Archive through August 08, 2002
TV ClubHouse: Archives: Archive Two:
Is Roddy Just Condescending?:
Archive through August 08, 2002
Wcv63 | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 12:56 pm     Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s Function: adverb Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless Date: circa 1912 nonstandard : REGARDLESS usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead. Edited to add the url: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary |
Oregonfire | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 12:57 pm     Irregardless is a form or regardless, but is considered a corruption of the word. It's in the dictionary though, so is technically acceptable usage, but somewhat frowned upon in conversation. (I had to look this one up years ago. A friend pointed out that she hated it and I had never even noticed the difference. Duh.) |
Crossfire | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 12:59 pm     Oh God, please, not the irregardless argument, that will just put in a world of heck. I've had to live though this one many times on another message board, but its too crappy to mention here. |
Draheid | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:00 pm     Thanks for all the definitions. I, too, believed it did not exist in dictionaries ... guess I should have looked. I had spent the better part of my life using that word, then someone told me it didn't exist so I have struggled to NOT use it for the last several years ... just seemed an appropriate question ... would love to have laughed at Roddy explaining it though!!! LOL |
Earthmother | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:04 pm     goddessatlaw..just got back and read your post..you are one good legal eagle!!! Now here's another question: If I get involved too heavily into what is being said in this thread and get myself in trouble, will you defend me? Will wait to comment until I hear from you..lol |
Oregonfire | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:04 pm     Everybody has a grammar pet peeve. I keep on noticing the houseguests using "If it was..." or "If I was..." the correct usage is "If it were... or "If I were..." For some reason that always jumps out at me when I watch the show. |
Earthmother | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:06 pm     Oregonfire.."Corruption" now there's a word I understand..lol |
Curlyq | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:08 pm     Wow. Thanks for the tip, Oregonfire. All my life I thought "were" was only used with plural subjects or "you". |
Blinky | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:08 pm     Rodified = subject matter having Roddy's approval |
Wcv63 | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:11 pm     Rodruption...come up with your definitions...I got the idea from reading the word "corruption" in one of the posts above. But "eruption" would fit as well. The corrupt eruptions from Rod.  |
Mystery | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:11 pm     You can remember the use of "were" in conditional sentences by thinking of Topol (or Zero Mostel) singing "If I Were a Rich Man...." (doesn't everyone get grammar tips from musicals?) The thing that annoys me is when people say "I" instead of me, as in "He picked my brother and I up at the store...." |
Mystery | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:12 pm     I love rodified and rodruption! |
Zeyna | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:15 pm     hehe you guys are cracking me up Rodification - pontification, Roddy style |
Oregonfire | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:17 pm     Curly, think "If I Were a Rich Man...da da da..." English teacher here, so I can't help myself. Oops, Mystery beat me to it. I sniff the possibility of a new thread: take the peculiar behaviors of the HGs and create words for them. Yes, that would be fun! |
Snee | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:19 pm     imply/infer |
Curlyq | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:19 pm     For some reason "rodruption" sounds to me like something Scooby-Doo would say. Maybe rodruption can mean the abrupt change of subject when Roddy gets within earshot (like a Roddy interruption). |
Beagle | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:20 pm     Great idea OR, you start that thread right now girl!  |
Blinky | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:20 pm     Go for it oreganfire |
Mystery | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:20 pm     Ruh roh, Curly! Yes, Snee, another good one. |
Snee | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 01:21 pm     hehe, we talked about 'roddying' and having 'roddied' last night! |
Wendo | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 02:35 pm     I started this thread, so I thought I'd jump back in. Some have posted about how we don't know Roddy and how do we know that he's controlling, condescending, et. al. That, we don't know how he is outside of the house. Well, unless he was lying at the time, we do know that this is how he treats his girlfriends. He said so to Chiara awhile back, that he likes to control, be in charge. I listened to the conversation. He even said that he would want his girlfriend to have a pager that only he would have the number for. C'mon, why would one admit to this on tv/camera unless it was true? Roddy is a chauvenist, he just couches it in psuedo compliments that are nothing more than insults. |
Costacat | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 02:38 pm     Actually, Wendo, I think Roddy is a sexist (I'm a feminist from way back, and the true meaning of the word "chauvinist" is someone with an insane allegiance to his/her country). So now that I've jumped down from my rod-ium (hmm... I'll have to add that to the BB3 words!), I do agree with you, sorta. And I do believe that some of what he says confirms my belief that he's a sexist. I mean, think about it. Why would he want to keep Eric over Chiara (besides reasons that we won't go into here on this thread!)? It sounds like the buddy syndrome to me... |
Sanfranjoshfan | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 02:49 pm     Wcv - "This attitude that the people you are talking to aren't smart enough to either know the "big words" or figure out the meaning by context is not only condescending but arrogant." Of course, there is always the *possibility* that in the his own personal social circle, he is surrounded by morons, dunces, dolts, and idiots....maybe he just does this out of habit because he is just so used to explaining things to dumb friends. :-) (Btw, no offense intended to any morons, dunces, dolts, or idiots that may be out there! LOL) |
Zachsmom | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 02:55 pm     But Wendo..him and chiara joke like that all the time..he has even made comments that he has a wife.. I guess I don't see this horrible sexist misogynist emotional abuser that you all do.. |
Earthmother | Thursday, August 08, 2002 - 03:09 pm     none taken Sanfran.. |
|