Having encountered in several places some less than lovely prose on a heavy-lidded afternoon, I’m provoked enough to fussily register a few fastidious notes.
The creationist proponent and erstwhile debater is named “Ken Ham,” not “Ken Hamm.” I saw this regularly over the last few weeks from both his friends and foes. While I understand the desire to grant him an extra letter, I would’ve chosen differently.
One is in the “throes” of death, not its “throws.
A man who styles himself a writer ill-advisedly employed the word “impactful.” I may send him the following from dictionary.com:
Impactful is one of those words that somehow arouse [sic] intense disdain, especially among editors and other would-be guardians of English. According to its critics, the word exemplifies “bad, ugly usage.” They call it “barbarous,” dismiss it as “a meaningless buzzword,” and hate it so much that they extend their contempt of the word to contempt for its users [indeed!]. Some justify their scorn by saying that the word lacks the original meaning of the suffix -ful —“full of”— as in remorseful or wrathful.