Words, usages, and phrases that annoy the shit out of you...

normalization

I'll say it again: weaponize

and the way reporters and columnists jump on neologisms like this with enthusiasm

what word should they be using?

D'mnuchin returns (darraghmac) wrote this on thread Trump, May 2017: 100 days of [unintelligible] on board I Love Everything on 31-May-2017

Normalisation

Stop saying this

some variation on "is this the hill you want to die on?" "i'm fine dying on this hill" "i'm going to die on this hill"

this one has spread like a virus in the past couple weeks, don't know tf why

what word should they be using?

― mark s, Monday, 27 November 2017 12:17 (five hours ago

Nothing -- silence. When it's their turn to speak on cable TV, stare blankly into the camera.

seriously where did the dying on hills thing come from and how did it spread so quickly

it's military so i blame tombot

it's a decades old english language idiom

Dying on a hill died quite some deaths on hills already. Not particularly new.

I know it’s not a new idiom but it’s spread like wildfire lately gonna do a google analytics thing in a sec

xps

'dying on this or that hill' has been around for at least a couple of decades, but has had an upsurge recently for reasons unknown to me. it will fade into the background again in a few weeks or months, like most faddish phrases.

it's upsurge is probably because taking stances on issues is such a big part of posting on social media and so many people have bad takes and strange hobbyhorses

Fuck horses are dying on the hills too??

where did the dying on hills thing come from

just to clarify, you do understand that choosing to die on a particular hill is a military metaphor for holding a position at any cost, don't you?

clarity is important

yeah yeah i know it's an old term i meant why has it spread so suddenly in pop culture/discourse in the last week or two

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=%22hill%20to%20die%20on%22

Kamikaze attacks on hills up seventy percent state office would make no comment when approached by this reporter

is this the hill you want me to kill you on

Hill killton

Abe said where you want this killin done
God said up on hilltop 61

“a phenomena”

Criteria instead of criterion.

Not 100% on point in this thread, but in my tiredness the phrase "have sex" just suddenly struck me as odd. The active "have" is already odd to begin with ("I'm having a slice of cake"). But "have sex" is this weird level of abstraction from the act. "Fucking" clearly describes a specific action/activity. "Engaging in intercourse" is more abstracted but it's still clear that you are doing a thing. But "having sex" sounds like some kind of strange, suspended state rather than an action.

xp yes fucking yes

weird xp

having sex is holding it in your hand

i’m having a sex right now

^now that's a phrase/construction i dislike

apparently people still don't understand how to use hashtags

"it's #raining in #melbourne!!! #watchout for #floods and #rain #thisisscary #dontgooutside #bringyourumbrella"

no

http://www.theage.com.au/technology/smartphone-apps/apples-date-related-bug-causes-headaches-for-device-users-20171202-gzxhua.html

A bug in Apple's software is causing headaches for many device users, with apps that use local notifications causing their devices to crash as of Saturday.

Apple users took to the internet to complain of the glitch

http://www.theage.com.au/world/despite-condemnations-donald-trump-is-impervious-to-the-uproar-he-causes-20171130-gzvvpe

On Wednesday, local time, Trump took to Twitter before sunrise to share three unverified videos

how do you "take to" something when you're already using it

like a duck takes to water
like a Trump takes to Twitter

okay that works

takin' it to the tweets

the revolutionary moves among the people like a duck takes to twitter

how do you "take to" something when you're already using it?

I don't see a particular problem with this. 'Took to' to me means someone logged into their account/opened an app in order to post. And even if the app is already running, the action of bringing it to the foreground is still required in order to post.

but... he's already on twitter

how do you "take to" something when you're already using it

I don't understand the objection unless he's literally using Twitter 24/7?

It's like, if a ship is harboured and then takes to sea... isn't it?

If Trump has a thought, picks up his phone, opens the Twitter app, and posts, then you can perfectly legitimately say he 'took to' Twitter. But in the case of him sharing the Britain First videos, you might assume he saw them on Twitter in the first place, in which case he was clearly already using Twitter and the 'took to' idiom is not appropriate (unless, that is, he watched the videos on Twitter, left Twitter, then thought to himself, 'I'm going to share those videos I saw', and opened up the app again in order to do so).

Yes, of course, duh... except a ship at harbour is still 'on the sea', sort of, it's just not sailing on the sea, to extend my tortuous analogy to breaking point... ummmmmmm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm3SNk3ffoA

What if a boat spends all afternoon sailing round and round the harbour, is it at sea?

A harbour is not the sea, of course, so even that doesn't work. I did say a ship and not a boat though, a ship sailing round and round a harbour wouldn't be the done thing.

Come to think of it, the phrase normally used is 'put to sea'.

A presenter used the word "deprivatize" at a workshop I was at last week--as in, "Deprivatize your strategies with other teachers at your school." As in, "share."

People just standing about are already on their feet, yet if they begin to run we may say they "took to their heels and ran".

lol @ deprivatize

makes sense though -- the word focuses on the proprietary nature of some teachers and their teaching materials