Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Expressions people get wrong
Comments
-
I love that story about Box Deluxe as I like practically everything on QI, but unfortunately I think it's just bollocks rather than dogs bollocks. The first known recording of the phrase is in Eric Partridge's dictionary of RAF slang (1949). That might put it in the right timeframe but doesn't suggest a commercial etymology.lordromford said:
They talked about this on QI a few years ago. Apparently it was when Hornby (I think) were selling ordinary train sets to poor families and special super-duper versions to rich ones. They, naturally, came in boxes and were thus named, respectively, ‘Box Standard’ and ‘Box Deluxe’.letthegoodtimesroll said:For me, the one that I’m still not convinced about is ‘bog standard’ and have always considered that a northern derivative of what it should be but which seems to be the accepted phrase yet I’ve always thought that this surely should be ‘box standard’ as in that's the version that comes out of the box.
Stephen Fry confidently asserted that these phrases became commonly used to mean ‘ordinary’ and ‘superior’, but they evolved over time into ‘Bog Standard’ and ‘Dog’s Bollocks’.
Great story if true, particularly the dog’s bollocks bit, but not sure if it’s an urban myth.
As for bog standard. I think that's been firmly discredited. It's far more likely that the bog refers to toilet meaning not very good. There is an explanation that closer to Charlton though. That it that BBC producers used the phrase for productions that weren't up to standard and would be more fitting for Lew Grade's ITV. In this version bog means toilet or loo which is a homonym for Lew. I wonder if Michael would be able to confirm this?0 -
It means that they won't try to tell you how to do something that you're plainly capable of doing. I know it as "don't try to teach your grandmother how to suck eggs".E-cafc said:"I won't try and tell you how to suck eggs"
Wtf is that about?
Also know someone who always says..." Yeah, well, it's gotta be 6 of one and 6 of the other"0 -
Addickted said:
Getting lend/borrow arse about face. It ain't difficult.
Bought and brought also frustrate me - ffs, you don't bruy things in the shops.
This for me. "I brought this for a fiver".............right, where did you bring it from you numpty !valleynick66 said:In a similar way people who can't understand the difference between i.e. and e.g. I see this all too often on business documents such as procedures and requirements specifications where it really should be correct.
3 -
It was always the former in our family, never heard the latter until this thread. However, each is OK because AND is commutative so both expressions mean exactly the same thing. "You can either have your cake or you can eat it" also means the same as long as you accept the OR is exclusive not inclusive.Stig said:
Another modern derivation that doesn't make any sense is, 'you can't have your cake and eat it'. I should be, 'you can't eat your cake and have it'.SuedeAdidas said:The proof is in the pudding.
I don't get how this derivation of the saying has come about......because it doesn’t make any sense.1 -
If they thought about what the two terms mean, "that is" and "for example", they wouldn't confuse the two so it says a lot about the writer when the wrong one is used.valleynick66 said:In a similar way people who can't understand the difference between i.e. and e.g. I see this all too often on business documents such as procedures and requirements specifications where it really should be correct.
1 -
Bog standard load of bollox, and not the dog's type.stonemuse said:
Great storylordromford said:
They talked about this on QI a few years ago. Apparently it was when Hornby (I think) were selling ordinary train sets to poor families and special super-duper versions to rich ones. They, naturally, came in boxes and were thus named, respectively, ‘Box Standard’ and ‘Box Deluxe’.letthegoodtimesroll said:For me, the one that I’m still not convinced about is ‘bog standard’ and have always considered that a northern derivative of what it should be but which seems to be the accepted phrase yet I’ve always thought that this surely should be ‘box standard’ as in that's the version that comes out of the box.
Stephen Fry confidently asserted that these phrases became commonly used to mean ‘ordinary’ and ‘superior’, but they evolved over time into ‘Bog Standard’ and ‘Dog’s Bollocks’.
Great story if true, particularly the dog’s bollocks bit, but not sure if it’s an urban myth.0 -
Like you, I'd never heard the original version. I only discovered it when I looked up the 'have your cake and eat it' version one day because it is senseless: If you 'have your cake', i.e. you possess a cake, you can eat it. Other than bakers and supermarkets, there would be absolutely no point in anyone ever having a cake if they couldn't eat it. The unused original phrase makes perfect sense though; the very process of eating your cake destroys it. Once eaten it no longer exists. Two very different phrases. Unfortunately the meaningful one has become defunct.AddicksAddict said:
It was always the former in our family, never heard the latter until this thread. However, each is OK because AND is commutative so both expressions mean exactly the same thing. "You can either have your cake or you can eat it" also means the same as long as you accept the OR is exclusive not inclusive.Stig said:
Another modern derivation that doesn't make any sense is, 'you can't have your cake and eat it'. I should be, 'you can't eat your cake and have it'.SuedeAdidas said:The proof is in the pudding.
I don't get how this derivation of the saying has come about......because it doesn’t make any sense.0 -
This is a very lacksadaisical thread that has me on tenderhooks!
(Of course it should be Lackadaisical and Tenterhooks!)0 -
Westminister. Where is this mythical place that I hear people speaking about?2
-
You are right! Hadn’t clicked how many times I have heard it until I looked at your post.9goalswentpastperry said:Westminister. Where is this mythical place that I hear people speaking about?
1 - Sponsored links:
-
I have seen "au fait" written as ofay.IdleHans said:I have also recently heard someone say 'fete of complis'
0 -
Oh dearLawrieAbrahams said:
I have seen "au fait" written as ofay.IdleHans said:I have also recently heard someone say 'fete of complis'
0 -
"What do they think we slapped all the way over to Belgium for if not to have our voice heard ? "
Either everyone was slapping each other like Reeves and Mortimer or it should be schlepped.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/schlep0 -
"£55m debt plus £18m purchase price means Duchatelet has spent over £70m for Charlton4
-
The proof is in the pudding .
No , the proof of the pudding is in the tasting you idiot.1 -
you do that because it's the correct way to pronounce it. when consecutive words end/begin with the same consonant sound you join the 2 together; so you only say the M sound once. this does admittedly give 2 ways of saying it, either pri-minister or prime-inister but never prime minister as this is far too clunkyMrOneLung said:I didn't realise I did this until someone pointed it out but I tend to link the two words and say Pri-Minister rather than Prime Minister
0 -
in our house we always use 'pacifically' in homage to a particularly stupid lady I once had as my boss. I have to make sure I don't say it in public though1
-
Belgiums instead of Belgians.
And "he's taken over the reigns".1 -
I think I've posted this on a similar thread.
My old boss had the brain of a duck, he mixed everything up, my favourite:-
'I've just driven past the local shop and it's gone bust, it was boarded up with bricks'
My old boss was a twat!2 -
In a particularly twattish episode of twattishness I once commented to a mate that something was "par de cour". After laughing disgusteldly at me for a couple of minutes he told me the phrase I was after was "par for the course".
1 - Sponsored links:
-
It would be a bit difficult, she been gone 16 yearsAddicksAddict said:
It means that they won't try to tell you how to do something that you're plainly capable of doing. I know it as "don't try to teach your grandmother how to suck eggs".E-cafc said:"I won't try and tell you how to suck eggs"
Wtf is that about?
Also know someone who always says..." Yeah, well, it's gotta be 6 of one and 6 of the other"0 -
'Chomping at the bit' seems to have completely taken over, instead of champing at the bit. It's reaching Jamie Redknapp literally levels of common usage now. That was one thing I always liked about Parky; he didn't always win, but he always said champing.1
-
"I'm on tenderhooks"0
-
Years ago I had this proper dozy lady at work, always getting sayings wrong. My favourite two were
Happy as a sandbag
Bald as a Badger.
2 -
According to the interweb, the below is quite common. Very appropriate for us at the moment
Do diligence
While it may be easy to surmise that "do diligence" translates to doing something diligently, it does not. "Due diligence" is a business and legal term that means you will investigate a person or business before signing a contract with them, or before formally engaging in a business deal together. You should do your due diligence and investigate business deals fully before committing to them0 -
Daddy_Pig
Have your cake and eat it. It should be "you can't eat your cake and have it".
You mean..
You can't have your cake, burn the candle at both ends and eat it1 -
No, as I said, the two mean the same thing. There is no mention of time, of one coming after the other. If you have you cake, you haven't eaten it. If you've eaten your cake, you don't have it. If it said "You can't have your cake and THEN eat it", I'd agree with you, that doesn't make sense but you're inferring a temporal relationship that isn't stated.Stig said:
Like you, I'd never heard the original version. I only discovered it when I looked up the 'have your cake and eat it' version one day because it is senseless: If you 'have your cake', i.e. you possess a cake, you can eat it. Other than bakers and supermarkets, there would be absolutely no point in anyone ever having a cake if they couldn't eat it. The unused original phrase makes perfect sense though; the very process of eating your cake destroys it. Once eaten it no longer exists. Two very different phrases. Unfortunately the meaningful one has become defunct.AddicksAddict said:
It was always the former in our family, never heard the latter until this thread. However, each is OK because AND is commutative so both expressions mean exactly the same thing. "You can either have your cake or you can eat it" also means the same as long as you accept the OR is exclusive not inclusive.Stig said:
Another modern derivation that doesn't make any sense is, 'you can't have your cake and eat it'. I should be, 'you can't eat your cake and have it'.SuedeAdidas said:The proof is in the pudding.
I don't get how this derivation of the saying has come about......because it doesn’t make any sense.0 -
A few on here use “top draw” when they should be saying “top drawer”. In the overall scheme of things it doesn’t really matter a jot but as you asked............
The other one as I’ve often mentioned is the superfluous “r” used when pronouncing the name of someone whose Christian name ends in a vowel and whose surname starts likewise eg Nicola”r”Adams or Jessica”r”Ennis.0 -
“Why don’t you make like a tree and get out of here?”-Biff Tannen 19851
-
Good friend of my father in law used to talk about “Going off on a tandem” and a flower called a Fuckia1
