Quote: Original post by benryves
Well, here are two examples from CNN

Journalists are notorious for this. If I had a cent for every time I see a spelling or grammar mistake on CNN and BBC or in a local newspaper, I'd be a rich man by now. But "spread wide" is not the same as "widespread"! :D It's still only a very small minority of busy people making mistakes and forcing them onto the population at large. Widespread would be something like "to google".

Quote: Original post by Ravuya
I believe it's part of the AP style guide.

It's especially stupid for where I live. Vienna, Vienna.

Quote: Original post by lightbringer
For instance, "The Pursuit of Happyness" is also wrong, and yet it's the title of a movie.

To anyone interested who hasn't seen the movie, the word "Happyness" is painted on the outside of the the main character's daycare where he keeps his son. He gets on to them a few times about it being misspelled, but he is always late paying his daycare bills so they don't really listen to him. This part of the movie is in the title because a big theme that is mentioned several times through the movie is "The pursuit of happiness".

Quote: Declaration of Independence
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. »

Quote: Original post by benryves
Well, here are two examples from CNN: "Thousands of fans, many weeping, packed a Hannover, Germany*, stadium Sunday" and "This week in iReport we're celebrating a couple anniversaries".

Neither of those examples are particularly hard to read, hard to understand, or non-sensical (although I certainly would have reworded the first one to have less commas). "pursuit happiness" just doesn't make any sense. Are we pursuing it? Did we pursue it? Are we happy because we are pursuing something else?

It's not clear and that is what makes it poor grammar. People who obsess over rules are just grammar-nazis. Practical people care about whether or not you can be understood.

Although on that note if we had previously defined "pursuit happiness" as "happiness gained from the act of pursuing something" then it would be acceptable grammar again. However, I've never heard of that term, and it doesn't seem like anyone else has either.

Quote: Original post by jackolantern1

Quote: Original post by lightbringer
For instance, "The Pursuit of Happyness" is also wrong, and yet it's the title of a movie.

To anyone interested who hasn't seen the movie, the word "Happyness" is painted on the outside of the the main character's daycare where he keeps his son. He gets on to them a few times about it being misspelled, but he is always late paying his daycare bills so they don't really listen to him. This part of the movie is in the title because a big theme that is mentioned several times through the movie is "The pursuit of happiness".

I'm glad you mentioned this (if you hadn't I was going to, lol). Before seeing the movie I thought, "Why'd they mispell happiness?". After seeing it you realize why.

It is a great movie too, IMO.

Quote: Original post by benryves
I can see where confusion may arise, as "of" and "on" appear to be optional in some cases in American English where they'd normally be present (two cases I encounter frequently are "couple things" instead of "couple of things" and "day of week" instead of "on day of week" - for example, "I bought a couple books Friday" instead of "I bought a couple of books on Friday"). I don't know if this is strictly a regional issue or merely poor grammar.

I don't think it's regional. "I bought a couple books Friday" is something you might hear in California too. Dropping the "of" from "couple of books" isn't such a stretch if you compare with a sentence where the number of books is stated explicitly: "I bought two books Friday". The ambiguity in this sentence is that Friday could be the name of the person being addressed. The "on" is understood. I think dropping the "on" is a recent development.

Who's on First by Abbott and Costello

Quote:
Abbott: Well, let's see, we have on the bags, Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know is on third...

Costello: That's what I want to find out.

Abbott: I say Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third.

Costello: Are you the manager?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: You gonna be the coach too?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: And you don't know the fellows' names?

Abbott: Well I should.

Costello: Well then who's on first?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: I mean the fellow's name.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy on first.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The first baseman.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy playing...

Abbott: Who is on first!

Costello: I'm asking YOU who's on first.

Abbott: That's the man's name.

Costello: That's who's name?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: Well go ahead and tell me.

Abbott: That's it.

Costello: That's who?

Abbott: Yes.
...