Off of and other horrors

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> APRIL

> I won't speak for anyone but myself, but when I hear someone speak

> improperly, my opinion of that person's intelligence and education level,

> and thus their subsequent credibility, drops.  It may not be fair, or

> always accurate, but, in general, it seems to be fairly predictive of

> intelligence and education.  And I just can't take someone seriously if

> they can't speak (reasonably) properly, although the odd "irregardless"

> isn't that big of a deal.

> 

> TILL

> Why wouldn't "irregardless" be a big deal?  Let's consider these two

sentences:

> 

> 1.  Regardless of what you say, I won't change my mind.

> 

> 2.  Irregardless of what you say, I won't change my mind.

> 

> The obvious intention is for both of these sentences to mean the same

thing,

> but how can they?  The English prefix "ir-" when affixed to a word

reverses

> its meaning. "Regular" and "irregular" are opposites in meaning.

> "Recoverable" and "irrecoverable" are opposites in meaning.  "Refutable"

and

> "irrefutable" are opposites.  "Reducible" and "irreducible" are

opposites.

> "Replaceable" and "Irreplaceable" are opposites.  "Reconcilable" and

> "irreconcilable" are opposites.  "Rational" and "irrational" are

opposites.

> "Religious" and "irreligious" are opposites. "Revocable" and

"irrevocable"

> are opposites.

> 

> How then could "regardless" and "irregardless" have the same meaning?

> 



Farrell, I am living in the land of "he got no..." and "she done good".  I
can live with irregardless. <G>
April

• Previous message: English is my mudder tongue
• Next message: Off of and other horrors
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]