Mine is people who separate words when they write. I'm Norwegian, and we can string together words indefinetly to make a new word. The never ending word may not make any sense, but it is gramatically correct

Still, people write words the wrong way by separating them.

Examples:

  • "Ananas ringer" means "the pineapple is calling" when written the wrong way. The correct way is "ananasringer" and it means "pineapple rings" (from a tin).

  • "Prinsesse pult i vinkel" means "a princess fucked at an angle". The correct way to write it is "prinsessepult i vinkel", and it means "an angeled princess desk" (a desk for children, obviously)

  • "Koke bøker" means "to cook books". The correct way is "kokebøker" and means "cookbooks"

I see these kinds of mistakes everywhere!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 60 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

(American) English: Inflammable vs flammable vs non-flammable.

Inflammable means flammable?!  What a country!

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Inflammable and flammable don't strictly mean the same thing.

    Flammable can be set alight

    Inflammable can set itself alight.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I've known the difference ever since I decided to look it up one day, but I've always felt the 'in-' prefix was the wrong choice (especially when labeling potentially dangerous substances). "In-" is more often used to qualify a word as "not".

    "Autoflammable" would have been my choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Remember: invaluable is a synonym of priceless, but not of worthless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments