Is this just the way things are now? “On accident” and “Should of” are perfectly normal things to say these days?
(not picking on you, thinman. Lots of people write like this now).
1 Like
Don’t worry my GF gets on me all the time about it. But yes, I say would of and should of all the time.
Fixed it!
cassette for grammer mod
“grammer moderator”
2 Likes
9 Likes
What is on accident supposed to be? I don’t think I use it but it is how I think the phrase being used.
“He dumped the Blue Label Johnny Walker down the drain on accident.”
I would use accidentally, but on accident doesn’t sound “wrong” to me. So I am missing something.
I believe “on accident” is not proper grammar but is used frequently enough that it seems normal.
It replaces “by accident.”
1 Like
I assume it’s back-formed from the example of ‘on purpose’ but it’s irksome anyway.
What’s really maddening is “fruit” vs. “fruits.” “Fruits” is a valid plural noun. “I’m putting these two fruits in the salad” “There are fresh fruits at my Kroger” --these are perfectly valid sentences. But also “fruit” can be a plural of “fruit.” “My Kroger has an aisle for fruit and vegetables.” “I bought some fruit at Kroger.”
Without looking it up, imagine trying to explain to a foreigner when you use “fruit” vs. “fruits,” it’s maddening. There is an actual logic to it, but native speakers never consciously think about it or learn it through formal education.
1 Like
“These two fruits do not belong in the pasta aisle.”
“There is some fruit in the pasta aisle.”
You know you would 100% never say:
“These two fruit do not belong in the pasta aisle.”
“There is some fruits in the pasta aisle.”
The reason for that is complicated, but we processes it without thinking about it.
.
Or how about
“There is a pile of fruit in the pasta aisle.” and “There are some fruits in the pasta aisle.”
instead of
“There is a pile of fruits in the pasta aisle.” and “There are some fruit in the pasta aisle.”
You know the second speaker isn’t a native English speaker. But why?
1 Like
God, it’s maddening. “I have several cheeses in my fridge” vs. “this is the cheese aisle of my Kroger.” I know it has something to do with countability, but there’s no way I could explain to a foreign speaker how this shit works. No one learns this “cheese: plural” vs. “cheeses: plural” shit in school, we just know it, and no one ever thinks twice about it, despite the fact that it’s incredibly subtle.
“This is the cheese aisle of my Kroger, there are many cheeses in it.”
It’s fucking nuts, because you would never say:
“This is the cheeses aisle of my Kroger, there are many cheese in it.”
But try explaining why that is.
1 Like
“There are fewer cheeses in my fridge than in the Kroger cheese aisle.”
“There is less cheese in my fridge than in the Kroger cheese aisle.”
Seems 100% right.
“There are fewer cheese in my fridge than in the Kroger cheese aisle.”
“There is less cheeses in my fridge than in the Kroger cheese aisle.”
Fuck, that is garbage. You are 100% not a native English speaker if you talk like that. But the difference is so subtle and I can’t explain it!
Holy fuck this is wild. It’s 100% correct English and yet I could never explain to a foreign speaker why the rules are like this. We should all reflect on the fact that we have this kind of deep, advanced, subtle, intuitive knowledge about the language that was never formally taught to us.
The fewer vs less is the key here re: cheese vs cheeses. I think the same thing is going on there.
you all done up and done it
Just substitute turd(s) and shithead(s) for every use of cheese(s) and fruit(s) and you will feel right at home.
2 Likes