irregard = not having regard
regardless = without regard
irregardless = without the lack of regard = having regard

* ‘some ancient greats’ (instead of ‘great’)
* ‘a person speaking’ (instead of ‘sa person’)

So, all in all, one missing S and one superfluous S – so it all balances out, in a way.

Language changes. This is what language does – the only languages that do not change are dead ones. And language has different registers, too, which mean that sa person speaking or writing in a sub-standard way, in a place where standard or ‘higher’ registers are expected will be recognised and judged for it.

As for ‘champing’ and ‘chomping’ specifically, perhaps it’s because I’m not a native speaker, but the distinction seems incredibly petty. Both are onomatopoeic in origin (echoing the sound of eager biting), and both have the exact same meaning. What on earth can make ‘champing at the bit’ more apt or correct than ‘chomping at the bit’, when both verbs are not only almost the same phonetically, but even mean the same thing? Just because it first appeared as ‘champing’? This is silly.

Irregardless, I fear my points may be mute! For example, recently speaking with someone about these types of things, he said, “I feel as though my head is literally going to explode.” Of course, I ended the conversation quickly in fear of his life and a nasty mess in Starbucks!!

:)