[marktwain]

Yeesh, remind me to never get anywhere near anything you build. You do realize that what you're learning in engineering school is how a few professor think the world works. As it sits the Websters dictionary is, has been for a long time, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future, the definition of the English language. Regardless of how little respect you have for the makers.

Remember that English was not designed, it evolved over time, and it is changing all of the time. Languages are dynamic, not static.

[discostu]

Languages are dynamic. That's no excuse for using it poorly. Eventually, maybe, if our society continues to mass produce idiots, "irregardless" will be a word (though it will still be a redundant word since it's common usage has the same meaning as "regardless") much as how "whom" is going the way of the dodo bird (kind of mixed on that one, I like the usage, but it's a terrible word to try to say, too many soft consonants with no glotal stops to help the word begin and end). But until that day comes it's not a word and its use makes one appear rather dimwitted.

Of course I'll admit that "irregardless" irritates me more than other nonsense words because it's one I used and worked hard to train myself out of (never have been good at that no ending preposition thing, though more recent style guides have been calling that rule into question). That training includes teaching yourself to have annoying mental tick when you see or hear the "word".