• HollowNaught@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    While that’s correct and all, it still irks me when somebody uses a word that has a shorter, older variant. (Gives side-eye to orientated)

    • DillyDaily@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      orientated

      Is this common in American English? I don’t think I’ve ever seen the word oriented double handled like that. Irregardless, it slew me

      • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        At least with orientated it kind makes sense because orientation is the process of orienting, so to have done the process would be to be orientated in a weird way but irregardless will always irk me because the ir and the less make a double negative, making the meaning as written ‘with regard’ which just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. Like if somebody misunderstood a sentence with a double negative we would call them wrong but because it’s a single word they get to change the entire language, regardless of its structure and rules? Seems kinda bogus to me.

      • tiredofsametab@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m a native US English speaker. I would only ever say oriented. As a kid, not knowing the “correct” form, I got corrected for saying orientated. I watch content from a lot of countries and do hear at least some British English speakers using orientated.

      • davidagain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        “Orientated” is reasonably common in British English, I think. I remember thinking someone had misspelt it the first time I saw “oriented” written down.