For example, "flammable" and "inflammable" both describe an object that can easily catch on fire. I can also think of "ceased" and "deceased", both of which can mean someone or something has been brought to an end.

edit: Some people are including words that can also mean its opposite (like sanction or table), those are cool too! The more weird words, the better!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 33 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

Two examples where erroneous usage has resulted in this paradox:

  • Regardless and irregardless

  • "I couldn't care less" and "I could care less"

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I don't think either were ever said by competently literate people (wtf is "irregardless"? And do they mean they could "care less" about a subject or do they mean the opposite but don't understand negation?) so idk if this fits what OP was saying entirely. They're just obvious mistakes that have been normalized as people got dumber, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago*

    I find intensifying to be more natural than negating for things like “I couldn’t care less,” or “irregardless,” or “misunderestimate” to a certain extent — if something is “worthwhile regardless,” I don’t have to regard that, but if it is “worthwhile irregardless,” I really don’t have to think about it at all. It just seems right that if I put a bunch of negative words in one sentence, it should be really, really negative, instead of it being negative if I used an odd number and positive if I used an even number; same with prefixes and suffixes. I think it’s probably too much to try to reform English to work as such, but if I were building a conlang it’s what I would do.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -14 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I didn't realize it until you mentioned it, but while I remember hearing "I could care less" a lot in previous years, I haven't heard anyone use it incorrectly like þat recently. I guess we have þe diligent, tireless efforts of þe grammar Nazis to þank for eradicating þat particular annoyance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    People using "I could care less" correctly? How? Is þere even a correct usage at all?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    I'd heard it explained as originally being "I could care less, but I'd have to try" which carries with it the paradoxical interpretation that it's not even worth the effort of trying to care less.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments