Death by Grammar

27 MAY 2007 hey, look grammar

Quiz: Who is the jerk in this scenario?

1: She made a joke at her own expense. I know she was being self-depreciating, but--
2: Actually, it's "self-deprecating". But go on.
1: What?
2: "Self-deprecating". Not "self-depreciating". That's not the right word.
1: Yes it is.
2: No it isn't.
1: People say it all the time.
2: People say Las Vegas is the capital of Nevada, but that doesn't mean it is.
1: What are you talking about?
2: If you bought yourself and went down in value over the time you owned yourself, you might be "self-depreciating". But in any other circumstance, it doesn't make any sense.
1: Oh, so instead you "deprecate" yourself. That makes tons of sense. Sorry I didn't go to your fancy college.
2: The college thing is irrelevant.
1: Irregardless, I--
2: "Regardless"! There's no such word as "irregardless", it means what "regardless" means!
1: How can it mean anything if it isn't a word? Ah ha! I caught you! It must be a word!

2 stabs 1 in the neck with a pencil.

And that is how grammar kills.

(The Answer to the quiz is: Both, because they're getting all pent up and personal about a word usage issue and should just have some sangria and relax. Standard usage now accepts "self-deprecating" when one is being excessively modest, but only because it overtook "self-depreciating" over time in the sense of "belittling oneself". One example I read said you could say "self-depreciating" if you did something that lowered your own worth to a project, like if you insulted your potential client right before turning in your bid.

And that's how I learned that "self-depreciating" is a valid term, though not in the way most people use it, though it used to be at one time.

These grammar murder mysteries are awfully confusing in terms of assigning guilt and a sentence. Ha! You get a "sentence" for a "period" of time, and so on!

I'm tired.)