AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Tom1200 :
results oriented is fine. but results orientated is a totally different thing.
I used to think that "orientate" was a word which people made up only when talking about CAD/ solid modeling, "rotate" leads people to say "orientate" rather than "orient". I was wrong.
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Tom1200 :
results oriented is fine. but results orientated is a totally different thing.
Thank you. Keep the faith, my man.
In reply to Duke :
Ditto. I used to be a big "you guys" and "dudes" user, but it was pointed out to me that some folks are uncomfortable with that, so I switched to using "y'all" and "folks".
Orientated............my eye is now twitching.
For the "you guys" trying to stray away from that. Y'all and folks is definitely common here in OK.
Here in the Pacific Northwest, everyone says "you guys", but "y'all" will probably get you sideways looks.
RacerBoy75 said:Here in the urban Pacific Northwest, everyone says "you guys", but "y'all" will probably get you sideways looks.
Fixed it for you.
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Tom1200 :
results oriented is fine. but results orientated is a totally different thing.
I caught the difference but was speaking more to their intent then their writing..................neither orientated nor oriented is fine by me because you know their intent is to ride you like a Kentucky Derby hopeful down final stretch.
Every employer expects you to get results but that statement tells me they think the statement gives them carte blanche to behave badly.
Tom1200 said:AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Tom1200 :
results oriented is fine. but results orientated is a totally different thing.
I caught the difference but was speaking more to their intent then their writing..................neither orientated nor oriented is fine by me because you know their intent is to ride you like a Kentucky Derby hopeful down final stretch.
Every employer expects you to get results but that statement tells me they think the statement gives them carte blanche to behave badly.
"i do just enough to not get fired, they pay me just enough to not quit. it works."
-- i have no idea who first said that, but i like it.
Since we're all piling on:
I'm so tired of seeing "up to" used in ads, spoken or in print. "Make up to $10,000 a week!", and, "Get up to 80 mpg!" Marketing people know full well that human nature makes us see "Make $10,000 a week!" and "Get 80 mpg!" What many people don't understand is any amount less than $10,000 a week or under 80 mpg also fits the description. Sometimes to mess with a salesman who uses "up to", I'll say, "So you guaranty that I won't get more?"
Another gripe is thread titles containing "The truth about..." We're instantly supposed to assume that, A: Everything that we've heard before is a lie, and B: Only this author knows what's going on. Pretty sure this started with the tabloids and perfectly suits online click bait content. Both reasons to not read further.
Lastly, another click bait trend is using: "What they don't want you to know..." This works well because readers already knows who "they" are, and there's no reason for the content creator to explain - getting easily-led readers to click through was the whole point.
Much of your complaints are now about linguistics, not grammar. Just sayin'.
Appleseed said:Much of your complaints are now about linguistics, not grammar. Just sayin'.
Shouldn't that be many, not much? Just sayin' 
einy (Forum Supporter) said:People saying "I'm going to the ATM machine". That literally expands to "Automated Teller Machine Machine".
I'm done complaining for the moment.
I hear and support you on that, but we now have CVT entering our lingo and most peeps won't know what that is without adding transmission.
Wow, twelve pages and not one complaint about:
these ones, and
those ones.
I can overlook many grammar mistakes but those two go off in my brain like a neon sign.
People. Who.Do.This.
Appleseed said:Much of your complaints are now about linguistics, not grammar. Just sayin'.
The title does say "design" which I would contend includes style.
JG Pasterjak said:Jerry From LA said:Ms Young,
I will worry about I, me, and myself when GRM stops splitting the infinitive. That is fingernails on blackboards to me. I'm donning the firesuit...
Personally I work very hard in all my writing to not split infinitives.
I am telling the ducks you eat birds.
Oh, oh, ohhhh, this one bugs the snot out of me:
The seat behind the front row is not the "backseat". It is the "back seat" - in other words, the seat in the back of the vehicle.
"Backseat" as a single word is an adjective to describe an occupant of the back seat.
I'm fixin' to figure out why y'all posted this thread here instead of the "off topic" area. 
Peabody said:It's obvious once you know, and this one is more legible than the one that just came to our town, but how many people, like me, drive by wondering WTF does that say?
Any corporate sign that you can't read and understand instantly isn't a very good marketing strategy. They get extra demerits for spelling boys with a Z.
Since this question was asked by the staff of a car magazine...if you ever run into your counterparts over at Hot Rod, tell them to stop printing articles with tiny white font on a black background. I still have pretty decent eyesight, but that magazine is getting to be nearly impossible to read without a magnifying glass.
DWNSHFT said:Wow, twelve pages and not one complaint about:
these ones, and
those ones.
I can overlook many grammar mistakes but those two go off in my brain like a neon sign.
Years ago when I was working retail auto parts an older gentleman asked if I was from California because I sounded like a valley girl when I said, 'these are the ones you'd be looking for' (or something along those lines) in reference to a pair of marker light bulbs. I hadn't given it much thought before that. Oof.
There's a commercial for a newer diabetes medication that states it is "not for those with type 1 diabetes or children". So, if I have children I can't use this?
I have a coworker who uses "these" in place of "this" when he writes emails, and it really bugs me, but I also feel sorry for a grown ass man who has made it this far without being corrected, or more likely, without applying the correction.
I have at least one coworker who routinely uses a semicolon as a comma, and it drives me crazy.
"Last week we ran a software update that some people had trouble with; but we now have a solution. Please contact me or Zach if you need assistance; and we will figure out when to apply the fix."
It's been mentioned previously, but I'll say it, too. The greengrocer's apostrophe irritates me.
Here is another one. The positive use of anymore doesn't exactly bother me, but it makes my brain hiccup a bit when I parse it, because it isn't common usage in my area. I see it most often on these very forums.
e.g. Anymore we're using pure nitrogen in our tires instead of regular air.
I'd write it as: We're using pure nitrogen in our tires instead of regular air from now on.
It isn't even the use of the word "anymore," it can just be the placement.
e.g. Nobody anymore is making simple cars.
I'd write it as: Nobody is making simple cars anymore.
DarkMonohue said:I have at least one coworker who routinely uses a semicolon as a comma, and it drives me crazy.
"Last week we ran a software update that some people had trouble with; but we now have a solution. Please contact me or Zach if you need assistance; and we will figure out when to apply the fix."
That's bad, but try this out:
"Team, we have to have a response these week on your recovery schedule or these may result in an official delay notice."
Takes the wind out of what should be a pretty serious email. Makes me cringe, is best way I can describe opening emails from him. They're also usually littered with bizarrely placed line breaks, but my brain reads past those.
You'll need to log in to post.
