I can't say I've ever heard 'fruits' used in that way. Maybe something like 'Several fruits are used in this recipe." But maybe not. It would depend on context, but 'different kinds of fruit, or 'several individual fruits?' Or 'fruits and vegetables.' But ...a bowlful of fruits? No, that would bug me as well. Why should it? I dunno. But it would.
Ha. I'm okay with moist--not my favourite, but it doesn't horrify me like it does many people. I like swampy though!
This. Very much this. And its bratty little sister, facilitate. Though facilitate arguably has more utility (seewhatididthere) on certain occasions. Can't say I've ever noticed this one, but much in the same vein I can't stand monies. Maybe I just don't understand the proper usage of it, but I've never really comprehended why you can't just say money.
You mean, instead of 'moisten the cloth and dab it on the stain,' we say 'swampify the cloth and dab it on the stain.'
I used to work on editing with a colleague. I would remove every "utilise" and she would remove every "facilitate." But like you, I found that there wasn't such an easy substitute for facilitate.
One newspaper had a style book that would invariably substitute remain when the original copy used stay. With the result that one theatrical review ended up reporting that a certain actress was left on stage adjusting her remains.
Irk. I love it. It's like Jerk.....ah what does it say your name is there? Meoff? Yeah, Jerk.... Jerk Meoff? YEAH, HAHAHAH JERK ME OFFFF..... Lots o goodies in this thread. Ah may a coome to tha raight place.... I do like 'irk'. It's texture and bent. Akin to odd. Now while I have removed a lot of words from my working vocabulary, out of functional necessity, there aren't any words that come to mind as irksome. Because they're all usable - if used Artfully. And that's what rubs my rhubarb is unartful lingo. You know, beau? Oh, I don't never use no spell-checker, neither. Got it turned off in HTML. Fuck that. Yeah. Fuck. Love it. @peachalulu: very is problematic when people use it with words of absolute meaning, like unique. Unique is or ain't. @Wreybies: I hadn't thought of that. I don't never use no little dash marks like that. Radical, I know! (-grins-) @NigeTheHat: 'basically' comes in two forms. First, like intimated above, it's a softness in the tone and regard of a topic. Arguably, it's a sloppiness in thought. I'm guilty - GUILTY - of it. Second, it's equal to 'essentially'; a focus. @Scot: as I know it, it was originally some one, any one, every one, no one, etc - just like every day, every thing, any thing...... I think popcul smashed 'em togetha.....and so I use separate or together depending on context and vocal rhythm. I write like I talk, and sound. @SethLoki: "It's just really hard to avoid it..." Ahm, how hard was it? .....I may, perhaps will, respond to later-than-those-above comments......
Part Deux: Agree with xanadu (we're in Xa-nado-ooooo-oo-oo-oooo) on the Acme thing. What the fuck do they do? Do wah do wah do..... Utilise is like usage - how. Use is 'what'. I'm fine with 'use' being the prime and only form, but ain't gonna happen, so it might be easier to enforce the format 'use/usage'. Cunt in amlang is at root derogatory reference to vagina. UK, though, I don't think so. It's (there it is again - here I go again on my owwwn) transcended the physical and became pure retort. And lovingly it seems. I use it derogatorily, but without intended reference to vagina. I like it for it's sound. Whore is another good one. Imagine Viking death metal - WHOOOORREEEE. Yeah. Lastly, always right?, fruit. Ahhhhhhh. As my music instructor would say, "Which is more plural, form or forms?" The former of course, and is the use when talking about fruit in a bowl. Fruits is for like mentioned above..... PS: speaking of it....how about is? LIKE, ain't nobody hea an agent of da E-Primes???
*Cowers in paaaaaaaiiiiiiiinnnnn* I cringe when I hear/read of "action items" being "actionable." Last time I checked, that meant you can sue somebody for them, not that something can be done about them. Ditto reporters who talk about "The damages from the storm." You mean somebody's already been to court and the judge has ruled that someone has to pay? All those trees down and houses destroyed are "damage," people. Just plain "damage."
Two writing ones that really grate on me: crit instead of critique and critter instead of critiquer or critic. I despise them both.
I loathe the word imagineer. It's what they call the attraction designers at Walt Disney theme parks. I met one once – utter tosser, ego the size of a coked up Trump. The OED lists the word's origin as: 1940s: from imagine, on the pattern of engineer. So what, an imagineer is a person who builds, or maintains imaginations, dreams and flights of fancy? My imagination is my own, Mr Disney. Take your thinly-veiled thought police and get back in your cryo tank. For fuck's sake. /rant off
Literally. There is no need for anyone to ever say the word literally. Not to mention that every dumbass who uses it doesn't know what it means.
Yes, there are uses for it. For example if what you're describing sounds completely unbelievable, but it DID actually happen or does exist, then saying 'literally' makes sense. Otherwise people will think you're joking or exaggerating. I describe the ending to the first chapter of Joe Abercrombie's The Blade Itself as 'literally a cliffhanger.' Why? Because the main character is left dangling by his fingertips over the edge of a cliff. If I merely said that the ending of the book was a cliffhanger, it wouldn't convey the right meaning. You'd just assume it was an exciting ending. It's a mistake saying certain long-accepted words shouldn't ever be used. They exist for a reason. It's a better idea to learn to use them correctly, so the meaning doesn't get corrupted to where it has no meaning at all, and just becomes an unpleasant buzzing in the ear.
Yeah. I agree that misuse of 'literally' is very annoying, but there are legitimate uses for it. 'Dumbass' would be up there with my most irksome words.
