The Slumbering Lungfish Dybbuk Hostel and All-Night Boulangerie

It sounds weird, this show... but what's even stranger is that there's obviously a huge market for it...

I don't even have to read the article (I will, though, after writing this.) to know about the horribleness of which you speak. I think whoever came up with this idea wondered how they could drive away fans and make sure no one else became interested in it, at the same time.

I've seen a bunch of links to Table of Malcontents on gmail.

When I saw the ads for this last month I assumed it was an April Fools joke. I'm very sad that I was wrong.

When I saw ST:TOS uncut on G4 I'd assumed they'd given up on ST:Bloomberg. I still haven't seen it, and I think I'll just avoid it.

One complaint I'd like to add to the article. A "Spock" Market doesn't make any sense because the Federation is not Capitalist. They don't use money!

Star Trek 2.0 can only be the product of a cable TV executive who was frozen in 1994, because it sounds like the kind of thing networks were trying to hype back before they knew what the Internet was. Next stop: Trek episodes where the audience gets to vote on what Kirk does next, and Trek through virtual reality headsets.

The thing that bugged me about this show is that my only real exposure to the original cast (oh man have I seen way to many episodes of Next Generation, and man is that show is strange looking back on it) was the Kahn movie and the whale movie. (I just assumed they bought a new Spock at the super market of the future; I’m pretty sure something close to that happens in the movie between the two). I don’t think too many networks air the original star trek and I’m willing to bet that an uncorrupted version might actually draw more viewers than most would expect. But at the same time I’m willing to give G4 some slack regardless of how annoying this incantation may be, they can only air so many X Play reruns a day.

I don't think people mean to say "could care less" when they want to express that they don't care about something. The phrase that would make sense is "couldn't care less." I know is easier to say could than it is to say couldn't, but since they pretty much have opposite meanings, it seems rather important to differentiate between the two. I know that most people couldn't care less about the rapidly declining verbal skills of most of the population, but I'm growing tired of incorrect phrases, words used incorrectly, made up words. Irregardless tops that list, but the phrase "could care less" is a close second.

It's an idiom. Idioms don't have to make sense. It's like complaining someone about someone saying "after a few drinks, they let their hair down and had a good time" when some of the people in question are bald.

Secondly, all words are made-up words. Did you know that words like "majestic" and "homicide" were neologisms when Shakespeare used them? Did you know Isaac Asimov made up the word "robotics"?

Thirdly, I don't mean to be egotistical about this, but if you're implying that I have "rapidly declining verbal skills" I think it's pretty clear that you're considering that one phrase while ignoring the rest of my body of writing.

Wow. A ridiculous snipe against a grammatical error (OK, sure, it's a common idiom, but why use an idiom which means exactly the opposite of the intended meaning when using the correct, and also idiomatic phrase, is just as clear?) that doesn't even occur in the post to which it's responding -- followed by an apparently very prickly response from one of the few people I've always thought of as having a relaxed sense of humour about life in general, and ridiculous snipes in particular. (Perhaps the problem is that you didn't let your hair, whether literal or metaphorical, down.)

I didn't mean to imply that you're lacking in verbal skills, nor do I wish to start a huge posting war, but I do feel the need to reply again.

Idiom or not, the words still imply a meaning quite different than the one you're wishing to express. Yes, everyone knows what you mean, but only if they're familiar with that particular phrase. Someone that hasn't heard it several times before, or that lacks the ability to define phrases depending on their context, might get confused. Where as saying "couldn't care less" would not be so confusing in or out of context. I originally learned the phrase years ago as "couldn't care less" and recently I've only heard it with the word could.

My point about made up words was not about new words with new meanings. Certainly all words are made up, but when a word is made up by butchering another word and then usurping its meaning, it bothers me. Surely someone with your verbal skills is at least a little bothered by that. It's not the most common thing, and is most often seen in the business world with their "buzz" words. Leverage is popular for some reason, and I hear irregardless all the time. Those are cases or words being misued, or words being made up to mean something that another perfectly good word already had covered. That is where I take issue.

Idioms, practically by definition, are subject to misinterpretation. Someone who had never heard the phrase "the bee's knees" or "wet behind the ears" before isn't going to have a clear idea what you're talking about unless they pay close attention to context.

And "could care less" isn't the only idiom with the opposite meaning from its literal meaning. The phrase "break a leg" for instance, or "fat chance." Now, I'd avoid these phrases in circumstances where unequivocal communication is more important than colorful writing, such as an instruction manual, but overall I think they enrich the language.

The reason I'm taking the time to respond to this is not because I think everyone should use "could care less" all the time. I just want to clarify that at least in this case it's an idiom used consciously, not a grammatical error.

I guess I just feel that “could care less” didn’t start out being an idiom, but rather as a statement. Now it’s been forced in to being an idiom due to misuse. As I said, I learned it as “couldn’t care less” or with emphasis, “couldn’t possibly care less”. The phrase “could possibly care less” doesn’t quite have the same ring to it. “Irregardless,” keep writing as you see fit, and I’ll keep reading.

Well, thanks. And if I came on a little too strong, it's just because this is a subject that I find really captivating, and I've thought about it enough to have my own strongly-held opinions about it. Language is a really fascinating thing.

I can't claim to be a pan-inclusionist: "irregardless" sounds really clunky to me, too, and I have a pet peeve about the recent trend of using the word "meme" as a synonym for "fad," which is kind of funny considering that "meme" itself is a neologism that some people abhor. And certainly I can see people having a similar issue with "could care less."

Anyhow, I could go on about this stuff all day, but it's pretty dry. Thanks for reading, and if you do find grammatical or usage errors that slip past me and the copy editors, please let me know.

Sorry, Lore, they're right. Start slacking off on something like this and the next thing you know and you'll start abusing apostrophe's.

Heh. In one of my replies I very nearly used "it's" for the possessive. So apparently I'm already showing symptoms.

I'm pretty sure the phrase started out as "As if I could care less" during the hyper-sarcastic late 80s. Over time the leading clause and ironic tone became assumed and vanished, but the phrasing stuck. So I don't have a particular problem with that one because I instinctively know that it's sarcasm even if it isn't spoken as such.
The one that gets under my skin is when people use the word "literally" to emphasize something that isn't literal at all. "I literally puked my guts out." Really? Because I'm pretty sure that would kill you.

I often say that I could care less where one might suggest I ought to say that I couldn't - but it would be telling a lie. I _could_ care less. But not much.