The origin of irregardless is not known for certain, but the speculation among references is that it may be a blend, or portmanteau word, of irrespective and regardless, both of which are commonly accepted standard English words. By blending these words, a word is created whose meaning is not predictable from the meanings of its constituent morphemes. Since the prefix ir- means "not" (as it does with irrespective), and the suffix -less means "without", the word irregardless could therefore be expected to have the meaning "in regard to", instead of being merely a synonym of regardless. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), Irregardless was first acknowledged in 1912 by the Wentworth American Dialect Dictionary as originating from western Indiana,[2] though the word was in use in South Carolina before Indiana became a territory. [1] The usage dispute over irregardless was such that, in 1923, Literary Digest published an article titled "Is There Such a Word as Irregardless in the English Language?". The OED goes on to explain the word is primarily a North American colloquialism.[2]



***ALERT ALERT ALERT***

THERE IS A GRAMMAR NAZI IN THE BUILDING!

Irregardless and Regardless are both equally acceptable. They are absolutely interchangeable. It's simply a matter of colloquial taste which word is used on a personal case-by-case basis.

QFT.

I disagree with what you say but IRREGARDLESS of that, I will defend to the death your right to say it!

In conclusion, it's a 'skeevy' word that is acceptable as a colloquialism.

This draws a funny line.

It is not an acceptable formal word for literature.

However, we are trying to convey a sense of 'speech' when we are roleplaying, so in and of itself, we're creating a literary paradox. To be more 'in line' with traditional literature we would distance ourselves from the creative aspect of certain characters.

In the end, in the way in which it was originally used, I concede. It was incorrect in the context but it's not a word that should be abolished entirely - it does serve it's use!

I submit that the word is so widely used in error that the usage itself redefines the identity of the very word due to the evolving nature of language.

It's here to stay.