• Anyways instead of Anyway
• your instead of you're
• their instea or they're

and a couple others...

My pet peeve is people thinking they are being clever by complaining about the supposed incorrect usage of literally as figuratively.

People, including famous authors, have been literally (not hyperbole) using the word as an intensifier, and therefore, figuratively, since 1847, e.g. F Scott Fitzgerald, Charles Dickens, and William Thackeray.

Did we change the definition of 'literally'? | Merriam-Webster - https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/misuse-of-literally

Y'all is completely fine to use. It was a mistake for English to lose its distinction between second person singular and plural. Either we accept the word "y'all" or we go back to saying thou and thee, either way we can't just keep on awkwardly dancing around not having a distinction between second person plural and singular.

Putting the punctuation outside the quotes (or parentheses) when the quote is only part of a sentence. I.e. He said "I need to go now".

I am not in defence of but actually annoyed by:

Using if instead of whether. For example: "I will check if the window is open". This means: "if the window is open, I will check". What people mean to say is "I will check whether the window is open".

Also, using was in hypotheticals instead of the correct were. For example: if I were going to check whether the window was open, I wouldn't be standing here. Not "if I was going to check [...]".

Most of it, as long as it's understandable I don't care. Language is about making yourself understood.

Anything is acceptable if it's for comedic effect.

"Y'all"

I will die on the hill that it's more efficient and neutral than the alternatives.

In Dutch you're supposed to write "Volgens mij" ("in my opinion"), but it's pronounced more like it's one word. So I feel "volgensmij" flows better

I'm perfectly fine with pretty loosey-goosey interpretations of when to use semi-colons. I realize that there is a specific use-case, but in reality it's just used for the most part as a sort of elongated comma; where the intention in the writing is to have a longer pause than a normal comma would.

And I'm absolutely fine with that. No one is really clear on the real semi-colon usage anyway. I'm relatively sure that the last sentance in the previous paragraph is the actual correct usage technically, but who knows? And more importantly, who cares?

Anything that is used colloquially but technically isn't correct because some loser didn't like it 200 years ago. To boldly keep on splitting infinitives is a rejection of language prescriptivism!

Singular they. I've had this opinion since long before I even knew about non-binary people. Using "he or she" to refer to a person without specifying gender is clunky as hell.

Period AFTER the end of a quote.

My buddy Joe told me “I will live and die on this hill”.

I'm of the opinion that so long as it is understandable it does not matter. English was once written as it sounded and there was no spelling consistancy. Those who were literate had little issue with it.

Some related reading: https://ctcamp.franklinresearch.uga.edu/resources/reading-middle-english https://cb45.hsites.harvard.edu/middle-english-basic-pronunciation-and-grammar

Edit: Okay my rant is more related to spelling than grammar but still interesting.

Ending a sentence with a proposition is just fine. Picky people whom I've only seen parodies of on the Internet go "oh you ended your sentence with a preposition I have no idea what you mean by 'He went in' maybe you could explain what he went into? A jello mold? A ditch? What did go into?"

You asked if he went into the store and I said he went in, you know what I meant because of CONTEXT CLUES.

I've never met anyone who's ever been this picky but I'm ready to bite them if I ever find one.

It's not a grammar mistake per se, but I feel like sharing it and it is close enough so here we go.

As a non-native English speaker: How can you have mop~~b~~ and vacuum the floor but not broom the room?! I know it doesn't exist, but I don't care. If we have to phrase it as a grammar mistake: I use verbalisations where they are uncommon.

Using commas, wherever you want.

They should be logical thought breaks, not adhere to any rules of grammar.

I'm really sick of people treating AAVE and other dialects like grammar mistakes, is what. Grammar Nazis indeed, protecting the purity of the English language.

A lot, to be honest. Spend enough time around non-native English speakers and you realise how little sense English makes. Their 'mistakes' have their own internal consistency and in a lot of cases make more sense than English does.