No.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/supercede

http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/supercede.html

I think that's a losing battle. About half of online dictionaries list it as an acceptable variant without mentioning a misspelling:
http://www.onelook.com/?w=supercede&ls=b

And the variant is approaching the correct spelling in usage:
http://www.google.com/trends/?q=supe...ate=all&sort=1

Yeah, maybe. I'm more worried that the less/fewer thing is becoming a losing battle too. As the above poster evidenced, even grammar nits are using them as synonyms and I see it everywhere.

I'm okay with "10 items or less" in the grocery store but for the most part when I see less in place of fewer, it's nails on a chalkboard.

I do generally correct myself when I do the less/fewer thing. I just keep making the mistake anyway though.

Odd thing is that I'm pretty sure it annoys the **** out of me when others do it wrong too. I'm really good at noticing that. It's like in poker when I can spot someone else's ****ty play and then I spew all over the place a few hands later.

Just saw this one for the first time:

"...It'd be who of you..."

What the hell?

"It would be who [which?] of you"?!

"It would behoove you"?

Just what the hell all around.

Door number two.

I love this one. Funny when people go through life mistaking the words they've heard. I remember a guy posting on a college football forum something like "Granite, he's a good quarterback..."

Recently I've been typing and saying "imput".

I totally do that with "impossible" in everyday speech, especially when being wacky. "What?! That's INNNNNNN possible!"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...g-forward.html

Bravo to him.

Except I hope his description of himself as a "grammar fascist" isn't presented as having anything to do with the crackdown on b-school jargon, because the latter is an issue of diction, not grammar.

Edit: It would appear that the minister knows his stuff just fine, or at least that his memo focused primarily on grammar; the emphasis in the article was its writer's and appears not to have captured the actual spirit of the memo (while including some errors of his own for our amusement...). Sloppy journalism — how shocking.

I hope this isn't considered too much of a derail, but I'm curious what other words people find they ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS transpose letters in when they type.

For me, "because" always becomes "becasue." I don't know why my fingers are so eager to get that S in before the U. But I have to go back and change it every time unless I'm being actively conscious about it.

If I ever have a daughter, I'll name her Becca Sue in honor of this phenomenon.

More in line with didace's comment, I find that when I type -and I hope I'm not the only one- a sort of "reserve" brain often takes over (I know there's a more elegant biological term) and spells things based on a combination of phonics and memory. I shock myself how often I type "are" and "won" when I meant "our" and "one." I have made more cringeworthy reserve-brain mistakes than that, but I can't think of any right now.

You definitely aren't the only one. I believe that unconscious phonetic spellings when touch-typing are pretty common. I've seen a lot and done it myself. I try to proofread everything I type before hitting Send/Submit/Save. I type short things like this response at around 80 wpm, so that might be related to the phenomenon.

I use a phonetic substitution ~once every several hundred words when I'm either mentally tired or just not focused. I can't imagine considering that cringeworthy or even including it in a language-nittery discussion, though, because it's zeroth-draft stuff, pretty much. True language nittery belongs to the realm of revision and rewriting, or at least to that of the true first draft, not that of the first form words take on the page.

The mental energy one can owl locate to preventing those infrequent and easily correctable errors is much better spent on a whole lot of other writing-process things, I think.

Drives me mental how "difficult" is getting replaced by "challenging". If something's difficult it's difficult; whether you find that a challenge is another matter entirely.

I had to enlarge the first one to find the critter and I'm still not positive I identified it.

Has anyone mentioned the gradual but near total replacement of the word "lose" with the word "loose" yet? My brain explodes everytime I read this. I just received an infraction on NVG trying to reach the masses. It was probably definitely worth it.

Exaggerate much?

You need to read more than just what NVGtards write. This isn't terribly common among people who completed high school.

Hyperbole has always been a strong suit. Too much Hunter S. Thompson.

FWIW I do see this quite a bit and it tilts the hell out of me, too. Less common but still annoys me for than other misspellings for some reason is when people write "lightening" when they mean "lightning." (MW actually does endorse this spelling as a verb describing lightning's action though).

What do you do if you're out shopping and see this? I probably wouldn't have said anything, but I just finished reading "The great typo hunt".

On purpose?

(and, yes, the rampant use of "loose" for "lose" drives me crazy too.)