I started this segment last week where I pick on some English language mistake that people commonly make.

One that's been bugging me for years is irregardless. But, I looked it up, and apparently it is, in fact, a word. It's just a really shitty word. Even if it is technically a word, it's a poorly formed word because the prefix 'ir-' is totally redundant. The suffix '-less' is already a negative, to make regardless mean "without regard" or "showing no regard". The addition of the negative prefix in front of regardless just isn't necessary. The Oxford English Dictionary and Dictionary.com both label irregardless as "nonstandard".

Here is Jonathan Owen for the Huffington Post defending that irregardless is indeed a word, but he's definitely not arguing that it's a good word:

One commenter, the same who said, "Irregardless is not a word," noted rather aptly, "There is absolutely no value to 'irregardless' except to recognize people who didn't study." Exactly. There is nothing wrong with its ability to communicate; it's only the word's metacommunication--that is, what it communicates about its user--that is problematic. To put it a different way, the problem with irregardless is entirely social: If you use it, you'll be thought of as uneducated, even though everyone can understand you just fine.

There you have it. It's technically a word. Go ahead and use it. People will get what you mean, but you'll sound stupid.