I find myself often winging it with “themself/themselves” and it seems to be like themselves is always colloquially correct when there are multiple preceding nouns you’re referring to…

Otherwise if there’s only one antecedent or whatever, its themself

Be gentle haha

  • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    I’m not sure if I understood the question correctly, but ‘factoid’ is the most commonly misused word that I know of. It’s not a synonym for ‘fact’; it actually means the exact opposite. A factoid is a misconception so widely believed that people take it as a fact. You could even say that the word ‘factoid’ itself has become a factoid.

    Example of a factoid: The great wall of China can be seen from space. No it can’t.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      18 days ago

      Might have been an idea to factoid-check that claim in a dictionary before posting because it’s not really correct.

      Factoid (noun)

      (1) an insignificant or trivial fact.

      (2) something fictitious or unsubstantiated that is presented as fact, devised especially to gain publicity and accepted because of constant repetition.

      Factoids are to facts what humanoids are to humans. It does not mean the “exact opposite” at all.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        The second definition in your quote confirms that factoid can mean a widely-accepted false fact.

        (2) something fictitious or unsubstantiated that is presented as fact, devised especially to gain publicity and accepted because of constant repetition.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    There’s no such thing as “correct” grammar. Different ways of speaking (or writing/typing) can certainly make people view you differently. For instance you might be seen as more or less smart or educated or affluent depending on your way of speaking. But that’s pretty much just stereotypes.

    I watched part of an MIT OpenCourseware course on linguistics once. (Very good and recommended, despite the fact that I haven’t finished it.) At one point the professor told the students that “we’ll speak no more about prescriptive linguistics except to mock it.”

  • prayer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    I love trying to incorporate different constructions I find in the Yale Grammatical Diversity Program. Currently working on “for to” constructions. My goal is just to understand how people perceive language, and this is a great resource. It isn’t a collection of “wrong” ways to say things, just how a minority of people say things.

    The most popular example I can think of is the song “Horse with no Name” in the chorus.

    I’ve been through the desert on a horse with no name
    It felt good to be out of the rain
    In the desert you can’t remember your name
    'Cause there ain’t no one for to give you no pain

  • MattMatt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    Utilize. So many people misuse it that I should probably accept that the definition has changed. Instead of thinking they are a bit dumb.

  • pelley@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    People used to say “proven.” Like, it’s been proven. But now they say it’s been proved. When did this change?

    • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      Acc. to Merriam-Webster it’s the opposite - “proved” used to be 4x more frequent than “proven” 50~60y ago, but nowadays they’re equally common in all contexts.

      In a more recent context, however, it’s possible that this tendency is being reverted because “proven” is being treated as a participle (even if proscribed), and the distinction between participle and simple past is slowly going away. So it’s possible that you’re noticing a small part of a bigger shift here. (I’m just conjecturing though, this might be wrong; take it with a grain of salt.)

  • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    I’ve seen a few people prescribing “themselves” even for the singular, and interestingly enough Wiktionary mentions that “themself” is sometimes proscribed. Based on that I’d argue that the linguistic community didn’t “settle down” on the rules of when to use one or another.

    That said, personally, I use it like you do: -self in the singular, -selves in the plural. Same deal with [our|your]+[self|selves].

    • theilleists@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      I don’t care if it’s not correct - I use “theirself” and “theirselves.” It jibes with “yourself,” “myself,” and “herself.”

      “Himself” is a frustrating outlier, but I do know at least one person who says “hisself,” and that’s enough precedent for me.

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        Weird - I never noticed that the third person reflexive forms typically use the main case (him/them) as a basis, while the others use the possessive (my/thy/your/our). No idea on why this difference.

        That said “hisself”, “theirself” and “theirselves” don’t sound bad to my ears.