It's not just in books, Toddson-- I read an AP article on Tom Daley yesterday and had to spit three times in response to not only the poor writing, but at the fact that the writer of the piece said something to the effect of "Daley, a Britain," as opposed to "Briton."

::headdesk::

The one misuse that makes me see red - using "descendent" to mean their grandparents, great-grandparents, etc. ... known to those of us who actually know English as "ancestors". snarl.

Yes! I hear that all the time. I don't understand the confusion.

Well, we are clearly on an upward trajectory, so the downward direction would be the past!

Burrell, you have e, way late.

known to those of us who actually know English as "ancestors". snarl.

Or at least antecedents, which is closer to descendents, if they really gotta be.

I honestly think a lot of it is newer generations losing touch with the phrases and what parts of daily life they came out of. Allowing someone "free rein" refers to horses, of course, as does "reining in" your expectations. To "reign over" is a different thing altogether, but younger people don't have that knowledge, and honestly, I think it's natural language creep.

Words really don't mean the same as they did 50 years ago. The meanings change as relevance changes. And of course, I can't think of any good examples right now.

I will throw my body over the line for "eyes rolling in the back of her head," instead of "eyes rolled back (or up) in her head," though. Competely different thing, really.

There was that one episode of Angel where Cordelia COULD have eyes rolling in the back of her head ... but I digress.

See, I'm down with the idea of language creep, but "rein" and "reign", to me, is incorrect, not lazy. Different words!

Um... I have Word Usage Issues.

I think it's natural language creep.

They'll take the proper usage of rein/reign from my cold dead fingers!

::high-fives connie neil::