...AND, VERY commonly, in "these regional mis-usages", the two words "idea" and "ideal" are switched, one for the other, as opposed to only one being mis-used.
example: "That ideal is idea" instead of "That idea is ideal".

Reference back to March, 2009/ Silly Rabbit's comment:
The word "ideal" CAN be used as a noun, yes. But in the context in which most were referring in this matter, that "mis-useage" of IDEAL is not as in the definitional circumstances cited following this comment, which hold its usage as a noun for referring to a lofty or high-held concept or goal. That is not the same, as I said, contextually.
************
i·de·al? ?[ahy-dee-uhl, ahy-deel]
–noun
1.
a conception of something in its perfection.
2.
a standard of perfection or excellence.
3.
a person or thing conceived as embodying such a conception or conforming to such a standard, and taken as a model for imitation:Thomas Jefferson was his ideal.
4.
an ultimate object or aim of endeavor, esp. one of high or noble character: He refuses to compromise any of his ideals.
5.
something that exists only in the imagination: To achieve the ideal is almost hopeless.
6.
Mathematics. a subring of a ring, any element of which when multiplied by any element of the ring results in an element of the subring.

We mentioned this idea/ideal thing to a close friend from Southern Indiana a few weeks back. He switched the verbal usage and I gingerly entered into the discussion with him as to having noticed the S. Indiana common switch of the two words, asking
"what was up?", from his viewpoint.
He DID get a little riled and defensive (but not too much), citing that it's no different than someone from (usually) the country saying "crick" instead of "creek". "It's just the way we say it. What's the big deal?", he responded.
That just doesn't seem the same to me. One is a "lazy-slur" sort of thing and the other is a total mis-usage, no different than saying, "I had the CONCERT of giving a CONCEPT" instead of saying , "I had the CONCEPT of giving a CONCERT".

I dunno!

I am not sure as to why this occurs, but it seems to be a common mistake THROUGHOUT Southern Indiana. I have lived my life in Louisville, Ky. We are right across the Ohio River from Southern Indiana. My wife taught for thirty years in S.IN.
And she concurs that this is a rampant "problem" over there.
ANYtime that I hear someone around these parts switch the two words, the chance is almost 100% that they are from S.IN.
Both of the words are in the dictionary. Both words are definitely taught for spelling and definition (How could they NOT be?). Yet "these people" continue to come up with grand concepts and claim that they have an "idea ideal".
They learn the spellings of the words....they learn the definitions...and they still switch the two. What's the deal here? And many of them actually seem to be reasonably intelligent, otherwise.
So, what is going on, I "aks" you that?

...and I am curious if there are OTHER pockets of the country where this ridiculous switch-a-roo happens regularly.

I am not sure as to why this occurs, but it seems to be a common mistake THROUGHOUT Southern Indiana. I have lived my life in Louisville, Ky. We are right across the Ohio River from Southern Indiana. My wife taught for thirty years in S.IN.
And she concurs that this is a rampant "problem" over there.
ANYtime that I hear someone around these parts switch the two words, the chance is almost 100% that they are from S.IN.
Both of the words are in the dictionary. Both words are definitely taught for spelling and definition (How could they NOT be?). Yet "these people" continue to come up with grand concepts and claim that they have an "idea ideal".
They learn the spellings of the words....they learn the definitions...and they still switch the two. What's the deal here? And many of them actually seem to be reasonably intelligent, otherwise.
So, what is going on, I "aks" you that?

...and I am curious if there are OTHER pockets of the country where this ridiculous switck-a-roo happens regularly.