Ha HA Brit! Our American stoners have beat you to the punch!

http://videosift.com/video/Steve-s-Grammatical-Observations-6-I-could-care-less

Foiled! Then again, I could care less... (har har har)

It's just mind-boggling how often I hear, "I could care less," particularly on TV, where you'd think the writers would be better with the English language than the average doofus. How do so many people fuck that up?

I fucking love David Mitchell.

I wonder if it got shortened from something like, "Pffft. As if I could care less."

Or the rhetorical, "Do you really think I could care less?"

Unfortunately, the verb 'to hold' makes just as little sense as 'to hold down' in referring to keeping a fort stable in somebody's absence. If David has a problem with the notion of hover-forts, he ought to be troubled by the implications on the width of said fort which are manifest in any usage of 'to hold' taken literally.

American: lieutenant, British: left tenant
American: a-loo-mi-num, British: a-loo-mi-nee-um
American: plow, British: plough
American: tidbit, British: titbit
American: color, British: colour
American: trunk, British: boot
American: sidewalk, British: ???????????
American: REsearch, British: reSEARCH
American: bernard, British: ???????

answers please

>> ^CheshireSmile:

American: lieutenant, British: left tenant
American: a-loo-mi-num, British: a-loo-mi-nee-um
American: plow, British: plough
American: tidbit, British: titbit
American: color, British: colour
American: trunk, British: boot
American: sidewalk, British: ???????????
American: REsearch, British: reSEARCH
American: bernard, British: ???????
answers please


Honestly I think it's just the way any language progresses.... I'm sure a Latin scholar would have a bone to pick with "the Queen's" English. That's not to say the changes make sense mind you, just that they will happen, and to lament them is an exercise in self-frustration.

"I could care less" is pretty inexcusable though; it reminds me if "irregardless". AAARRRGGGG I hate irregardless... without without regard?

I could care less?

/sarcasm
/valleygirl

Dude, seriously, let's hang out, hold down forts, and, like, chill. You bad, I bad: we all bad -- but let's be real and not stress the small stuff. amirite? kkthxbai in your bbq, foo.

>> ^CheshireSmile:

American: lieutenant, British: left tenant
American: a-loo-mi-num, British: a-loo-mi-nee-um
American: plow, British: plough
American: tidbit, British: titbit
American: color, British: colour
American: trunk, British: boot
American: sidewalk, British: ???????????
American: REsearch, British: reSEARCH
American: bernard, British: ???????
answers please


American: berNARD
British: BERnard
Can say this with confidence because there is a British guy in our choir who goes by BERnard.

And according to this site:
http://www.englishclub.com/vocabulary/british-american.htm

It's sidewalk vs. pavement

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Australia says "path" for "sidewalk".

Fortunately, the verb to hold makes perfect sense. Unfortunately your knowledge of English appears to be limited. "To hold" has many meanings, one of them being " to retain forcibly, as against an adversary".

>> ^CircleMaker:

Unfortunately, the verb 'to hold' makes just as little sense as 'to hold down' in referring to keeping a fort stable in somebody's absence. If David has a problem with the notion of hover-forts, he ought to be troubled by the implications on the width of said fort which are manifest in any usage of 'to hold' taken literally.

Or footpath for sidewalk.

Tell me about it!I should be so lucky!

Still, David's objection to 'hold down the fort' is based on a literal interpretation of the verb 'to hold down.' All I was saying is that 'hold the fort' becomes equally silly when interpreted that way. I have nothing against the verb itself. We go back a long way, 'to hold' and I.

Furthermore, 'to hold down' also has many meanings, including...

hold down
a.to restrain; check: Hold down that noise!
b.to continue to hold and manage well: She held down that job for years.

Just because something is in the the dictionary doesn't mean it makes literal sense, as David was implying it should.
>> ^nanrod:

Fortunately, the verb to hold makes perfect sense. Unfortunately your knowledge of English appears to be limited. "To hold" has many meanings, one of them being " to retain forcibly, as against an adversary".
>> ^CircleMaker:
Unfortunately, the verb 'to hold' makes just as little sense as 'to hold down' in referring to keeping a fort stable in somebody's absence. If David has a problem with the notion of hover-forts, he ought to be troubled by the implications on the width of said fort which are manifest in any usage of 'to hold' taken literally.

I could care less works when delivered as a snarky threat. It implies that although a person cares a little bit about something, they could stop caring altogether.

Exhibit A: Two (wo)men working together on a project

Person A: "Why aren't you working harder?! Don't you care about this project?"
Person B, with furrowed brow: "I could care less, you know."

I was unaware of the British "Lieutenant" pronunciation. That's a strange one, and dictionary.com says it's only "left-" in non-navy use.

Aluminum was first referred to as Alumium by Humphry Davy. He later settled on Aluminum. The Quarterly Review decided that wasn't classy enough and opted to call it Aluminium, as seen here in the 4th paragraph.

>> ^CheshireSmile:

American: lieutenant, British: left tenant
American: a-loo-mi-num, British: a-loo-mi-nee-um
American: plow, British: plough
American: tidbit, British: titbit
American: color, British: colour
American: trunk, British: boot
American: sidewalk, British: ???????????
American: REsearch, British: reSEARCH
American: bernard, British: ???????
answers please

Ah it's the same difference really.

A British sidewalk is a footpath.

The proof's in the pudding (or in the eating thereof).

Bernard

Burr-nard for Americans, Bear-nud for British.



... my own personal pet peeve is people who think the cops wrote them up for "driving with undue care and attention"

THAT MEANS YOU'RE BEING TOO CAREFUL DAMMIT!! IT'S DRIVING WITHOUT DUE CARE AND ATTENTION!!!

I couldn't care less about our differences in pronunciation and spelling, but I could care less about your dental hygiene.

The HD version of this kinda freaked me out because you can see his eyes jump to read the teleprompter.

Anyone else notice that?

Meh. I could care less about David Mitchell.

If I wrote a "Dear America" thing about use of English, it'd be a hell of a lot longer than this =\

The oft-misused phrase "beg the question" always bothers me when it's abused.

>> ^dag:

Australia says "path" for "sidewalk".

>> ^Asmo:

Or footpath for sidewalk.

So what do you call a route through a nature reserve or woodland or a through-way which doesn't have a road beside it?

I like definition between names of things. 'Path' is too universal.

Pavement, Path, Footpath, Alley, Trail, etc.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'spelling, grammar, wording, queen, usa, states, british, view, opinion' to 'spelling, grammar, wording, queen, usa, states, british, view, opinion, i could care less' - edited by calvados

>> ^Payback:

Bernard
Burr-nard for Americans, Bear-nud for British.

... my own personal pet peeve is people who think the cops wrote them up for "driving with undue care and attention"
THAT MEANS YOU'RE BEING TOO CAREFUL DAMMIT!! IT'S DRIVING WITHOUT DUE CARE AND ATTENTION!!!


My late grandma was actually ticketed for undue care while driving; she was driving dangerously slow on the freeway.

It might've been here in Quebec, the first place I'd seen that had minimum speed limits.

>> ^nanrod:

Fortunately, the verb to hold makes perfect sense. Unfortunately your knowledge of English appears to be limited. "To hold" has many meanings, one of them being " to retain forcibly, as against an adversary".
>> ^CircleMaker:
Unfortunately, the verb 'to hold' makes just as little sense as 'to hold down' in referring to keeping a fort stable in somebody's absence. If David has a problem with the notion of hover-forts, he ought to be troubled by the implications on the width of said fort which are manifest in any usage of 'to hold' taken literally.



Exactly. That counter-argument is mentos.

Aluminium
Yeah, as said above on the Aluminium thing... we SPELL it differently (we being Aussies who slavishly follow the brits) to the yanks, so we say it differently.

So that particular case is not one of pronouncing a word oddly, it's spelling it two different ways and therefore pronouncing it as they are spelled.

Titbit

You want this explained? He explained it... it IS Titbit... and the puritanicals got rid of the tit in it..

Sidewalk
Us Aussies and English call them footpaths... they are paths we walk on with our feet. Just as sensible as sidewalk... although sidewalk limits you to being on the side of something, whereas as a footpath can roam where it pleases.

The could and couldn't care less has bothered me for years. I agree with him completely. However, it's kind of ironic having a Brit correct us on grammar. From time to time I'll listen to the BBC on my local NPR affiliate. You want to know the two most annoying things I hear? Brits putting "r"'s on the end of words ending in "a". For example, every time they say "Africa" it ends up sounding like "Africar or Africur". Drives me up the wall. The second thing that annoys me is how they use hospital as a verb. So instead of saying "we're going to the hospital", they say "we're going to hospital."

I'll write you. No, you'll write to me.

>> ^kurtdh:
The second thing that annoys me is how they use hospital as a verb. So instead of saying "we're going to the hospital", they say "we're going to hospital."


Not using as a verb. They use it as a title or name. Like "We're going to London." They remove "a" from a lot more nouns than just 'ospital too.

>> ^Payback:

Bernard
Burr-nard for Americans, Bear-nud for British.

... my own personal pet peeve is people who think the cops wrote them up for "driving with undue care and attention"
THAT MEANS YOU'RE BEING TOO CAREFUL DAMMIT!! IT'S DRIVING WITHOUT DUE CARE AND ATTENTION!!!


Hmm, as a Brit, I say Burr-nurd. We (usually, unless the person with the name says otherwise) pronounce Anthony as if the H wasn't there -- an-tur-knee.

And now for something completely different: Arguing about something which actually matters.

>> ^garmachi:

And now for something completely different: Arguing about something which actually matters.


Arguing about something that actually matters.

In the absence of an idiomatic or metaphorical interpretation of a word or phrase that makes sense in the circumstances all we are left with is the literal interpretation. Your two definitions of "hold down" make no sense when applied to defending a fort against attackers while to hold the fort is a common long time usage and not one that just happens to be in the dictionary. Remember in the movie "The Longest Day" the British paratroopers were ordered to "hold until relieved". "Hold down until relieved" would have made no sense. >> ^CircleMaker:

Still, David's objection to 'hold down the fort' is based on a literal interpretation of the verb 'to hold down.' All I was saying is that 'hold the fort' becomes equally silly when interpreted that way. I have nothing against the verb itself. We go back a long way, 'to hold' and I.
Furthermore, 'to hold down' also has many meanings, including...
hold down
a.to restrain; check: Hold down that noise!
b.to continue to hold and manage well: She held down that job for years.
Just because something is in the the dictionary doesn't mean it makes literal sense, as David was implying it should.
>> ^nanrod:
Fortunately, the verb to hold makes perfect sense. Unfortunately your knowledge of English appears to be limited. "To hold" has many meanings, one of them being " to retain forcibly, as against an adversary".
>> ^CircleMaker:
Unfortunately, the verb 'to hold' makes just as little sense as 'to hold down' in referring to keeping a fort stable in somebody's absence. If David has a problem with the notion of hover-forts, he ought to be troubled by the implications on the width of said fort which are manifest in any usage of 'to hold' taken literally.