Mine is people who separate words when they write. I’m Norwegian, and we can string together words indefinetly to make a new word. The never ending word may not make any sense, but it is gramatically correct
Still, people write words the wrong way by separating them.
Examples:
-
“Ananas ringer” means “the pineapple is calling” when written the wrong way. The correct way is “ananasringer” and it means “pineapple rings” (from a tin).
-
“Prinsesse pult i vinkel” means “a princess fucked at an angle”. The correct way to write it is “prinsessepult i vinkel”, and it means “an angeled princess desk” (a desk for children, obviously)
-
“Koke bøker” means “to cook books”. The correct way is “kokebøker” and means “cookbooks”
I see these kinds of mistakes everywhere!
(American) English: Inflammable vs flammable vs non-flammable.
Inflammable and flammable don’t strictly mean the same thing.
Flammable can be set alight
Inflammable can set itself alight.
I’ve known the difference ever since I decided to look it up one day, but I’ve always felt the ‘in-’ prefix was the wrong choice (especially when labeling potentially dangerous substances). “In-” is more often used to qualify a word as “not”.
“Autoflammable” would have been my choice.
It’s prefix is in- because of “it can become inflamed”.
How about ignitable instead.
superbesplodey
I think “enflammable” was the intended meaning
Remember: invaluable is a synonym of priceless, but not of worthless.
tbf it’s referring to the verb “to value”, not the noun. long as you keep that in mind it makes perfect sense
So much of English just does not make sense. lol
deleted by creator