What's new

Words and Phrases that really annoy

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
Maybe, but it could be said by a person who has been browbeaten and/or fears their comment will be taken as a "microaggression" by the other person. Where in the past a recipient was expected to have a thicker skin and deeper thoughts, where the recipient shrugged their shoulders and thought that was an off-color or inappropriate remark to some degree, but also understood that the speaker was trying to make some broader point beyond the initial emotional "triggering" response it might also induce.
True enough, but I meant it mostly as applies to normal people.
 
Seems to me that some of the introductory-type phrases folks are complaining about, some of which are not to be taken literally, are conventions for signaling certainb things in conversation. I think the quick question one is rather literal. I am probably usually saying I know you have other things on your mind right now but can I kindly interrupt your other activiities for on small item. Whereas if somone just started with a question, I might be thinking, I do not have time for this just now. If they say a quick question, I am more prepared to interrupt whatever I am doing. I would intend to hold them to the qucik question, though.

The to be honest, which seems something like beginning with "frankly," really means what I am about to say may be a little controversial, but I am aware that it is so. Maybe a signal to take whatever is said more seriously than if I were saying some pablum.

The I could care less, seems to me something of a hackneyed attempt at humor. It seems to be something that has become accepted in general usage, but it always sounds bit silly and unsophisticated to me. But the speaker may mean it to be. I do not think there is any loss in meaning.
 
Last edited:

AimlessWanderer

Remember to forget me!
Seems to me that some of the introductory-type phrases folks are complaining about, some of which are not to be taken literally, are conventions for signaling certainb things in conversation.

Agreed.

"Can I ask you a question...?"
The question I am about to ask would probably appear rude or invasive if I just blurted it out, so if you're not in a mindset to take/answer such questions, say so now, before I ask it.

"To be brutally honest..."
I might normally tip toe around the edge of what I'm about to say, or be cautious with how much I share, but this seem like an "out with it" moment, and you might not like what you hear.

"With all due respect..."
This is probably going to land badly. If I knew how to share it more gently, and share it I must, then I would do so. If it does land badly, I'm not intending to cause hurt, just shave how different my perspectives are on this.

"I'm not racist but...."

I had call to use "this is going to sound horribly racist, but..." a few weeks ago. I was extremely uncomfortable saying it (and what followed), even though I meant no ill will whatsoever. I'm still unsettled now as to whether or not my thinking was rooted in generosity or prejudice...

Basically, I was telling someone I had been in a space where I expected to see far greater diversity than what I actually saw. 95% of them were who I'd have expected to make up maybe 10-15%, only 5% were who I'd expect to make up probably 25-30%, and the demographics I'd have expected to make up the other 60% were absent. It wasn't a problem, other than ... this is all very oddly weighted ... where the hell's everyone else?
 
I suppose there are other ways of saying most of these introductory type phrases that are more literally accurate. Actually, I think to be "brutally honest" is arguably more accurate than to be "honest." What the speaker is really saying is "to be candid" or "to be frank." But I do not know that either of these forumaltions would necessarily be better understood than "to be honest." The speaker, if seems to me is attmeping to soften the impact of something they are about to say that could be taken as critical or confrontive. It seems useful in conversations among human beings to be able to signal that kind of intent.

On the other hand, if I hear myself saying "this is going to sound horribly racist, but..." or "I am not a racist, but . . . ," maybe that is a signal to myself, not to go further with what I was going to say! :) I am not being critical of AW! Maybe it is just me.
 

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
I don't think anything on this list so far could not be explained or reasonably rationalized with some examination.
I think that virtually all of the explanations and rationalizations are correct in some situations.
I'd wager that the situation which makes these words and phrases annoying to the folks that have written them is that often they are NOT used in the context of the explanation or rationalization and that, in a nutshell, is what makes them annoying.
 
I'd wager that the situation which makes these words and phrases annoying to the folks that have written them is that often they are NOT used in the context of the explanation or rationalization
I hear you, Phil. And there is the situation where someone says "can I ask you a quick question," and the question is anything but quick. I suppose sometimes folks start a series of sentences with "frankly" or "honestly" when there is nothing that was not being candidly discussed in the first intance.

I suppose that depending on the actual tone "with all due respect" really means in this case "due respect" is zero respect.

I think sometimes these phrases are just filler while the speaker tries to think of exactly what they want to say!

Words of nuance, words of skill
Words of romance are a thrill
Words are stupid, words are fun
Words can put you on the run

What are words worth?
What are words worth? Words!
 

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
I hear you, Phil. And there is the situation where someone says "can I ask you a quick question," and the question is anything but quick. I suppose sometimes folks start a series of sentences with "frankly" or "honestly" when there is nothing that was not being candidly discussed in the first intance.

I suppose that depending on the actual tone "with all due respect" really means in this case "due respect" is zero respect.

I think sometimes these phrases are just filler while the speaker tries to think of exactly what they want to say!

Words of nuance, words of skill
Words of romance are a thrill
Words are stupid, words are fun
Words can put you on the run

What are words worth?
What are words worth? Words!
I agree. Context is often King.
 
I guess I would say that "at the end of the day" may have come to be used so much that it arguably sounds distractingly trite these days. I am not sure I have a phrase to substitute that is much better. "When all relevant considerations are taken into account" sounds wordy to me. "In the fullness of time" seems imprecise at best. "In the end" may be as good as anything. Maybe "in the end" is better for being simpler. "When all is said and done" always makes me want to say "there is more always said than done," and itself sounds rather hackneyed.

I do not think I have ever come across "boots on the ground" outside a military context, and there meaning to be effective actual troops would need to be sent in, rather than, say, air attacks. How is it used? Is it referencing whether or not an organization has the appropriate personnel/expertise in place to accomplish some task? If so, it seems a little imprecise. Is it referring to an organization needing to send employees in person to a particular location in order to accomplish some task? If so, it does seem quite precise, but how often does that happen. If referring to figuratively sending employees to a particular place, but assigning sufficient of them to the task, it seems like a confusing metaphor, and it would be better to literally say that without the potential confusion of "boots" and "ground."

Just my 2 cents, though.
 
My mother-in-law: And Them… She says it all the time. It goes something like this when talking to my wife: I saw your sister and them. We are going to visit my friends and them. We saw your friend at the store and them.

She constantly mixes up words and I never say anything, I just let her talk and enjoy the stunned looks. Her classic word jumble :
We ran into Mary and them, she told me that her grandson came out as gay. Well you know his uncle and another cousin are gay . It must be generic(meaning to say genetic). I excused myself and walked into the bathroom so I wouldn’t lose it. On the way home I asked my wife if you find generic gay kids at the big lots store. She punched me in arm and laughed. A visit is worth weeks of comedy.
 

AimlessWanderer

Remember to forget me!
On the other hand, if I hear myself saying "this is going to sound horribly racist, but..." or "I am not a racist, but . . . ," maybe that is a signal to myself, not to go further with what I was going to say! :) I am not being critical of AW! Maybe it is just me.
I probably would have went with my gut. YMMV.

The joys of neurodiversity, and seeing everything through a different filter. Self doubt is all too common, and going with my gut is just as likely to get me in trouble, as keep me out of it. :lol: Most times, it defaults to trusting those around me to approach my indiscretions, or clashes with societal norms, with the good will and compassion that I do strive to use with others (even if I do get it calamitously wrong sometimes).
 
I guess I would say that "at the end of the day" may have come to be used so much that it arguably sounds distractingly trite these days. I am not sure I have a phrase to substitute that is much better. "When all relevant considerations are taken into account" sounds wordy to me. "In the fullness of time" seems imprecise at best. "In the end" may be as good as anything. Maybe "in the end" is better for being simpler. "When all is said and done" always makes me want to say "there is more always said than done," and itself sounds rather hackneyed.

I do not think I have ever come across "boots on the ground" outside a military context, and there meaning to be effective actual troops would need to be sent in, rather than, say, air attacks. How is it used? Is it referencing whether or not an organization has the appropriate personnel/expertise in place to accomplish some task? If so, it seems a little imprecise. Is it referring to an organization needing to send employees in person to a particular location in order to accomplish some task? If so, it does seem quite precise, but how often does that happen. If referring to figuratively sending employees to a particular place, but assigning sufficient of them to the task, it seems like a confusing metaphor, and it would be better to literally say that without the potential confusion of "boots" and "ground."

Just my 2 cents, though.
Lol. I kind of noticed over the years here in the US and probably the same worldwide we get into saying certain things. I think a lot of it starts through the Press, movies and media.
I do notice these Trends change as years ago and new sayings develop to become popular, or maybe cool.
My bad... bad what? Sentence or what. lol
 
Gets on my nerves when people say( I'm not going to lie) blah blah blah
So that means the rest of the time they might be telling a lie
 
Top Bottom