I am sure that “in the world” seems to you like a normal thing to say.   Well, go and eat some lava!   For this is what the phrase implies: a capsule deep below the earth’s crust, literally “in the world”.   Even journalists use the disgusting phrase, as evidenced by this tedious list:

“How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world
, Daily Mail, 21, Nov, 2009
“Largest book in the world goes on show for the first time”, The Guardian, 26, Jan, 2010
“The fattest bloke in the world has a heart attack”, The Sun, 19, Fév, 2010
“Iceland Airwaves: The coolest festival in the world, Independent, 22, Oct, 2010
“There is nobody better in the world at the moment than Pocock at turnovers”, Express, 4, Nov, 2010
and, hilariously,
“Building the fastest car in the world, Telegraph, 16, Jun, 2009

Hahahahaa!   But, putting humour aside for one moment, this phrase is absolutely terrible, confusing and shameful, and the fact that journalists propagate its hegemony in our media outrageous.   You’re all just regurgitating morphemes!   We shall be sending a note to Simon Heffer of the Telegraph, and to all of you:

The correct phrase is
on the world

This phrase is not the only that sounds completely nonsensical if you think about it for slightly too long.      Languages are full of these ILLOGICISMS that disobey the laws of logic and physics.     No physicist has performed an experiment to prove that these phrases knock the universe off his axis, so we will presume that this is what happens whenever you say something like

my old house
What you mean is my former abode and not the house I live in now which is old, unless that is what you meant, but working this out from the context you used it in is too much work for me!  Must do better!

is illogical.   This goes back (presumably) to the 12th century, when poor peasants were in control of English and allowed it to get out of hand whilst the respectable Monarchy and toadies spoke Good French like a good boy.
ALWAYS (like ALTOGETHER, ALREADY and ALRIGHT, which is not a word,) is a contracted form of ALL+word to make ALWORD as we shall call it.   But if a person of either gender says
“The traffic is always bad on this one-way street”,
he is talking nonsense!   The street can, by definition, handle traffic going only one way due to Roadway Code laws – so to say ALWAYS (ALL WAYS?!) confuses everybody who is me and makes the sentence laughable!  The better way to say this is “The traffic is ever worse upon this single-carriageway restricted-access automobility area.”  Fools.

is, of course a terrible terrible thing to, write and ruins sentences.   The word was invented about 10 years ago by feminists; we have no evidence of this, but, like the Queen’s English Society, we have a royal warrant not to need evidence when being sexist.
It is considered very “nice” and “inclusive” to write “human” in place of “man”, but have you ever noticed that all “humans” are actually “men”?   At my club they certainly are, at any rate.   This brings us to the crux of the matter: what do these politically-correct persons write as the plural of human?  Not hu-men as logic would dictate but “humans” which is utterly confusing and illogical once again!   We decent citizens must continue to say and write “humen” and “wimyn”, as mathematics dictate.

I hate several.  It is a vague number whose value has yet to be determined by a panel of grumpy runts (the same goes for billion, which as I remember used to be called a “mallard” or something. We should start saying one mallard).
“Several” is close to “seven”, but in some cases, usually when illiterate academics are speaking, its value is exaggerated to anything from “eight” to “an hundred”!   Those academics must be made unemployed at our request.

You eat more than me
What are you, a cannibal?  One must never write “me” as a subject pronoun, it must always be “I”; “more than I”.   Oh yes, and it also sounds as if the listener is going to eat the speaker and then some more people, but this is a minor worry. Nitpicking is our greatest concern.

I hate people like you
What do you mean?!  People who like me are hated by you?  Think before you speak.

It happened last week
No: it happened PAST week!  “Last week” can only describe the week before the apocalypse!  Which will come unless we all improve our language and listening skills!  Except for us.

Rubbish.  When the French Academy was deciding which words it wanted to loan to English, here they made a grave omission.  If one can re-spond, one must be able also to “spond” in the first place!  But we have no word spond so how on earth are we supposed to re-spond, it is impossible!?  Has anyone ever knowingly sponded? If I spond too slowly, will I react and my leg kick someone on the train?  Do the police and fire brigade care about their sponce times?  This phrase is utter rubbish and/or a most contagious societal illness which we must stop saying from this moment onwards.

And consider the following:
“He was given short shrift by the judge because of his slack grammar.”
This is the kind of thing journalists often write, but what the hell is shrift?   Can one give someone “long shrift”?    Can shrift be given ceremonially as a present?   This is foolishness at its finest.

Since we have not oppressed the low class much yet, we will turn to their language which is frequently nonsensical.   Consider the word
gaffer for “manager”, which raises the humourous proposition of his being someone who makes “gaffes”!   Arf! Arf!

Then again, the language of those richer and more successful than us is also illogical.  
“CEO”, for instance, a word the Queen’s English Society chose to mock with their usual level of satirical wit (i.e., none).[1]   It doesn’t stand for anything!  How is it even pronounced?!   “Keeo”?!  Does this person still “manage” the company, or does he “ceoize” it now?   Just say “gaffer” like a normal person.

The word
RIGHTLY is not illogical in itself, but the way the QES bandy it about is pretty-much insane.   [Actually, in this sentence the correct word order would be “The way is insane, about with which they pretty-much bandy it”.  You’re sacked – Ed.]
I am paraphrasing, but the Queen’s English Society wrote something like “we are rightly proud of our English Academy”, which is inaccurate; one may only say “rightly” when one’s belief has been vindicated.   This did not happen; the QES ended up deleting their Academy from the internet because they were so proud of it.   It now only lives on in the hearts of deluded people everywhere who know they are right.
(On the other hand, if they intended “rightly” to mean “in a right-wing way”, then they were using the word correctly.)

And the most illogical piece of language of all (particularly if you’re Spanish/Welsh): DOUBLE NEGATIVES, which were invented by Geoffrey Chaucer and seem utterly illogical to us, as we have no friends, who use double negatives.

The best cartoon we could manage

[Released CC-BY-3.0, PEF Web-Mister}

[Released CC-BY-3.0, PEF Web-Mister]

Make a Free Website with Yola.