Underneath Of - Page 3

Tinkrbl44 · ‎08-23-2010

@amyb wrote:
@Biftu wrote:
Not shocking for sure. But to me proper English is important.
Same here. No need for people to jump on people who appreciate good grammar...not "shocking" at all...I hear it all the time, newscasters, radio hosts, tv hosts, QVC hosts...we've just gotten sloppy grammar over these few decades, it seems.

I had a "grammatically correct" type mom, who whould lovingly correct. I loved English class and language from a young age. Correct grammar is important to me...and the use of the English language. Doesn't make someone a "Karen" who would rather hear the correct way to use the language. I try to. I like words, language, writing. I do use plenty of slang, and write things here like "b'cuz" etc...but it's just become an online shorthand. Speaking the language it's different...especially communications professionals, on tv and radio. Imho.

So, I hear you @Biftu ...I've heard the "underneath of" too. Another one I always mention bugs me to this day yet it's become the norm now to say "a whole 'nother" instead of what used to be the correct way...either "a whole other" or "another."

Oh well. 🤷‍♀️

@amyb

My biggest pet peeve is calling anyone a "Karen." It's now gone beyond stupid with the slang and name-calling.

JMO, of course.

MamaWick · ‎03-09-2010

I feel the same about the word "literally." That word is useless.

My religion is very simple. My religion is kindness ~ Dalai Lama XIV

When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace ~ Jimi Hendrix

Estellee · ‎07-12-2011

Doesn't seem like a big deal LOL. Comical in a way.

lgfan · ‎10-19-2012

@Tinkrbl44 wrote:
@Biftu wrote:

@THEY CallMe Mr Wilkes wrote:
Doesn't bother me at all.

It has a certain cadence and rhythm that I like.
You may like it but regardless It's improper English.

@Biftu

Wait a minute .... is it "regardless" ... or "irregardless".

LOL

"Irregardless is often used in informal speech but it is not considered correct in formal writing. It is a nonstandard synonym for regardless, which can confuse English learners. It’s best to stick with regardless for clear and correct communication."

RescueLover · ‎02-06-2022

Ahhhh I understand you now ! @Biftu 🌻

I guess I never noticed it on The Q.

I’ll have to pay closer attention to Jayne Brown now. 😂

Teddixat · ‎10-04-2010

@Biftu I agree. It is so redundant. Underneath speaks for itself. I am surprised how many hosts say that.

Teddixat · ‎10-04-2010

@RescueLover No she is not saying to not wear anything underneath a jacket - she is saying underneath of a jacket or under best of snything is improper grammar

In short, "underneath" is a preposition, and "of" is a preposition. You rarely need two prepositions in a row, although it does happen. With "underneath," though, you will never need to add "of."

KKJ · ‎03-11-2010

I've been surprised how many people I thought knew better use bad grammar. I worked with teachers that did this. A common incorrect usage was in writing they'd put "should of" instead of "should have". Same with Could of.

My mom hated when reading the newspaper back when weddings were announced and they'd always incorrectly write "the couple are at home in..." when it should be "couple is" as it's one couple.

santorini · ‎03-09-2010

@Biftu wrote:

@RescueLover wrote:

Sorry I don’t get what you mean? @Biftu 🥴

Are you trying to say “nothing” should be worn underneath of the jacket ?

If soooo That alone would increase sales for sure ! 😂

@RescueLover See, you are saying "underneath of" too. What I am saying is that the word "of" after "underneath" is improper English. Underneath is a preposition and of is a preposition and you don't need two prepositions in a row. You should say, you can wear it underneath a jacket. The "of" is not needed nor correct.