Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,878 Year: 4,135/9,624 Month: 1,006/974 Week: 333/286 Day: 54/40 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Annoyances
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6381 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 61 of 93 (231178)
08-08-2005 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by nator
08-08-2005 4:17 PM


Of course, in America we pronounce the name "Don Quixote", (DON key HO tee), which is how they say it in Spanish, unlike the English who must anglecize EVERYTHING and pronounce it (DON QUICKS ut).
I've never heard any Brits pronounce it like that except as a joke (usually a stereotypical representation of someone from the uneducated underclass). The usual pronunciation in my experience when that is done is more (DON QUICKS OAT).
A few years ago I went to see some friends who had just bought a new house. It's a big house with a paddock at the back. I asked if they'd be getting a horse or something to keep the grass down and Tracy (with a dead straight face) replied "No, but I am thinking of getting a donkey. If I do I'm going to call him Oti." I was several beers the worse for wear at this point so I fell for it and said "Oti - what a strange name". Her reply was, of course:
"Surely you've heard of Donkey Oti before?"
...and "fillet" is (FILL et), not (fill-AY) after the English get through with it.
...and "skillet" is (SKILL et), not (skill-AY) after the English get through with it. Oh wait...
Of course, any Englishman will tell you the correct pronunciation of "skillet" is "frying pan".

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by nator, posted 08-08-2005 4:17 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by CK, posted 08-09-2005 5:12 AM MangyTiger has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 62 of 93 (231179)
08-08-2005 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by nator
08-08-2005 4:17 PM


Of course, in America we pronounce the name "Don Quixote", (DON key HO tee), which is how they say it in Spanish, unlike the English who must anglecize EVERYTHING and pronounce it (DON QUICKS ut).
That's not English (or Brits) its just Spanish ignorant fools. A lot of English are in this boat I guess but I've never heard anyone pronounce in Don Quicks ut.
What amuses me (rather than annoys me) is people who pronounce Byron's Don Juan as if it were the Spanish (Don H-won), as opposed to the correct pronounciation of Don Jew-on.
...and "fillet" is (FILL et), not (fill-AY) after the English get through with it.
We use both, depending on context. Don't ask me what that context is, its just whatever seems right at the time. For examplt Fillet o'fish is almost universally pronounced fill-AY unless one is mocking the northerners.
As to the Aluminium, as far as I am aware Aluminum was the original name for it wasn't it? Oh wait, a website
I'd respond with a post about my pet peeves, but it would take far far far too long. Just for fun though I'll do one, people that rearend somebody and refuse to accept that they were at fault no matter how patiently it is explained to them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by nator, posted 08-08-2005 4:17 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Omnivorous, posted 08-08-2005 9:52 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 71 by Wounded King, posted 08-09-2005 5:53 AM Modulous has replied
 Message 72 by Silent H, posted 08-09-2005 6:10 AM Modulous has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3991
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 63 of 93 (231189)
08-08-2005 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Modulous
08-08-2005 8:39 PM


Modulous writes:
quote:
I'd respond with a post about my pet peeves, but it would take far far far too long. Just for fun though I'll do one, people that rearend somebody and refuse to accept that they were at fault no matter how patiently it is explained to them.
Then you will love this one.
Three years ago I was rearended at a stop light; my subcompact car was utterly destroyed, sandwiched between the rearender and a large truck. My knee was badly torn, and my neck herniated in two spots: waking up strapped to a board as it slides into an ambulance is a novel sensation.
Last year, my knee was surgically repaired; in two weeks I go to surgery for a two-level C-spine fusion with hardware caging--I've worked furiously at physical therapy with medications and traction for the past three years to avoid it, but no go.
Her defense? At 19, never seriously ill in her life, with no history of fainting, and on no medications: "I passed out just before I hit you." Ah, her insurer declared, the emergency doctrine--we won't even pay for your car.
No apology, of course. Whenever our paths cross during legal proceedings, she delivers the same self-righteous glare. When my attorney first asked me what I wanted, I said, "I want her 19 year old neck."
This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 08-08-2005 09:53 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Modulous, posted 08-08-2005 8:39 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Modulous, posted 08-08-2005 10:38 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 64 of 93 (231200)
08-08-2005 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Omnivorous
08-08-2005 9:52 PM


Ah, her insurer declared, the emergency doctrine--we won't even pay for your car.
What the hell is the emergency doctrine?? My God! Any insurer in the UK would pay out for that, and then raise the hell out of the 19 year olds premiums since she is now a huge insurance risk.
OK, I just looked up the emergency doctrine, whilst it has some sense and purpose, it still wouldn't hold water in your situation in the UK. She would still be held liable, no question.
Gargh! I can't believe that shit was pulled on you, *shakes fists*
you see??? You get me started on this, and....GARGH!! It's totally mad, how can anyone claim they aren't liable when....nyeeah
I'm going to bed, everytime I get a glimpse at US financial law it drives me insane. *cue steam pouring out of ears*

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Omnivorous, posted 08-08-2005 9:52 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by MangyTiger, posted 08-08-2005 10:48 PM Modulous has not replied
 Message 66 by Omnivorous, posted 08-09-2005 12:02 AM Modulous has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6381 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 65 of 93 (231201)
08-08-2005 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Modulous
08-08-2005 10:38 PM


I doubt you would ever be allowed to drive again in the UK.
I know someone who passed out a few times in their teenage years (he's now 47) and the doctors could never find out why. As a result he was unable to get a Driving Licence. I don't know if he'd be able to now - he gave up trying many years ago.

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Modulous, posted 08-08-2005 10:38 PM Modulous has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3991
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 66 of 93 (231213)
08-09-2005 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Modulous
08-08-2005 10:38 PM


Modulous:
quote:
Gargh! I can't believe that shit was pulled on you, *shakes fists*
The funny thing is that I thought my knee was only bruised; the neck injuries didn't exhibit clear symptoms for some weeks--it takes time for the corpus polposus (I think I got that right) to extrude from the intervertebral space far enough to impinge on the nerve roots and/or spinal cord.
I've never been litigious, and if they had simply offered me a check for my car, I would have signed a release.
We are due in court in November; we are confident the emergency doctrine defense will not be allowed. The young lady in question has been deposed by my attorney (who could perhaps falsify the notion that sharks cannot evolve into mammals, or vice versa), and she was caught out in multiple contradictions.
No doubt I'll get a handsome settlement, my attorney will buy a new boat, and the young lady (who is still driving), will pay higher insurance premiums until she one day kills someone.
Is this a great country or what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Modulous, posted 08-08-2005 10:38 PM Modulous has not replied

  
Thor
Member (Idle past 5938 days)
Posts: 148
From: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 12-20-2004


Message 67 of 93 (231215)
08-09-2005 12:26 AM


robinrohan writes:
yes. But what I really dislike is overblown prose: Using a lot of exotic words in an attempt to impress. And usually what is said is not a precise thought at all. It is possible to express any idea, no matter how complicated, in a clear manner.
I wholeheartedly and emphatically concur with your succinct summation of this particular phenomenon. It is exceptionally unfortunate when superfluous verbosity is incorporated into a person’s conversational and/or literary repertoire, for no discernible purpose other than the maintenance of a faade of intellectual credibility.
In other words, I agree. It’s annoying when people use a lot of big words just to look smart!
Nighttrain writes:
With a trend to out-source more business telephone communications to Mumbai in India, you get stuck with some person, male or female, who thinks they topped the class in conversational English, and are determined to show you the full extent of it. After eventually finding a mutual pidgin, you give them an address---'Sydney? Whereabouts in Australia is Sydney?'
Not something I’ve dealt with myself, but my Dad once ended up in that situation. So he just refused to talk to anyone in India and demanded to be put through to someone in Australia.
LinearAq writes:
Because idiots keep buying stuff from them.
No profit = no calls
(sigh) I guess that is the sad truth. I wish they would at least refrain from calling during the time period when most people in the world tend to be cooking/eating dinner.
schrafinator writes:
Cutomers at work
Yeah, any kind of customer service job is a great way to see the dark side of human behaviour. I’ve spent a lot of time in such jobs, and I’d say one of the things I hate most are those people who have a (very undeserved) elitist attitude, and any rules, requirements or restrictions that everyone else must abide by, are somehow beneath them and should not apply to them. Often, it’s not from the people you’d expect. I used to be a security guard in a major library, and I recognised very senior executives from major companies, who I’d have thought would be quite arrogant, would actually come in very cooperative and happy to abide by the rules. Then some scruffy unemployed git would come in and kick up an angry fuss over some minor rule, as though it was cutting into their valuable time. Some people just need to get a life.
FliesOnly writes:
Anyone that talks on their cell phone while driving.
Even worse are those who read and send text messages while driving. I personally wouldn’t have believed that anybody could be so outrageously stupid, but I read about an accident recently that was caused by exactly that!
schrafinator writes:
Of course, in America we pronounce the name "Don Quixote", (DON key HO tee), which is how they say it in Spanish, unlike the English who must anglecize EVERYTHING and pronounce it (DON QUICKS ut).
Well, I have to say in defenCe of Aussies, that we do pronounce Don Quixote in the right way. Oh, and that’s Aussie with a z sound, not s.
But on to other matters
Heard an interesting new word on TV last night, dangerousness. That sounded a bit questionable to me, even though it was a documentary, and was used by medical and legal professionals. It certainly annoyed me.
I was also reminded of another classic pet peeve when I was confronted with it this morning, and that is people who fart on crowded trains or buses. Those who do so in elevators should probably be included here too.

On the 7th day, God was arrested.

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by robinrohan, posted 08-09-2005 7:00 AM Thor has not replied
 Message 74 by nator, posted 08-09-2005 7:27 AM Thor has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4156 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 68 of 93 (231228)
08-09-2005 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by FliesOnly
08-08-2005 4:11 PM


from over the water
quote:
1. Anyone that talks on their cell phone while driving.
Illegal without a headset - 1000 fine plus points on license (12=no license).
quote:
2.People that do not use turn signals.
Driving without due care and attention - Fine plus points on license.
quote:
6. Ok, I have one more. It's the over use by the media of the word allegedly. It literally drives me up the friggen wall () when I hear some news anchor say something like..."Joe Blow was arrested today for allegedly molesting a small kitten, two puppies, and a gerbil". Bull shit! He was arrested because there was sufficient evidence to support the allegations. Whether or not he did it has yet to be determined. I once listened to an NPR story about a murder and in a 3 minute segment they used the word something like 23 times. It was awful. Someone is not arrested for allegedly committing a crimethey are arrested for committing the crime, and a trial ensues that will then determine their guilt or innocence.
Look, if John Doe is arrested for a murder and as a TV anchor I say Today, John Doe was arrested for the murder of Jane Doe, I have done nothing wrong. John Doe WAS arrested for the murdersorry Johnno slander there.
I know what you are say BUT under english law it would be libel not to use alleged.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by FliesOnly, posted 08-08-2005 4:11 PM FliesOnly has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by nator, posted 08-09-2005 7:33 AM CK has replied
 Message 86 by FliesOnly, posted 08-09-2005 10:49 AM CK has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4156 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 69 of 93 (231230)
08-09-2005 5:12 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by MangyTiger
08-08-2005 8:27 PM


Never encountered that either, it's always been DON key HO tee.
How americans always say POO-SHOW for peugeot cracks me up.
I can however forgive BI-CESTER (It's actually "BISS-TER").
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 09-Aug-2005 05:12 AM
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 09-Aug-2005 05:17 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by MangyTiger, posted 08-08-2005 8:27 PM MangyTiger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by robinrohan, posted 08-09-2005 5:40 AM CK has not replied
 Message 76 by nator, posted 08-09-2005 7:34 AM CK has not replied
 Message 93 by MangyTiger, posted 08-09-2005 7:53 PM CK has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 93 (231232)
08-09-2005 5:40 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by CK
08-09-2005 5:12 AM


Charles
How do you pronounce "Worcester"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by CK, posted 08-09-2005 5:12 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Modulous, posted 08-09-2005 8:48 AM robinrohan has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 71 of 93 (231233)
08-09-2005 5:53 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Modulous
08-08-2005 8:39 PM


What amuses me (rather than annoys me) is people who pronounce Byron's Don Juan as if it were the Spanish (Don H-won), as opposed to the correct pronounciation of Don Jew-on.
How can you be sure it is Byron's Don Juan they are talking about rather than Tirso de Molina's or Moliere's?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Modulous, posted 08-08-2005 8:39 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Modulous, posted 08-09-2005 8:29 AM Wounded King has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5847 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 72 of 93 (231237)
08-09-2005 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Modulous
08-08-2005 8:39 PM


people that rearend somebody and refuse to accept that they were at fault no matter how patiently it is explained to them.
Actually there are times when the rearended are in fact at fault, and it is just as ridiculous when they deny their own culpability.
I was in a car (I wasn't driving) that was moving along a rather important street during a heavy snow fall. Visibility was good enough, but the streets were extremely slick.
Some lady pulled out of a parking lot onto the street ahead and then stopped, or nearly stopped, right in front of us. Of course we hit her.
Her defense before everyone, including stunned and exasperated police was that our car had to be at fault because we rearended her. She could not have been expected to accelerate onto the street, and indeed should have been expected to stop once she entered the street because of the icy conditions.
Cases like this also occur at sites where roads merge onto highways and people slowdown or stop, rather than accelerate into traffic. Sometimes the timid are as dangerous as the aggressive.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Modulous, posted 08-08-2005 8:39 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Modulous, posted 08-09-2005 8:40 AM Silent H has not replied

  
robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 93 (231241)
08-09-2005 7:00 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Thor
08-09-2005 12:26 AM


I wholeheartedly and emphatically concur with your succinct summation of this particular phenomenon. It is exceptionally unfortunate when superfluous verbosity is incorporated into a person’s conversational and/or literary repertoire, for no discernible purpose other than the maintenance of a faade of intellectual credibility.
Query: Does this elitizing of vocabularization promulgate, mitigate, or instigate socio-professional advancement?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Thor, posted 08-09-2005 12:26 AM Thor has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2198 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 74 of 93 (231250)
08-09-2005 7:27 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Thor
08-09-2005 12:26 AM


quote:
I’ve spent a lot of time in such jobs, and I’d say one of the things I hate most are those people who have a (very undeserved) elitist attitude, and any rules, requirements or restrictions that everyone else must abide by, are somehow beneath them and should not apply to them.
Oh yes, those are fun, always. The rules apply to everyone else, but not them. Lots of those in the US.
I just thought of another pet peeve. The tendency for younger people to insert the word "like" every couple of words during conversation.
Example: "She was, like, driving and talking to her boyfriend, and, like, got pulled over by a cop, and then she like, ran into a ditch!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Thor, posted 08-09-2005 12:26 AM Thor has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Omnivorous, posted 08-09-2005 8:55 AM nator has not replied
 Message 87 by LinearAq, posted 08-09-2005 11:31 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2198 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 75 of 93 (231251)
08-09-2005 7:33 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by CK
08-09-2005 5:08 AM


Re: from over the water
1. Anyone that talks on their cell phone while driving.
quote:
Illegal without a headset - 1000 fine plus points on license (12=no license).
FYI, it doesn't matter if people have a headset on or not. The research tends to show that talking on a phone while driving significantly takes one's attention off the road the same, regardless of how you do it (handheld phone or headset)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by CK, posted 08-09-2005 5:08 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by CK, posted 08-09-2005 8:38 AM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024