“Oh, and myself. There is never a right time to use this word. Myself is just a no.“
Er, yes there is: it’s for when you’re both the object and subject of a transitive verb. For example, “I made myself look stupid”, or “I tried to blow myself”.
““my bad” always makes me want to ask what the utterer is talking about, on account of it being an incomplete sentence.“
Leaving aside the precise definition of a sentence for a moment, a noun phrase is a perfectly valid statement if there’s an implied verb (the explicit use of which would make it a sentence by anyone’s definition). You’d be ok with someone saying simply “my fault”, implying “that’s my fault”, right? So “my bad” is fine, given that “bad” has been nounified to become a synonym for “fault” or “mistake”. If you refuse to accept that “bad” has been nounified (or that “noun” has been verbified into “nounify”, and that “verb” has also been verbified into “verbify”) then fine, but you’re basically objecting to the mechanism by which we arrived at the rich language we have today and if you want a durable moral high ground you should really go about simply grunting and pointing at things.
😉
“Or, as someone at school used to say ‘can I lend your pencil?’ No, lend out your own pencil. He also used to say ‘borrow us your pencil’ so he got it doubly incorrect.“
There are a number of vernaculars that show this sort of inversion, though. A common example is “that’ll learn yer” where “learn” means “teach”. Is it wrong or just different? It makes perfect sense to people who speak in that vernacular so it’s really just different; same goes for “ain’t got no somethingorother”, words get inverted in specific contexts.
Fascinating fun, innit? 🙂