?He is the very pineapple of politeness!? Mrs Malaprop?s announcement in the 1780s had led an English audience to chortle in merriment. The tartar?s confounding of the juicy tropical fruit with a superlative adjective was indeed the very ?pinnacle? of humour (grammarians would beg to differ).

Even though we still laugh at the unforgettable character in R.B. Sheridan?s play The Rivals, her bloopers are sometimes uncomfortably close to the ones that we make.

Ask the researchers compiling the 11th edition of the Concise Oxford Dictionary. They found an increasing number of people confused with the use of simple words and phrases. For example, 20 per cent of the writers surveyed were in favour of ?towing? the line, instead of ?toeing? the line. One in 10 can ?pour? over a book when we should ?pore? over it. Idioms and phrases can trap even the most careful of writers into making outrageous errors. Most of such mistakes happen when the writer is trying, unnecessarily, to pep up a sentence and force it towards overemphasis.

Sample this. ?They dug in their feet and refused to listen to reason.? The writer, in this case, has got carried away with a description of stubbornness. The sentence should have been written, ?They dug in their heels and refused to listen to reason.?

A journalist?s indignation resulted in a worse error. ?Will the election commission bring the National Games under its hammer?? Even the poll panel must have been shocked at the idea of auctioning off a major sports event.

Another reporter, commenting on the perennial wrangling between factions in a political party, said, ?After the distribution of ministries, the rebels in the party are up in the arms.? The dissidents were certainly ?up in arms? over being snubbed by the bosses, but one wonders in whose arms they had found consolation!

Why single out a poor hack when the president of the most powerful nation on earth has spawned numerous websites with his uncanny ability to spread terror among defenders of grammar.

US President George W. Bush, a true heir to Mrs Malaprop, is unparalleled in his versatility in error, ranging from improper use of verbs and nouns to muddled references and plain ignorance. Similar-sounding words inspire the best Bushisms. ?We?ve got hundreds of sites to exploit (he means explore), looking (sic) for the chemical and biological weapons that we know Saddam Hussein had prior to our entrance into Iraq.?

His paean to democracy goes something like this, ?Free societies are hopeful societies. And free societies will be allies against these hateful few who have no conscience, who kill at the whim of a hat.?

Terrorists or the US may kill at their whim but a hat cannot be held responsible for whimsicality. Ever the Texan cowboy, Bush spouts such howlers at the drop of a hat.