On Accident vs By Accident

BrokenArrows

Ive noticed a recent and increasing pattern of people saying "On Accident" instead of "By Accident". Why is this happening?

I knocked over the coffee on accident.

I knocked over the coffee by accident.

Bigbagofcans

I have yet to hear anyone say 'on accident', fortunately.

is_that_so

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Ive noticed a recent and increasing pattern of people saying "On Accident" instead of "By Accident". Why is this happening?

I knocked over the coffee on accident.

I knocked over the coffee by accident.

First abomination comes from American English usage, like on the weekend and thankfully not frequent. The 2nd one would be accepted as being most correct.

Bob Harris

It's 'by'. Just another example of how language changes or takes on new meanings, 'reach out' and 'absolutely' being obvious examples.

Autecher

It's an American thing. "I didn't do it on purpose, I did it on accident".

Standman

Autecher wrote: »

It's an American thing. "I didn't do it on purpose, I did it on accident".

Just shows how language often isn't logical. There's no reason why "on purpose" should be ok while "on accident" isn't, other than everyone's got used to the former.

suicide_circus

On purpose

By accident

is_that_so

Bob Harris wrote: »

It's 'by'. Just another example of how language changes or takes on new meanings, 'reach out' and 'absolutely' being obvious examples.

It's also how not teaching grammar allows bad grammar take hold.

Omackeral

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Ive noticed a recent and increasing pattern of people saying "On Accident" instead of "By Accident". Why is this happening?

There's a reasonable explanation here. You can talk about evolution of language or the Americanisation of the world. The actual reason, however, is because they are absolute f*cking idiots.

They also "lay down" or do a lot of things "purposefully" - which is a word, but not the way it gets used

Omackeral

bluewolf wrote: »

They also "lay down" or do a lot of things "purposefully" - which is a word, but not the way it gets used

Don't forget that they play with "Legos" instead of Lego.

corner of hells

These threads are becoming unpossible.

Addicting is one that pisses me off no end.

mad muffin

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

I have yet to hear anyone say 'on accident', fortunately.

Dito

Guy:Incognito

It's been a slippery slope since stupid people started using been when they should be using being.

amcalester

should of would of could of

Bob Harris

BrownFinger wrote: »

Addicting is one that pisses me off no end.

Instead of addictive?

fieldofsheep

My own pet hate - when people say they'll 'revert' to you instead of saying they'll get back to you.  Double points if they say they'll 'revert back' to you.  

Penfailed

bluewolf wrote: »

They also "lay down" or do a lot of things "purposefully" - which is a word, but not the way it gets used

That's creeping in over here. So is, "I was sat..." instead of, "I was sitting..."

is_that_so

Penfailed wrote: »

That's creeping in over here. So is, "I was sat..." instead of, "I was sitting..."

It's always existed. It's just non-standard grammar in the northern part of England. I always feel a need to correct that!

AudreyHepburn

By accident or accidentally

Penfailed

is_that_so wrote: »

It's always existed. It's just non-standard grammar in the northern part of England. I always feel a need to correct that!

My point was that it's creeping in over here too.

riffmongous

I agree its annoying too, but we use plenty of non standard grammar here too due to the influence from Irish.. we also use some no longer accepted grammar from English, such as ye. Of course some folk will will tell you it's wrong.. but wrong according to whom? English has no regulated control body afaik. Why is ye no longer acceptable?

NickNickleby

amcalester wrote: »

should of would of could of

I would of said that too, but you got their before me. Definately.

I need a shower.


As you know, my master's work was the very epitome of accurate and beautifully crafted writing. (although sometimes a sentence can read like a mathematical formula, but he's still my hero.)

branie2

By accident is the correct term

mcmoustache

Bigbagofcans wrote: »

I have yet to hear anyone say 'on accident', fortunately.

I think it's a yank thing.

marcbrophy

Who's the wanker that voted "On accident"? :P

764dak

marcbrophy wrote: »

Who's the wanker that voted "On accident"? :P

Maybe he or she did it by accident.

looksee

In the olden days, when people communicated by letter, their lack of grammar and spelling abilities would be shown up only to the recipient. Now everyone's creative approach to English is communicated to the world online, to the extent that 'correct' grammar and spelling is becoming extremely hazy and people are picking up bad habits.

It is considered bad manners on-line to correct someone else's English, and oddly (not really) this one aspect of manners and courtesy is respected where otherwise anarchy reigns. Language changes and evolves, fair enough. However, the errors seep into formal writing, news reports, and ultimately legal documents. Many of the common errors, for example, confuse words that mean the opposite to each other. Either accept or except can be correctly used in a sentence, but one will mean exactly the opposite to the other, and could have catastrophic results. Look how much of an issue a single comma has caused in the American constitution.

Rain, reign, rein are all different words. One of them is used incorrectly in Boards' rules and regulations - we keep telling them but it hasn't been changed. If they can be used interchangeably why not spell it rane and save ourselves a lot of bother?

The only consolation is that when the current aging crop of people who were actually taught English grammar finally dies out, someone will have invented a computer program that can construct non-ambiguous sentences. Won't that be fun? Who needs literature and poetry?

Up Donegal

'On accident'...whoops!, I meant 'by accident!'

Guy:Incognito

looksee wrote: »

.

It is considered bad manners on-line to correct someone else's English,

Only by people who dont want to see their poor grammar highlighted.

Gwynplaine

In the car, on the train, in the bed, on the sofa.

Guy:Incognito

Gwynplaine wrote: »

in the bed, .

If you're actually in it yes. Under the covers. Otherwise you are on the bed.

silverharp

first time I have ever heard this, even with people where English isn't their first language

topper75

is_that_so wrote: »

It's always existed. It's just non-standard grammar in the northern part of England. I always feel a need to correct that!

You are right. It's origins can be seen by comparing to German and Dutch structures. English has Germanic origins after all. Many speak of English as though there is only one pure correct form; you hear references to the 'Queen's English', whatever that may be. There are many dialects in England and all are equally valid as they emerged at the same time, brought by the Germanic tribes - Saxons, Jutes, Angles, Danes that spoke proto Yorkshire, Northumberland, Scots, Wessex etc. There were many royal houses over the centuries that originated in different districts. The Tudors were actually Welsh! "I were just stood there laughing" is absolutely valid and correct, though it sounds odd to many.

biko

Slowly but Shirley the language is deteriorating.

What amazes me is that there are so many spell checkers and grammar checking tools available now it should be easy to get a least the basics right.

Up Donegal

looksee wrote: »

In the olden days, when people communicated by letter, their lack of grammar and spelling abilities would be shown up only to the recipient. Now everyone's creative approach to English is communicated to the world online, to the extent that 'correct' grammar and spelling is becoming extremely hazy and people are picking up bad habits.

It is considered bad manners on-line to correct someone else's English, and oddly (not really) this one aspect of manners and courtesy is respected where otherwise anarchy reigns. Language changes and evolves, fair enough. However, the errors seep into formal writing, news reports, and ultimately legal documents. Many of the common errors, for example, confuse words that mean the opposite to each other. Either accept or except can be correctly used in a sentence, but one will mean exactly the opposite to the other, and could have catastrophic results. Look how much of an issue a single comma has caused in the American constitution.

Rain, reign, rein are all different words. One of them is used incorrectly in Boards' rules and regulations - we keep telling them but it hasn't been changed. If they can be used interchangeably why not spell it rane and save ourselves a lot of bother?

The only consolation is that when the current aging crop of people who were actually taught English grammar finally dies out, someone will have invented a computer program that can construct non-ambiguous sentences. Won't that be fun? Who needs literature and poetry?

Yes.
I would consider myself to have a decent grasp of the written English language. I agree that people shouldn’t be taken to task publicly over incorrect spelling/grammar etc. being used in social media posts between friends. There is a Facebook group out there which has been set up for that purpose only!! As far as I’m concerned they might be dyslexic, didn’t have the necessary education, or have some other difficulty which they have no control over and that they’re probably doing their best.
What does bug me, though, is incorrect spelling/grammar on notices, signs, advertisements etc. that we see displayed openly every time we go to town. There are printed posters with glaring errors. I think that the companies that print these posters should inspect the wording before printing and, if necessary, consult the customer to make them aware of any such errors. We can’t forget the erroneous tattoos that appear from time to time either! At least with a cardboard poster, it can be ripped up and re-done, but a tattoo is forever!

Up Donegal

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

By accident or accidentally

I would say that both are fine.

Guy:Incognito

Up Donegal wrote: »

!! As far as I’m concerned they might be dyslexic, didn’t have the necessary education, or have some other difficulty which they have no control over and that they’re probably doing their best.
!

Surely if that's the case, correcting them and showing they've made errors they might not even realise they've made is a good thing?

You dont get to a point in school and just stop telling people when theyve done something wrong and just accept that that's what they think is right. That's what gets us to where we are with the likes of the Facebook thread where people are lashing up any old mixture of letters that vaguely resembles words.

No one is saying that people should reply with "you ****ing idiot, that's not how you spell that, are you thick or something? But helpfully correcting errors shouldnt be an issue.

hgfj

biko wrote: »

Slowly but Shirley the language is deteriorating.

What amazes me is that there are so many spell checkers and grimmer checking tools available now it should be easy to get a least the basics right.

Grimmer?

tuxy

I saw or I seen?

I did or I done?

I think these ones need to be pointed out on here at least

Guy:Incognito

tuxy wrote: »

I saw or I seen?

I did or I done?

I think these ones need to be pointed out on here at least

I seed

tuxy

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I seed

I dun

looksee

Up Donegal wrote: »

Yes.
I would consider myself to have a decent grasp of the written English language. I agree that people shouldn’t be taken to task publicly over incorrect spelling/grammar etc. being used in social media posts between friends. There is a Facebook group out there which has been set up for that purpose only!! As far as I’m concerned they might be dyslexic, didn’t have the necessary education, or have some other difficulty which they have no control over and that they’re probably doing their best.
What does bug me, though, is incorrect spelling/grammar on notices, signs, advertisements etc. that we see displayed openly every time we go to town. There are printed posters with glaring errors. I think that the companies that print these posters should inspect the wording before printing and, if necessary, consult the customer to make them aware of any such errors. We can’t forget the erroneous tattoos that appear from time to time either! At least with a cardboard poster, it can be ripped up and re-done, but a tattoo is forever!

But that is the whole point! People don't know the correct version because it is not taught (not 'thought') in schools; increasing numbers of teachers do not know what is correct, and the English that is on-line adds to the confusion.

Bobblehats

Must be infuriating spending your life listening out for something that nobody actually says

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Omackeral wrote: »

Don't forget that they play with "Legos" instead of Lego.

Really?

Personally with the exception of what’s already built in I think we should pluralise with an s, for all the new words.

Guy:Incognito

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Really?

Personally with the exception of what’s already built in I think we should pluralise with an s, for all the new words.

Lego is the collective word though.

You dont play with 50 pieces of lego or 50 legos, you just play with lego.

We shouldn't dumb language down, we should smarten people up.

AllForIt

Once I said 'on accident' on accident.

...make that twice.

Up Donegal

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Surely if that's the case, correcting them and showing they've made errors they might not even realise they've made is a good thing?

Correct them by all means, but not on a public forum like social media.
I have, at times, privately pointed out errors to authors, usually people I know, of grammatical, factual or spelling errors in social media posts because I felt that the authors might be subjected to unnecessary criticism if they weren't pointed out.

Turquoise Hexagon Sun

I could care less :pac:

Badly Drunk Boy

marcbrophy wrote: »

Who's the wanker that voted "On accident"? :P

764dak wrote: »

Maybe he or she did it by accident.

I reckon they did it 'by purpose'...