Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 129 posts

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#71

Post by Jedd »

I recall my mum, it must have been in the 1980's, engaging in much eye-rolling and tut-tutting at our (Australia) then prime minister, Bob Hawke, using the word 'irregardless'. Bob was ostensibly quite charismatic, but no one could accuse him of being an especially thoughtful communicator.

In retrospect it's fairly typical behaviour for less literate types to adopt a word that sounds sophisticated beyond their standard repertoire , and assume it's sufficiently cromulent for formal use. (A very recent thread on HN was around the use of the word 'decimate' as an alternative spelling for 'destroy', for similar reasons.)

I think Boris Johnson is a profoundly bad force in the universe, but I do recall feeling the editing of one of his appearances on a UK TV show (Have I Got News For You) was patently unfair, as he was asserting that calling small four wheeled vehicles 'quad-bikes' was etymologically unsound. His point (I imagine - the broadcast did not include the justification) was that 'bike' is a corruption of bicycle, in turn rooted from 'bi', referring to the two wheels.

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#73

Post by lou1306 »

throw0101a wrote: post #66
daffy wrote: post #50

The author seems to claim that `irregardless' is all right and that caring about it is caring too much and vain. He compares it to other malformed words such as `television' and `flammable'. But there seems to be a significant difference between these and that. While recognizing the malformedness of these words require knowledge of Greek and Latin, recognizing that of `irregardless' is trivial for anyone who is profi…

> and `flammable'. Which has the same definition as inflammable. This has always been inconceivable in my mind.

Similarly infuriating fact: in Italian, "infranto" means broken, but "infrangibile" means "unbreakable" (as in glass).

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#75

Post by [deleted] »

daffy wrote: post #50

The author seems to claim that `irregardless' is all right and that caring about it is caring too much and vain. He compares it to other malformed words such as `television' and `flammable'. But there seems to be a significant difference between these and that. While recognizing the malformedness of these words require knowledge of Greek and Latin, recognizing that of `irregardless' is trivial for anyone who is profi…

[deleted]

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#76

Post by jwilk »

vbtemp wrote: post #55
irthomasthomas wrote: post #51

My favorite/worst example of language evolution is the word factoid. Factoid literally meant a thing resembling a fact (i.e. a false fact) which is believed to be true after being repeated in print. Now, those same writers who where presumably spreading factoids, have inverted its meaning to be 'a minor, but true fact' [0]. [0] http://www.doctoryourself.com/hoffer_factoids.html

Would a more correct version of a minor, true fact be a _factino_? Kind of like a Plutino or Neutrino?

factlet (like piglet)

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#77

Post by nafey »

daffy wrote: post #61
vbtemp wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would a more correct version of a minor, true fact be a _factino_? Kind of like a Plutino or Neutrino?

Factule, perhaps, from the unattested but regular diminutive factulum.

Factarrino if you really wanna go wild with it

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#78

Post by kazinator »

Merriam-Webster labels the word as "nonstandard" and recommends that regardless be used, all the while assuring readers that "irregardless" is indeed a word that has been in use by English speakers for "well over 200 years" and by "a large number of people across a wide geographic range and with a consistent meaning".

And, note, that same dictionary makes no disparaging remarks about the abuse of "literally" as a generic intensifier; it simply cites that usage as one of the meanings. The abuse of "literally" is more recent than "irregardless".

That tells you that "irregardless" is quite the lexical pariah. A major dictionary like Merriam is not able to wholeheartedly accept it in spite of the word's age and stability.

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#79

Post by Emma_Goldman »

trynumber9 wrote: post #68

If it makes you feel better it's not widely used: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=regardless%2Ci...

It's scarcely surprising that it's not used in print. Books are considered, written by those most proficient in English, read and re-read, and professionally proof-read.

The extent of its use in ordinary conversation is something else entirely.

Re: “Irregardless” is part of a penumbra of unorthodox English words

#80

Post by daffy »

jwilk wrote: post #76
vbtemp wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would a more correct version of a minor, true fact be a _factino_? Kind of like a Plutino or Neutrino?

factlet (like piglet )

But that would be mixing Latin and English, just as bad as television!
Post reply on HN