Topic: Phrases that people get wrong

[Ghost Town]

That's one of the biggest movie misquotes ever that one.

There's loads like it. Essentially contractions and reworkings of several sentences or ideas until it sounds like something you think really was said in the movie or book or whatever. 'Play it again, Sam' is another good one, as is 'Elementary my dear Watson'

[Alan_X]

I'm sure it's been posted but heard it a few times recently:

"Chomping at the bit..."

[Alan_X]

And a film quote that is wrong in two ways:

"If you build it, they will come.."

The line that he hears in the corn field is: "If you build it, he will come..."

And it's endlessly quoted as a rationale for building 80,000 seater stadiums.

Later in the film the daughter does say: "people will come..."

[Hazell]

And a film quote that is wrong in two ways:

"If you build it, they will come.."

The line that he hears in the corn field is: "If you build it, he will come..."

And it's endlessly quoted as a rationale for building 80,000 seater stadiums.

Later in the film the daughter does say: "people will come..."

Maybe people are conflating Field of Dreams and Wayne's World 2?

[Crosby Nick]

There's loads like it. Essentially contractions and reworkings of several sentences or ideas until it sounds like something you think really was said in the movie or book or whatever. 'Play it again, Sam' is another good one, as is 'Elementary my dear Watson'

“Alas poor Yorick, I knew him well” is another wrong one. Bit more highbrow than Dirty Harry but there you go.

Someone was presenting at work today and said “without further adieu” which made me chuckle.

[ChaChaMooMoo]

People sometimes tend to mix lesser and fewer.

For those of you who don't know, if you can count it, its fewer. If you cant, its lesser.

Fewer eggs, fewer dollars, fewer IQ, fewer tablets.

Lesser money, lesser hate, lesser salt, lesser ambiguity.

Admitted, I learnt the difference about 3 years ago. And I'm 32.

[Ghost Town]

People sometimes tend to mix lesser and fewer.

For those of you who don't know, if you can count it, its fewer. If you cant, its lesser.

Fewer eggs, fewer dollars, fewer IQ, fewer tablets.

Lesser money, lesser hate, lesser salt, lesser ambiguity.

Admitted, I learnt the difference about 3 years ago. And I'm 32.

Forget 'people', it looks like you haven't got the hang of it either. Lesser is not the mass noun counterpart of fewer. The word you are looking for is 'less', a quantitative comparative adjective.

Lesser is a comparative adjective used to denote qualitative differences, not quantitative, and is the opposite of 'greater'.

You can't really mix up lesser and fewer because they are used in different ways, in different kinds of sentences.

Muphry's Law strikes again

[Ghost Town]

“Alas poor Yorick, I knew him well” is another wrong one.

Think that one came about due to a popular TV advert which used it incorrectly. Think it was for some kind of beer. Heineken or Carling or something. Shows how impactful ads can be

[McrRed]

Bloody Muphry's Law

[Crosby Nick]

Think that one came about due to a popular TV advert which used it incorrectly. Think it was for some kind of beer. Heineken or Carling or something. Shows how impactful ads can be

I was trying to remember what it was, Carling Black Label wasn’t it? After he did a few keepy ups with the skull?

[Ghost Town]

Bloody Muphry's Law

Lol, it really is called that.

It's great because you can't cite it without people assuming you've made a mistake in the spelling and thus fallen foul of Muphry's Law yourself. Very meta

[Ghost Town]

I was trying to remember what it was, Carling Black Label wasn’t it? After he did a few keepy ups with the skull?

That's the one! It's coming back to me now. Most people's first ever exposure to Hamlet - not the cigar!

[Alan_X]

Think that one came about due to a popular TV advert which used it incorrectly. Think it was for some kind of beer. Heineken or Carling or something. Shows how impactful ads can be

You may be right but I'm sure the incorrect quote predates the advert.
 

[Alan_X]

Water, water everywhere and not a drop to drink..

Should be

Water, water everywhere, nor any drop to drink..

[Alan_X]

"Money is the root of all evil"

Should be:

"For the love of money is the root of all evil"

[ChaChaMooMoo]

Forget 'people', it looks like you haven't got the hang of it either. Lesser is not the mass noun counterpart of fewer. The word you are looking for is 'less', a quantitative comparative adjective.

Lesser is a comparative adjective used to denote qualitative differences, not quantitative, and is the opposite of 'greater'.

You can't really mix up lesser and fewer because they are used in different ways, in different kinds of sentences.

Muphry's Law strikes again

I am not sure I get it mate.

Are you saying that in the examples I provided, it must have been less. And not lesser?
Like, less money, less hate, less salt and less ambiguity? And only if I'm comparing them, then lesser money, lesser hate, lesser salt and lesser ambiguity.

But are the examples for fewer right?!? Thats what I understood when I learnt it. Fewer to describe what can be counted. And less to describe what cannot be counted. You can count dollars. But you cant count money. You can count calories but you cant count salt.

[Alan_X]

People use "blood is thicker than water" to mean family ties are most important. In fact the meaning is quite different.

The original meaning is that "the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb". Shedding blood on the battlefield, or mixing blood as a 'blood brother' ritual is more of a bond than family ties.

[Crosby Nick]

It’s an honour to be my brother’s Best Man today. They say blood is thicker than water... and X is thicker than both.

I think of may have used that a few years back.

[Ghost Town]

You may be right but I'm sure the incorrect quote predates the advert.

Yes it's possible. In fact if the misapprehension existed before the ad it might be where the ad got it from.

I mentioned it because I'm a Shakespeare geek and I've discussed the misquote with others of a similar mind who have cited the ad as the source. But I suppose it's an easy enough mistake to make so doesn't really need a source

[Alan_X]

There are loads in Shakespeare:

Misquote: “Gild the lily”
Actual Quote: “To gild refined gold, to paint the lily”.

Misquote: “Lead on, Macduff”
Actual Quote: “Lay on, Macduff, and damned be him who first cries ‘Hold! enough!’”

Misquote: “Bubble bubble, toil and trouble.”
Actual Quote: “Double, double toil and trouble.”

Misquote: “Methinks the lady doth protest too much”
Actual Quote: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

Misquote: “The rest is science”
Actual Quote: “The rest is silence”

Misquote: “A rose by any other name smells just as sweet.”
Actual Quote: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet.”

Misquote: “To the manor born”
Actual Quote: “but to my mind,—though I am native here and to the manner born,—it is a custom more honour’d in the breach than the observance.” (referring to drunken carousing).

And:

Quote: “Romeo, Romeo… Wherefore art thou Romeo?” doesn't mean 'where are you Romeo?' it means 'Why are you called Romeo' and specifically, why is he a Montague.

[Ghost Town]

I am not sure I get it mate.

Are you saying that in the examples I provided, it must have been less. And not lesser?

Like, less money, less hate, less salt and less ambiguity?

Yes that's correct.

Less is used to indicate quantity for mass nouns, like the examples you give. Its counterpart is 'fewer', which is used with countable nouns. A good way of remembering which is which is 'fewer apples, less apple juice' or 'fewer milk bottles, less milk'

And only if I'm comparing them, then lesser money, lesser hate, lesser salt and lesser ambiguity.

No lesser is not used for quantities, it's used for qualities - size, strength, value, importance, potency etc. So you wouldn't say 'lesser money' when you mean there's a smaller amount of money. It's difficult to think of an example where lesser would be used with money. Or any of your examples...

Ok, it's a bit tortuous but with hate, for example, you could say 'I hate both Everton and Man Utd but Utd is the greater hate while Everton is the lesser hate' if are talking about the quality of the hate, not the amount in units.

Think of the phrase 'the lesser of two evils'. You're not talking about a countable amount of evil, you're saying that of the two evils this one is not so evil as the other.

Basically if you can say something is greater, the opposite of it is lesser

But are the examples for fewer right?!? Thats what I understood when I learnt it. Fewer to describe what can be counted. And less to describe what cannot be counted. You can count dollars. But you cant count money. You can count calories but you cant count salt.

Yes that's correct, fewer and less are counterparts of each other, depending on whether you're talking about a mass noun or a countable noun

[Ghost Town]

Water, water everywhere and not a drop to drink..

Should be

Water, water everywhere, nor any drop to drink..

While we're on about that poem, it's Rime of the Ancient Mariner, not Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner - an error I see even if learned papers about it

[Ghost Town]

Misquote: “The rest is science”
Actual Quote: “The rest is silence”

Crikey, never heard that misquote before, although it would be quite a good play on words in the right context

Misquote: “To the manor born”
Actual Quote: “but to my mind,—though I am native here and to the manner born,—it is a custom more honour’d in the breach than the observance.” (referring to drunken carousing).

Again, I think that one started out as a play on words and then people forgot

Quote: “Romeo, Romeo… Wherefore art thou Romeo?” doesn't mean 'where are you Romeo?' it means 'Why are you called Romeo' and specifically, why is he a Montague.

Yeh, she's basically saying 'why the fuck did I have to fall in love with Romeo bloody Montague, of all people?'

[Red Beret]

Phrases you can get wrong?

"That wall's so hot you could fry an egg on it." - Donald J. Trump.

[McrRed]

A good Guardian longread on the subject of shifting language and malapropisms:

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/aug/15/why-its-time-to-stop-worrying-about-the-decline-of-the-english-language

Loved the bit about naprons.

[Jm55]

May have already been mentioned and it’s not a phrase so much as a word but ;

When people says they’ve ‘brought’ something when they’ve actually ‘bought it.’

[Kenny's Jacket]

People use "blood is thicker than water" to mean family ties are most important. In fact the meaning is quite different.

The original meaning is that "the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb". Shedding blood on the battlefield, or mixing blood as a 'blood brother' ritual is more of a bond than family ties.

Thats interesting. 

[CHOPPER]

Born not manufactured

Which should really be pronounced - Gutted I picked the wrong team

[cester-the-red]

May have already been mentioned and it’s not a phrase so much as a word but ;

When people says they’ve ‘brought’ something when they’ve actually ‘bought it.’

Haha this winds me up also , it got to the stage that I thought it was me who was wrong , until I bought it to my attention [emoji57]

[Ghost Town]

Thats interesting.

Except that it's almost certainly not true.

The claimed origin phrase "the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb" has no citation; no-one knows where it comes from and it may just be something someone made up on the internet in the mid-1990s. That's as far back as the trail goes. Any other claims - that it comes from the Bible, that it comes from the 14th C Troy Book etc are false. You'll see this supposed error of understanding mentioned all over the place but without references. It seems as if people love to point out how we've got something wrong, so repeat the claim without verifying it.

Meanwhile the traditional explanation, that 'blood is thicker than water' means that 'family ties are stronger than non-family ties' goes back to the 17th century in its present form and the 12th century in a slightly different form, and has been in pretty continuous use for for hundreds of years.

In other words: don't always believe what you read on the internet

[afc tukrish]

In other words: don't always believe what you read on the internet

Quite true, things we read on the internet are often bias, written by brave souls who refuse to tow the line...

[Kenny's Jacket]

Except that it's almost certainly not true.

The claimed origin phrase "the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb" has no citation; no-one knows where it comes from and it may just be something someone made up on the internet in the mid-1990s. That's as far back as the trail goes. Any other claims - that it comes from the Bible, that it comes from the 14th C Troy Book etc are false. You'll see this supposed error of understanding mentioned all over the place but without references. It seems as if people love to point out how we've got something wrong, so repeat the claim without verifying it.

Meanwhile the traditional explanation, that 'blood is thicker than water' means that 'family ties are stronger than non-family ties' goes back to the 17th century in its present form and the 12th century in a slightly different form, and has been in pretty continuous use for for hundreds of years.

In other words: don't always believe what you read on the internet

OK thanks.  That doesn't mean that Alans' post is wrong though, more that we cant be certain, that explanation also makes more sense when using the full phase.

[JC the Messiah]

Here's one I don't understand from our American friends.

In the UK, we say "You're hearing me, but you're not listening."
In the US, I've heard that you "You're listening, but you're not hearing me."

Now, I've always thought that hearing is the passive action, like seeing. Whereas listening requires conscious effort, like watching.

So you can hear what someone is saying, without listening. But you can't listen if you don't hear them.

Or have I misunderstood the American version?

[Alan_X]

Except that it's almost certainly not true.

The claimed origin phrase "the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb" has no citation; no-one knows where it comes from and it may just be something someone made up on the internet in the mid-1990s. That's as far back as the trail goes. Any other claims - that it comes from the Bible, that it comes from the 14th C Troy Book etc are false. You'll see this supposed error of understanding mentioned all over the place but without references. It seems as if people love to point out how we've got something wrong, so repeat the claim without verifying it.

Meanwhile the traditional explanation, that 'blood is thicker than water' means that 'family ties are stronger than non-family ties' goes back to the 17th century in its present form and the 12th century in a slightly different form, and has been in pretty continuous use for for hundreds of years.

In other words: don't always believe what you read on the internet

Haha - fair enough. I committed one of my own cardinal sins - not following up and corroborating. Will do a bit more research.

[Ghost Town]

OK thanks.  That doesn't mean that Alans' post is wrong though, more that we cant be certain, that explanation also makes more sense when using the full phase.

True we can't be 100% certain, but as the supposed alternative phrase is never referenced and no-one has a source for it, I'd be 99% certain that it's false.

Haha - fair enough. I committed one of my own cardinal sins - not following up and corroborating. Will do a bit more research.

Easily done, there's so much noise online now it's hard to know whether   any claim is accurate or just so oft-repeated as to seem so

[Ghost Town]

Quite true, things we read on the internet are often bias, written by brave souls who refuse to tow the line...

Ahem.....toe the line

Though you probably know that and I've probably been wooshed

[Kenny's Jacket]

True we can't be 100% certain, but as the supposed alternative phrase is never referenced and no-one has a source for it, I'd be 99% certain that it's false.
Easily done, there's so much noise online now it's hard to know whether   any claim is accurate or just so oft-repeated as to seem so

Sorry GT I misread your original rebuttal.  I thought you were saying we cant prove the meaning of the longer phase, not that its likely made up.
So yeah you're correct sorry. 

[afc tukrish]

Ahem.....toe the line

Though you probably know that and I've probably been wooshed

 

Along with "bias" instead of the proper "biased..."

Thought it was fairly obvious...

[Ghost Town]

Along with "bias" instead of the proper "biased..."

Thought it was fairly obvious...

I just assumed you were crap at English

[afc tukrish]

Ahem.....toe the line

Though you probably know that and I've probably been wooshed

Mourinho’s really good at this, doesn’t deal in cliches and actually takes the time to analyse the action. He’s miles ahead of the rest of the rabble we have to hear.

Always like Keane too, twat of a bloke, yeah, but he at least says what he’s thinking, rather than tow the line.

It's spreading!

 

Now I need to get back to pisspronuniciating my worms...