I choose to believe chestnuts are lazy.
Unless you have a health condition that causes it, morbid obesity is gross. I don’t mean being fat. I’m talking the mom in What’s Eating Gilbert Grape. Also, you shouldn’t need a rascal scooter to shop in Wal-Mart unless you have such a health condition.
The worst part is understanding the medical definition of morbid obesity. Those of us you’re excusing as “just fat” also clear that bar
If you put your cheese on top of the other pizza toppings you should be institutionalised.
Fair
What if extra cheese is one of the toppings?
Difference in temperature cannot be expressed in °C. It’s not 5 °C warmer today than yesterday. It’s 5 K warmer. You can say “five degrees warmer”, but not “five degrees Celsius warmer” or “five Celsius warmer”. “Five Celsius degrees warmer” is also correct, but who’d do that?
The reason is that the Celsius scale has a fixed offset. If your birthday is in a week, you wouldn’t say it’s “one seventh of January from today”.
I was not aware of this before and this is probably one of the most pedantic things I’ve heard for a while - great answer.
TIL; January has 49 days.
Thank fuck I’m from the US and don’t have to fuck with any unit conversion fuckery.
They’re called Lego pieces or just “Lego”, not “Legos”. It is the official way to say it, but more importantly I got used to it while growing up. I would always say “Lego ___”, for instance Lego sets, Lego bricks, Lego pieces: “Pass me the Lego brick.” The only time I would say “Lego” is as a group: “Bring the Lego upstairs.” Everytime I hear “Legos” my eye twitches because it sounds so wrong. Not sure where I picked this up but I will die on this hill.
That’s the official recommendation from LEGO as well. I found a piece of paper that mentions this in the box of one of my dad’s old LEGO sets.
I always hated how most people don’t pronounce the first R in “February”. It just sounded kinda weird to me.
I propose we replace the word entirely to something easier to spell and pronounce, such as “Feby”.
Now you have me paying attention to how I pronounce it. And now either way feels weird. Thanks a lot.
I think it’s mostly that particularly poor common grammar drives me nuts. Like, there’s no excuse to not know the difference between you’re and your. Once could be a mistake or a typo, but if it’s a pattern of behavior you’re just not trying. Get your shit together. :)
I definitely judge people on grammar and spelling. If you can’t be bothered to learn your native language, then I can’t be bothered to decode your shitty writing.
On Lemmy it’s hard to know if it’s their native language or not, be forgiving!
People using “was” when they mean “were”.
And the classic “should of/could of”.
Same but also add “less” and “fewer”
I could care fewer on that one.
Many annoyance, much frowns
Those who always want to correct usage of the word ‘ironic’, much like those who use ‘whom’ as the subject of a sentence, are trying to signal intelligence but revealing stupidity, and can be dismissed pretty much entirely as people to take seriously.
Their hubris is ironic.
One more: Conservatives are mostly less likely to have a higher education, less likely to be financially successful, more likely to be racist, more likely to lack critical thinking skills, less emotionally developed. And then there are the highly educated and rich hate mongers who stir up the rest for their own gains.
Shallow, maybe. But accurate? Absolutely
Excusing folks with dyscalculia, those of you who speak proudly and openly about how bad you are at math can die in a fire.
Functioning adults are expected to read. You should also be able to calculate reasonable numbers and percentages without needing the calculator on your phone to know what 20% is; Or what one half of 3/8 is.
Socks and slides is only acceptable footwear for taking the bin to the kerb or checking the mailbox. If you’re wearing them in public I immediately assume you are a classless dumbass and your opinion on anything is irrelevant.
I choose socks and sandals over proper footwear in order to demonstrate this. It keeps people’s expectations lower and makes life easier.
Sometimes I just wanna wear an outfit that makes people laugh and smile…
I feel attacked
This is fair.
Agree, same with wearing sweatpants, if you are not doing actual sporting activities
This is shallow, but not pedantic.
People who think anyone uses literally to mean figuratively are annoying and too caught up in their crusade to realize their take is idiotic. No one uses it to mean figuratively. People use it to emphasize regardless of the figurative nature of language. It’s semantic drift that happens to most words that mean something similar to “in actuality” (e.g. really, actually). Even in other languages.
I find if more confusing than annoying, at times. If the emphasizing is getting on the way of being clear, you should maybe use some other way to emphasize it.
“I’m literally broke” shouldn’t be a statement open to interpretation, in my person opinion. The internet and lack of familiarity with strangers just aggravates the problem.
That’s a valid opinion. That they’re using it to mean “figuratively” is not.
I think the definition has even been updated to reflect this.
Yeah. Dictionaries reflect popular usage. And I think literally has probably been in use in that sense nearly as long as it’s been used to mean something really did happen that way.
For some reason everyone in my city says seen where they should say saw, and I look down upon all of them.
Like “I had a dead tree I had to seen down”?
/s
I’m a stickler for grammar and speech as well. It’s classist, I know. But even as a little kid, I picked up on terminology that other kids used that in retrospect reflected poverty (mee-maw, pop-pop, commode (for toilet), yeller (instead of yellow)). At the time, I couldn’t explain why I disliked it, but I considered it deficient. I’ve come a long way in dismissing those views by myself, but I can’t not notice.
“Commode” is one of those? Huh. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a person use that word (I’ve only seen it in writing)
Germany did not invent döner kebap and it’s insane that they claim that. Anyone who insists on it displays a tragic lack of understanding about what a kebab even is and should be ashamed of themselves.
What they did invent is their own way of preparing and serving döner kebab, an existing dish that is itself a variation of other existing dishes that came before it. In the kebab world, that’s not only allowed but also basically encouraged. Everyone is welcome to modify dishes to their heart’s desire. There are countless kebab dishes in Turkish cuisine that are nothing more than slight variations on existing dishes. What you should do after creating your own variant, however, is to also give it your own name to mark the difference. That’s what the Germans have not done. They’re continuing to use the name of a dish they did not invent. That’s a bit of a dick move. Seriously, look up Adana kebab and Urfa kebab. They’re essentially the exact same thing except one is hot and the other is not. Yet they have different names, because that’s how it’s done.
The German döner kebab is a distinctly different thing than the “real” döner kebab. According to the long standing kebab traditions, it must be given its own name. Otherwise no, döner kebab was most certainly not invented in Germany. Name it something else and make a proper claim. It would even help enrich your exceptionally poor and boring cuisine a little bit.
By Germans you mean ethnic Turks who made it and marketed it as such to ethnic germans?
I mean I get your point but the naming here is part of marketing IMHO German Turks made it for local market while keep “exotic” name
Rebranding at this stage is futile lol this thing is more popular prolly than the Turkish original lol
It is true that it was a Turk that marketed it as such, but it’s mostly the Germans that are so insistent on claiming it’s a German invention. The only Turks I’ve seen that weren’t largely indifferent were those who made and sold the stuff, but even the non-döner-worker Germans can be weirdly militant about it especially after a few drinks.
In any case, why it was named that is irrelevant to the point. Which is that we’re being pedantic in this thread and, strictly speaking, the name is wrong. It is in gross violation of the unwritten döner naming conventions. But obviously I’m not holding my breath for any official rebranding.
Ha! How much time have you got?
Shallow and pedantic is my speciality.
But for the sake of brevity I’ll simply say that hearing (or reading) less in cases where fewer would be more appropriate is like driving an ice pick into my brain.
Yes…both are technically correct, but I have to fight the urge to be that guy whenever I hear it.
They’re not interchangeable. ‘Fewer’ is for countable nouns and ‘less’ is for aggregate nouns, just like ‘how many’ and ‘how much’.
E.g:
Aggregate:
“How much sand? Less sand.”
Countable:
“How many grains of sand? Fewer grains of sand.”
Oh believe me, I know. I agree.
but the argument nowadays is that common usage dictates that both are now “acceptable”, similar to how apparently “literally” now effectively means “figuratively” because everyone uses it.
We don’t have to accept it.
Along with that, I’ll add in “number” vs “amount”:
- A shocking number of people get this wrong (countable)
- The amount of confusion about it is distressing (aggregate)
My stupid mental trick for keeping these straight: fewer potatoes means less mashed potatoes.
