Personally irks me, and so does totally, but the most irksome word of all is basically. People using that word should be lined up against a wall and shot. Okay, so I’m a grouch, but I bet I ain’t the only one with a hatred of certain words.
no. It's 'IT' - my personally most irksome word. IT is just too easy to write and IT rarely solves anything.
I'm going to give a shot at guessing why.... Because it says: I'm giving you just my opinion, so I don't want to hear shit about your opinion, and I most certainly don't expect to be held to account. Retorts are forbidden. That is all, good day. Because it says: I deal in absolutes. Pink is basically* red. Like Mr. Personally, I won't suffer your answer to the contrary so I make even the smallest thing, the whole thing. Because it says: *I haven't taken the time to really think about what I have just said. And I'm not going to. I only have enough energy to oversimplify the matter to a meaningless degree and when you disagree with me, I will be repairing to the use of personally and then totally, in that order. ------------------------------------------------ Am I close?
I dislike the word irksome. Not sure what that is about, but I just don't feel okay when I look at it. Weirdly enough...
Words I shy away from tend to be because of their sound, not so much their syntax or other things that can be read into what they say about the user. Snack, snatch, moist, and the one I loathe the most, chronicles. Also, I have a particular disdain for the deference we show to borrowed Gallicisms as regards maintaining their diacritic marks. We don't do this for any other language other than French. Why? That bugs the crap out of me because it adds yet one more layer of unintuitive complexity to an orthographic system that already contains such complete insanity as the word eighth.
No words in particularly bother me. The attitudes with which they are said bother me a whole hell of a lot - I'll most definitely admit to that. Snobs & a snobbish attitude bother me very much. The word 'snob' doesn't at all.
OK, (or rather okay), I need to go and Google all this to understand it. I thought I could read English, speak English, write English but now, I am sobbing in a corner - I know so little!
Nope, it's not so complicated. Personally, I don't believe it's complicated. (Since my name and avatar are here for all to see, then it's pretty damn obvious this is my personal opinion.) She was totally besotted. (Besotted is total.) Basically, I've got this idea that... (Do I really have to explain why I dislike this loathsome word?)
It's "radical" for me. What an utterly stupid word. Noone cool uses that word, and noone trying to be cool succeeds in utilizing it for such a purpose. It has a zeerustesque quality to it. It has few genuine uses and is usually used inappropriately, and even when not it manages to be both annoying and boring at once.
Jeez! In a real-time conversation with me, you would be irksomely screeching your teeth. I use this word a lot when speaking. It is a bad habit. But I don't use it upon the context you highlighted. It usually goes a little something like this: Basically, what you were saying was... I think I use it correctly, but I overuse it.
Not crazy about - very mainly because it squirms in and stops you from possibly/probably using a better word. also seems - it's like people have become afraid of making a concrete statement so waffling starts.
What I mean is... Lots of languages from which English borrows words have accent marks in their original orthography. But it's only when we borrow French words - for reasons that cannot sensibly be explained - we demand that if they had accent marks in French, then they must in English too. We don't do this for the plethora of Spanish words borrowed into English that do have accent marks in their original language. People get their knickers in an orthographic twist over a work resume that doesn't have accent marks or if someone mentions a cliche and fails to mark the e with a ´. Invariably, when asked to explain why these accent marks should be kept, the reasoning that's given is a recitation of the spelling rules of French. Guess what, English isn't French! Why in the world would we insist on résumé? It's a noun and would never be mistaken for the verb resume. The syntax leading up to the use of either one would make it perfectly clear which one is in play. And, again, the part that really bugs me as that we only get pedantic about French words. Is there some pact of which I am unaware? Can it be reviewed, please? Because.... no. </rant>
I like 'basically'. It can add rhythm to an otherwise juddering sentence. And sometimes it's useful to signal that you're only giving the necessary information, not all the information available.
This reminds me of slang. I hated the whole Whazzup thing. Also Saweeet ( calling everything sweet only you had to twist the word into two syllable - sa-weet. *shudders* ) and Bogus. The use of bogus especially from a guy had me writing him off as a total airhead. Don't mind the use of junk for genitals though. * laughs* I was actually toying with the use of it in a sentence although I'm worried that in another twenty years, if I publish the story, that people won't know what I'm talking about other than the context.
'Like' I was like thinking is anyone like gonna press like the like link bottom right of this post. And will it be like in protest...or approval ?...
Do you write "no body" or "no-body"? Sure, there's an awkward combo of two O's in "noone", but consistency and simplicity are more important IMHO. And if someone ends up reading it as "noon", to that would just sound quirky, in a lovely way.
Nobody, somebody, anybody, everybody, everyone, anyone, someone, no-one. Consistency has nothing to do with it, unless you mean consistency within your WIP, each word stands on its own merit, and 'noone' has none.
I don't like vulgarities. So any word that can fit into that category irks me, with emphasis on the word: Spoiler pussy *shivers* Even typing it gives me the willies.
