Most common TT spelling mistakes

Inspired by Piaczka's thread about annoying phrases, I have a personal list of misspelled words specifically linked to travel: accommodation (and its variations), itinerary (even more variations).

However, several others have been appearing more often: "I have been pouring over past threads", "a place without hoards of tourists".

Any others you have seen on the travel branches?

Boarder is of course a correctly spelled word, and one associated with travel. But it is mostly seen here when "border" is intended. A boarder is someone who boards in lodgings.

If you are going to give us more general words like poring and hordes, then I shall give you "led", for which "lead" is annoyingly substituted, I would dare to say more often than not.

On the Iceland branch, we regularly see Porsmork, a misunderstanding of the Icelandic script Þórsmörk, more usually rendered Thorsmork if you don't wish to use the special characters not easily accessed from many keyboards.

Itinerary has many variants on the TT.

scoodly

• Colosseum (versions such as colisseum, coliseum, colloseum etc)

And that famous museum in Paris -- the Lourve.

Don't forget the Sacre-Couer (or Cuoer, or Cueor) and accomidation/accommadation...

On the Eastern Europe branch, we've got St Petersberg, Sophia, Prauge (!) and Hungry.

Columbia for Colombia is quite common.

A curious note is that Valladolid is rarely spelt rightly in the Western Europe branch but it's usually spelt rightly in the Mexico branch (although I must say I didn't pay much attention to the Mexican branch but when I made it...).

@ansh_jain_47 (#3): According to Wikipedia, [Coliseum|en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colosseum] seems to be also right.

Prolly to many too list.

#8 Don't you mean Liszt?

Check your brackets my friend!

This post has been removed because it may not have met our community guidelines.

Completely off-topic, but as we are speaking about amusing things on TT - the other day, someone added to a two-year old thread I had replied to and it popped up in my Recent Threads list. When I read it, that last reply made me laugh (you need to read the OP first).

[http://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/thread.jspa?messageID=16978960#16978960]

Columbia instead of Colombia grates my nerves but the one that really really annoys me is Manhatten instead of Manhattan.

In tourist brochures, 'sights' instead of 'sites'.

Nothing to do with travel as such, but it drives me mad when I see 'it's" instead of 'its" and vice versa, and I am talking about in newspaper articles, and I don't mean in tabloids.

Piaczka, are you sure about your sights vs sites? The usual term is sightseeing. I think "sites" has become common because of websites and words like that.

One regular on W Europe systematically asks what kind of "sites" people are interested in when he sees it -- campsites, etc.

My dictionary tells me it's "sights" for tourist attractions.

I do not mind "sites" and "sights", when used properly...

I sometimes have to stop & think if I mean a site+ (location) or a +sight (something to see). I do object to "web sights" unless you are admiring spiders in action.

Someone posted on the US branch that "I would be boarded to death lying whole day on the beach." I have no idea why he would be so offensive that surfers would want to attack him.

How could I forget!

He's going through a faze.
It doesn't phase me. (or, it's doesn't phaze me.)

Maybe boarded to death but at least s/he is lying on the beach and not laying on it.

I should have checked. The "boarded" person is not a native English speaker.

A native speaker just posted a request for "advise" about "itenarys."

In India, I've never heard Eurail, only Eurorail. Before taking a Eurail pass, I thought Eurorail was correct!

Eurail becomes Eurorail on 50% of posts...correcting is hopeless!

Lots of English words have changed their spellings over the years, especially when the 'accepted' spelling was unnecessarily complicated/ irregular. This process will carry on no matter what anyone thinks. This year's 'mistake' will be next year's 'correct' version. What you think is 'correct' might have been wrong a few years ago.
There's always been an element of 'fashion' to English spelling.
Get used to it.
Chill out.

As long as the meaning isn't affected, who really cares?
(Especially on a forum such as this which is used by lots of non-native speakers).

"I" "really" "care."

What about posts with plurals after an apostrophe such as "I want to take photo's" etc?

#25 The non-native speakers are not the ones making most of these mistakes.

In tourist brochures, 'sights' instead of 'sites'.

Yes, how dare they refer to things to be seen as 'sights'! the nerve!

I sometimes have to stop & think if I mean a site (location) or a sight (something to see).

Many sites are also sights but the majority of sights are not sites, if you follow me.

I always like it when people recommend a certain place and then misspell it- shows how well they know the place... Siena is probably spelled with double 'n' half the time, but Harlem, Bruge, The Hage, etc are also common.

The other one that shows up at least once a day is 'definately'.

Many sites are also sights but the majority of sights are not sites
Aww...but most sights are built on construction sites, aren't they? Doesn't that, in a way, make them sites as well (although not in a tourist's point of view)? For my part, I definately think so.

but most sights are built on construction sites, aren't they?

No. A beach, a forest, a waterfall, or a sunset are "sights" but they are not constructed on sites.

Good point :-).

Aww...but most sights are built on construction sites, aren't they? Doesn't that, in a way, make them sites as well (although not in a tourist's point of view)? For my part, I definately think so.

mmm there are very few sights on construction site- as , in my mind (as well as in Google's) a constructon site looks like this:
https://www.google.com/search?q=construction+site&hl=en&safe=off&sa=X&prmd=imvnslb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=ONavT7qtOsPQhAeBzbGECQ&ved=0CIUBELAE&biw=1220&bih=665
Unless you're interested in cranes, a construction site is not a sight.

The Louvre is a sight but the site of the Louvre is the land on which the palace was built- which is can't be seen as the building is in the way... if one were to raise the Louvre (god forbid!) the land would again be visible and could be referred to as the former site of the Louvre...still confused, Ansh? ;-)

I don't know, I think I would define "site" rather more broadly, not just as somewhere where nothing has yet been built or something is in the course of being built.

Of course, like campsites, websites, archeological sites...

My ophthalmologist calls his clinic EyeSite.

Raise the Louvre or raze the Louvre?

Site officiel du musée du Louvre

#28,
my point applies to native English speakers as well. Not everyone has enjoyed a 'top class' education; sometimes people type in a hurry; hardly ever does it harm the meaning of a post.
So, I repeat, chill out. It really doesn't matter (whether 'you' 'really' 'care' or not).

Put it another way.

Get a life.

Oh, and make sure you never, ever, make a speeling mistake yourselves...

Coming back to the word "site" or "sight" and having pondered over the matter for awhile, without wanting to sound like I am pandering to those of you who have different views, I realize that it should probably be "tourist sight", even though you see "tourist site" written so often on the internet. It's true, the Oxford dictionary states that :

-site: • a place where a particular event or activity is occurring or has occurred : the site of the Battle of Antietam | materials for repairs are always on site.

-sight(s): • places of interest to tourists and visitors in a city, town, or other place : she offered to show me the sights.

:)

Raise the Louvre or raze the Louvre?

would you believe me if i said i was being tongue-in-cheek? [giggles nervously]

Your a site for soar ayes.

#41: leaving out the article would make it look more authentic.

'It's' and 'its' are still the ones which get most on my nerves.

#35 - sites of historic interest, etc. There can be touristic sites where there's not much to see. Site entrance fees seem more common to me than sight entrance fees, as well. Especially since when there is a sight, it's often visible from outside the site.

still confused, Ansh?
No, not anymore ;-).

8K. Nice job!

Site entrance fees seem more common to me than sight entrance fees, as well.

there will be a site entrance fee for an archeological site but there is no site entrance fee for the Louvre. It's just an entrance fee.

Let’s translate this whole thread into everyday English, because beneath all the pseudo-intellectual posturing, something very different is really going on.

Let’s start with the title. ‘Any really stupid idiots out there who can’t spell?’
Yes, that should do. But I think a sub-heading too, as there’s a sub-text here, isn’t there?
So let’s try, ‘Did you lot all know how clever I really am?’
Yes, I think that sums it up. What an obnoxious thread it is. And what happens next? ‘Baaah, baaah,’ here they come, the mindless sheep, piling in behind.
‘Oh, yes, baaah, baaah, do you know, someone out there doesn’t know the difference between its and it’s? How shameful. But of course, I know. Preen, preen, baaah.’
And more, ‘Oh, how right you are. Baah, baah. And do you know, some people out there can’t spell ‘Lourve?’ And of course, by pointing this out, I’ve just displayed to you all that I do know. Aren’t I clever! Baaaaaah.’

And on and on it goes. Post after post of self-congratulatory preening and showing-off. It’s truly nauseating. I know the ‘World of Sport’ has descended into the most awful gang of juvenile name-callers, but some of us did have higher hopes for ‘Speaking in tongues’. Maybe some intelligent discussion? Some insight into how language works in different countries?
But no. Just an orgy of toffee-nosed, holier-than-thou posing. Who are you all? Wannabe teachers who feel a need to be-little others just to disply your own ‘knowledge’ (probably checked on google just to make sure you ‘know’ what you claim to ‘know’).
Truly pathetic. Shame on you bjd for the original post. And shame on all you sheep for not seeing what a cheap and self-serving shot it was. If all you want to do is take the piss out of others and show-off your own ‘expertise’ (backed by google) why don’t you join some ‘Save the apostrophe’ society and leave the rest of us to discuss something more interesting than the fact that a mistake in Manhattan ‘really annoys’ you.

It is a forum, after all, not an English exam or an interview for the civil service. Get off your high horses and show a bit of sensible tolerance.

Troll. Let's translate your post.
"I am new here and have no clue how the forum works. Also, I have no sense of humour."

Hmm, now that's an idea, anyone care to join the 'Save the apostrophe' society?

After all, this is a forum (google it if you don't know what that means).

47 ah yes, the old 'sense of humour' excuse. Justifies just about anything and everything.
Just what is so funny about taking the piss out of spelling mistakes?
So, you're not a wannabe teacher, just a real 12 year old.

Get your maths right, guys cannot be 12 now if born in 1997.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

Do you know the ending of the English saying, 'People who live in glass houses...'?

(No peeking on google).

I believe it has to do with a king, who lived in a thatched hut, who was knocked out when his seat of office fell out of the rafters.

Moral: People who live in grass houses shouldn't stow thrones.

No, but I'll give a clue, in the form of my own 'favourite' misspelling. By 'favourite', I do of course mean the one which most 'annoys me', 'grates my nerves' or even, 'drives me mad'.

It is the misspelling of the word 'exhibition'. (That's the correct spelling, in case you feel the need to look it up, but, of course, you won't).

What really 'annoys me' is when people miss out the 'h', as in 'exibitions'.

Or when they put it in the wrong place, as in 'exibhition' which 'grates my nerves'.

But what really 'drives me mad' is when they do both+. In +consecutive sentences.

Now all you spelling experts might think that so shocking, that I must be making it up. But it's true. I could even give you the location so that you could all see it for yourselves and chortle away in a very superior way. (Chortle, verb, 'to laugh, showing pleasure and satisfaction, often at someone else's bad luck'. Cambridge Dictionaries Online).

But I won't tell you. That would be too easy. What I'll do is give you a clue, then you can have the satisfaction of tracking it down by yourself and chortling all the more at how clever you've been. And maybe also with a little hint of relief.

Because when I said you could all see it and chortle in a superior way... I lied.

What I should have said was, nearly all of you would be chortling.

All except one.

Have fun!

By the way, anyone know what a 'petard' is? And what you do with it??? (You can google it if you really must).

Great news! Just spotted another corker! ('A person or thing that is especially good, attractive or funny+'. CDO). Somebody has just written ‘speing’ on a post! Can you believe that! Chortle, chortle, chortle. (Can you even guess what they were +trying to write??) I might even permit myself a little snigger. ('To laugh at someone or something in a silly and often unkind way'. CDO)
I won’t name names, but if you want to go find it and snigger away merrily to yourself, check out the ‘Teaching Italians in English’ thread here on ‘Tongues’ (where all the language ‘experts’ hang out). You’ll have to be quick, before they slither over there themselves and correct it. (The spelling you want is ‘speaking’. Just trying to be helful). Hurry now. All of you.
And yes! It is indeed yet another of our merry band of spelling fascists. Chortle, chortle, snigger, snigger some more. (A style tip, cover your mouth with the back of your hand when you’re sniggering. Uncovered mouth, not too wide, for chortling. And let the folds of fat on your belly wobble a bit as you do so).
You know, I’m beginning to enjoy this game. Immense fun.
Still no-one know the ending of the ‘glass houses’ saying, or what a petard is? Well, try this instead. Finish this saying, ‘Physician...’ A clue for you (save you google-time), it’s biblical. I’m not religious myself, but some of you might call yourselves ‘Christians’ on your days-off from doing 'other things'...

Two down.

Pétard?
You can "smoke" one or it can "smoke" you...

My airline gets lots of requests from people in the Middle East about hotels near the 'shamzelizay' and other such places, but we have learned to speak them out loud to figure out what they are talking about (although my example is one of the easiest ones). Actually, a lot of these spellings are perfect transliterations when you consider that many of these people have only ever seen the Arabic names for the places and monuments and they have to try to determine how it might be written in the Roman alphabet.

Sorry mate, you seem to have joined the party too late. Ansh_jain 97 is busy sweeping his blog so that he doesn't make an exhibition of himself, while I think nutrax is having an attack of nerves. Possibly gone out to buy a new dictionary.

Nice to have a more 'thoughtful' response to the issue though, rather than the earlier infantile intolerance and piss-taking.

I don't quite understand the point of your post unless you have been appointed as the person who decides that a thread is finished.

Perhaps he has appointed himself to that position.

I just saw a good one. I am pretty sure it's a case of autocorrect rather than bad spelling, but it made me chuckle.

A poster encouraged a visitor to Southeast Asai to get vaccinated for typhoon and Japanese encephalitis.