Literary Pet Peeves

For my 25th birthday my mother gave me a copy of Lynn Truss's Eats, Shoots and Leaves, a book about common grammatical errors. It was written by a linguistic stickler for others who share a similar passion for proper grammar. It made my top list of favorite reads, not least of all because it pleases my inner anal retentive editor.

Given her taste in gifts, it should come as no surprise that my mother writes a weekly column for her local newspaper. She dedicates a closing paragraph each week to one "literary pet peeve." I helped brainstorm ideas, keeping Truss in mind, and my mother has included most of my suggestions in her column.

Since I was the mastermind behind most of those literary gems, why not include some of my favorites in a blog?

Pet Peeve: a minor annoyance that an individual identifies as particularly annoying to them, to a greater degree than others may find it.

That Wikipedia definition exemplifies one of the very literary pet peeves I'd like to list:

1) Using inconsistent pronouns in the same sentence.

• "Them" refers not to a single individual, but to a group of people with a minimum of two persons.
• The political correctness surrounding the usage of he/she frightens many writers into defaulting to a neutral description, often at the expense of grammatical accuracy.
  

2) Misuse of the apostrophe (').

• The biggest culprits are "its" and "it's." It's a common error, I realize, but it's really quite simple. "Its" is possessive, like "his" or "hers;" one does not write, "his's" or "her's." Conversely, "it's" is a contraction for "it is." Simple, eh?
• I used to work for a business whose graphic designer made a sign which read "Welcome to Belly Up. Box office located downstair's." The mental grammar sirens immediately blasted and I covertly told the owner. Unfortunately for me (fortunately for him, though), the sign was replaced with the correct use of the word 'downstairs' (sans possessive apostrophe) before I had a chance to photograph the evidence.
• Take caution with your apostrophes, or you may upset the hippo's...
  

3) The use of the word "irregardless" in any context.

• I have heard on several occasions, and even read on a few, sentences beginning the the following fashion: "Irregardless of the fact..." or something along those lines.
  
• The accurate segues include "regardless" or "irrespective."
  
• Somewhere along literary path, the two correct usages merged, creating the illegitimate misnomer which has become the commonly accepted, though ultimately incorrect, irregardless.
• Even writing the extra two letters makes me cringe.
  

4) Saying "for all intensive purposes" in lieu of the correct "for all intents and purposes."

• This may sound odd, but I have heard it on more than one occasion. In fact, and I admit this reluctantly, I uttered the improper form of the expression well into my teen years.
  
• I recently discovered via Facebook that a high school crony also made the same mistake.
  
• Our mutual friend noted this and asked, "what, dare I ask, did you think was an intensive purpose, anyway?" We offered similar sheepish responses: a shrug, a grin and, "I dunno, a really, really intense purpose?"
• As far as I know, there is no such thing as an intensive purpose.
  

5) Replacing "it's a dog eat dog world" with "it's a doggie-dog world."

• "Dog eat dog world" refers to the animal-like instincts of humans, who often hurt others for their own interests (not unlike dogs, at times).
  
• I don't know what "doggie-dog" means, if anything, but I'm fairly certain that this malapropism emerged before the popularity of Snoop Doggy Dogg.

These examples hardly scratch the surface of daily misuse of the English language. In fact, an entire blog could be dedicated to literary pet peeves!

In the meantime, do yourself a favor: pick up a copy of Eats, Shoots and Leaves, if you haven't done so already, and get better acquainted with the rules, even if you break them. Especially if you break them.