ABSTRACT
Not only members of the general public have their pet peeves as far as usage criticism is concerned: usage guide writers have them, too. Due to the works’ largely non-specialist nature, selection principles have always been idiosyncratic and non-systematic, even today, despite some scholars signalling changes for the better in how usage guide writers provide usage advice. Usage problems are discussed by analysing usage guide advice and attitude surveys among the general public, and comparing actual usage retrieved from various corpora (BNC, COHA, COCA, Hansard, TIME). Five selected usage problems are presented in detail: could of (for could have), likely (for very likely), the placement of only, flat adverbs and the variation between try and and try to. These case studies illustrate the potential for analysing other usage problems in trying to explain why usage problems continue exist or, in some cases, disappear from the prescriptive canon. Showing the similarity between the views held by usage guide writers, the general public and others, the chapter illustrates the largely amateurish nature of the genre.
