[m a d r a]

I love reading the boards, and don't usually have much to contribute, but there are some things that piss me off, that, to me, detract from the actual content of the thread. Let's clear up some confusion:

- "it's" = "it is"
- "its" = possessive of "it"
"Its mouse has one button, but it's a great computer."

- "you're" = "you are"
- "your" = possessive of "you"
"You're going to flame me for this post, and that's your prerogative."

- "they're" = "they are"
- "their" = possessive of "they"
- "there" = an adverb indicating a place
"They're going to their house, which is over there."


I think every member should pass an English test before being able to register as a member. (OK, that's extreme. I'm not really serious.) But is anyone else with me here?

i'm with you all the way but unfortunately you're banging your head against a wall here [or as too many posters would say "your banging your head against a wall"].

i find "their/there/they're" and "you're/your" the most irritating but i've also noticed a couple of interesting regional classics which i put down to people spelling phonetically according to their [there] own accent...

english people using "draw" when they mean "drawer" [as in: open the 'drawer'] because the english tend to not pronounce their "R"s

yanks using "more then" instead of "more than" because of the american tendency to pronunce "A" as "E"

i try not to be prejudiced against someone's views because of how they spell but i can't help it. i see atrocious spellling, i think "thicko!" and disregard that person's views.

i also fail to see why being deaf gives you absolution from the rules of grammar. it could be argued that 'hearing' how words are pronounced disadvantages those of us who aren't deaf [cf. through, threw, bough thought - same dipthong. different pronunciation]

at the end of the day, when you post here, you're publishing on an international medium. those of us with no musical or artistic talent would think twice before uploading our latest scribblings or caterwauling to the internet for the world's perusal, yet people who can barely string two words together seem to feel no similar reservations before inflicting their mangled prose upon us.

[as someone else said- i forgive the offender if english is not their native language. in that case you get extra kudos for being bilingual]

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by m a d r a:
<STRONG>
i also fail to see why being deaf gives you absolution from the rules of grammar. </STRONG>

Deaf people using ASL don't "disregard" grammar, their grammar is simply different from ours. I don't know too many specifics, but I know they make no distinction between "a" and "an" (no need for it) and I think they're much less strict about prepositions than speaking folk are. Perhaps someone more knowledgable could weigh in?

[Timo]

Time now for one of the only bon mots I can remember from my long-departed Pop:

Timo.
You may be obscene,
you man be profane;
but you may not be ungrammatical.

[daimoni]

.

[Timo]

Damn.

[namannik]

Here are a few more very common mistakes:

When something is a mistake, you have done it by accident[, not on accident. When you mean to do something, you do it on purpose.

If you are on a diet, the foods you eat should be healthful, not healthy. Eating healthful food will help you become more healthy. If someone says, "My meal was healthy," that must mean that the food wasn't rotten or something.

"A lot" is two words. It's not "alot"

[zigzag]

My pet peeves:

Businesses that use apostrophes and accents in order to add flair to their names, e.g. "D'arque� Tanning Salon."

Store signs that misuse the apostrophe, e.g. "Get your hot dog's here!" or "RESTROOM'S ----&gt;." There oughta be a law for that one.

[I know "oughta" is technically incorrect but it's a nice idiom. Kinda like "sorta."]

Businesses that think they're being clever by substituting "K" for "C", e.g. "Krazy Karol's Kountry Kitchen." OK, OK, we get it. At least this reminds me of something truly funny: the Monty Python sketch in which Eric Idle is able to pronounce "k" but can't pronounce a hard "c" and goes around calling people "silly bunts."

"I'm not bias" instead of "I'm not biased." This seems to be a popular one around here, almost as bad as "loose" instead of "lose."

"At worse" or "From bad to worse" instead of "worst."

"Eminent" instead of "imminent," as in "His arrival is eminent."

Nukular.

"Masonary" (no such word) instead of "masonry." I went to architecture school with a guy whose buildings were all "masonary."

"As far as books, I don't read many" instead of "As far as books are concerned, I don't read many" or "As for books, I don't read many."

"Forebears" instead of "forebearers." I realize that the former has become accepted but I still hate it. It sounds like a reference to "previous bears."

"Regime" instead of "regimen," as in "I have a new exercise regime." Another accepted usage that I hate. It sounds like the Nazis have ordered the speaker to use his exercycle.

The overuse of "the," as in "With the Poli-Grip, I can eat the apples, I can eat the corn" instead of "With Poli-Grip, I can eat apples, I can eat corn." This has become particularly popular in TV commercials (it communicates a certain earthiness), but it needs to stop. Now.


Common usages that don't bother me:

"Very unique." Technically incorrect (something is either unique or it isn't - you can't qualify it), but it seems a natural thing to say, and I think the meaning is clear. If you think about it, everything is unique in some fashion, but some things seem more unique, or distinctive, than others.

Split infinitives and sentence-ending prepositions. Even if these things were somehow incorrect, I wouldn't care because they sound natural and I don't really understand what the rules mean anyway (I slept quite comfortably during English class).


Things that have always confused me that I hope someone here can explain:

If you end a sentence-ending quote with an ellipsis, where does the period go? In other words: is it "The moon in June . . . " or "The moon in June . . . ".? What if you need to use a comma instead of a period?

Why do the British say "I'm going to hospital", while Yanks say "I'm going to the hospital"? After all, both say "I'm going to school."

Similarly, why do the British refer to single corporations in the plural, as in "Apple have nice products," while Yanks say "Apple has nice products"?


Rules that I would change:

When a clause or a sentence ends with a quote, all punctuation not a part of the quote itself should go after the quotation mark. This makes much more sense to me and would be easier to keep track of.


Now that I've proven myself to be hopelessly anal, I won't blame anyone who corrects my own mistakes.

[ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: zigzag ]

[rjenkinson]

"your attention please, a useful website about errors in english has been found on the internet! more news as we get it..."

-r.

[ford prefect]

The joke goes like this:

You say: Hey punk, wanna box?
Punk says: Yeah, come on (or other generic punk-type reply)
You say: What's wrong with the one you're living in?

It's funny. It's one of those phonetic thingys.

The thing I hate is when people say :
"My sister she has red hair"

In southern Utah we say things like "We was all down at the lake"
I also don't like "We were (was) out to Gunlock visiting grandma"

Another joke:

"We were out fishing yesterday, and I caught this HUGE hammerfor."
Expected reply: "What's a hammer for?"
"You don't know what a hammer is for? You must be stupid!"

I love these dumb jokes. Did anyone else feel the nostalgia when they heard the barenaked ladies line:

"I just made you say underwear?"

[MikeM32]

My last job was mostly typography, so I had to be careful. I think the it's (it is) and its thing have always dumbfounded me. This is even more confusing when dealing with a persons name.

Is it Mike's car or Mikes car? I've always been confused by that for some reason.

Thankfully the person that I learned typography from was my proofreader at my former job. The man has been "in the business" of print since the days of lead type and linotype machines. He's just a year shy of retirement. I have always had a tendency to respect my elders so it fit in that he became my "mentor" of sorts.

I know my grammar and puncuation aren't perfect, but I try to achieve some sense of grammatical correctness with my posts. I just find it annoying when people nit-pick over a mis-placement of the words "your" and you're". Like Spheric Harlot mentionned this is the internet and it's an extremely "fast" form of communication. We don't all have the time to proofread our posts (should proofread be hyphenated? I.E. proof-read? ) Hmmmmm.

And I can tell you people a few things about proper typography versus some secretarial dribble typed-up in Microsoft Word. Double spacing between paragraphs is a big "no-no". Also a single word at the end of a paragraph = a "widow" another big "no-no". Yes, even the type on a page must bear some artistic semblence lest it be confused with the workings of some secretary taking dictation.

Mike

[ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: MikeM32 ]

[namannik]

Originally posted by ford prefect:
<STRONG>"We were out fishing yesterday, and I caught this HUGE hammerfor."
Expected reply: "What's a hammer for?"
"You don't know what a hammer is for? You must be stupid!"</STRONG>

That reminds me of another one. When you're driving down the road during the winter, and there's snow on the ground, point out the window and say to someone, "Look at all that snew." They'll inevitable reply, "What's snew?" And then you say, "Not much, what's new with you?"

[zigzag]

Originally posted by MikeM32:
<STRONG>

I know my grammar and puncuation aren't perfect, but I try to achieve some sense of grammatical correctness with my posts. I just find it annoying when people nit-pick over a mis-placement of the words "your" and you're". Like Spheric Harlot mentionned this is the internet and it's an extremely "fast" form of communication. We don't all have the time to proofread our posts (should proofread be hyphenated? I.E. proof-read? ) Hmmmmm.</STRONG>

Don't worry - it's your ideas that count most. This just happens to be an opportunity for people to talk about their personal (and often irrational) feelings about language.

I used to get confused about "its" and "it's" as well. Try to think it through:

Mikes = more than one Mike (plural)

Mike's = belongs to Mike (possessive)

its = belongs to "it" (also possessive, but a different rule applies than with "Mike's")

it's = contraction of "it" and "is".

The most helpful thing for me is to remember that "it's" is a contraction of the words "it is", and therefore uses an apostrophe. So, if you aren't trying to say "it is" in the sentence, you probably want to use "its", without the apostrophe. In other words, if you wrote "The dog licked it's b***s," you would effectively be saying "The dog licked it is b***s," which is obviously incorrect. The correct way would be "The dog licked its b***s." So, if you get into the habit of seeing "it's" as a contraction of "it is," it should help you get the hang of it.

Of course, the rule is different when it comes to Mike and Mike's. If you wrote "The dog licked Mike's b***s" or "Mike licked the dog's b***s," you'd be correct, although you might also be arrested.

[ 05-08-2002: Message edited by: zigzag ]

[Timo]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I went to architecture school with a guy whose buildings were all "masonary."

Are you sure he wasn't designing a lot of Masonic temples?

Rules that I would change:
When a clause or a sentence ends with a quote, all punctuation not a part of the quote itself should go after the quotation mark. This makes much more sense to me and would be easier to keep track of.

I'd like to see that too. Your other pet peeves are right on, except for "nukular," which I find sort of endearing (still remembering when I used to say it that way).

[ 05-09-2002: Message edited by: Timo ]

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Timo:
<STRONG>

I'd like to see that too. Your other pet peeves are right on, except for "nukular," which I find sort of endearing (still remembering when I used to say it that way).

[ 05-09-2002: Message edited by: Timo ]</STRONG>

Jeah, Jimmy Carter never did learn to pronounce it - and he was a nukula engineer.

[Kaglan]

I also am a fan of prescriptive grammar. This is partly because of how I was taught in school; unlike many teachers these days my instructors not only expected grammatical writing but forced us to memorize large portions of Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. I am well aware that many of these prescriptive grammar rules are arbitrary -- for all linguistic convention is arbitrary -- but I still believe that maintaining a standard of educated (written) discourse is a boon to all English-speaking peoples. Standardized grammar "levels the playing field," allowing a means to communicate across academic disciplines and national borders with ease and effectiveness. Do you have an accent or grammar or cadence which people judge you for? Here it is invisible. Perhaps those variations which are acceptable in spoken English in your locale are not the same variations that are acceptable here. With standard grammar, there is only one formal language to learn, and it is shared, with minor deviations, by all English-literate peoples. Origins are concealed. Education is simplified.


That said, this is an internet message board, which requires a grapholect of its own. Though I try to be vigilant in correcting my own grammar, I don't criticize it in others unless they want me too (I have a couple of friends who correct eachother's grammar). And like many people, I write by ear -- so to match convention (rather than prescription) I will commit a host of atrocities like beginning sentences with conjunctions, splitting infinitives, and ending with prepositions.


Where I do tend to be critical of people:
1. Subject/verb agreement (particularly with I, me, who, whom)
2. Incorrect useage of semicolins and commas

[Kaglan]

Oh... and regarding the placement of punctuation inside or outside of the quotation marks. The rule dictated here varies from country to country and from style manual to style manual, so it isn't worth getting excited over. (Like aluminum and aluminium, or whether collective nouns have plural or singular verbs).

I think typographically, it looks better to have the punctuation inside the quotes -- and most books on my shelf do this -- but have seen a style manual that dictates the contrary. I try to match what I'm writing for. If my prof does it one way, I will be sure to do so for all the papers I prepare for him.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Kaglan:
<STRONG>I also am a fan of prescriptive grammar. This is partly because of how I was taught in school; unlike many teachers these days my instructors not only expected grammatical writing but forced us to memorize large portions of Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. I am well aware that many of these prescriptive grammar rules are arbitrary -- for all linguistic convention is arbitrary -- but I still believe that maintaining a standard of educated (written) discourse is a boon to all English-speaking peoples. Standardized grammar "levels the playing field," allowing a means to communicate across academic disciplines and national borders with ease and effectiveness. Do you have an accent or grammar or cadence which people judge you for? Here it is invisible. Perhaps those variations which are acceptable in spoken English in your locale are not the same variations that are acceptable here. With standard grammar, there is only one formal language to learn, and it is shared, with minor deviations, by all English-literate peoples. Origins are concealed. Education is simplified.


That said, this is an internet message board, which requires a grapholect of its own. Though I try to be vigilant in correcting my own grammar, I don't criticize it in others unless they want me too (I have a couple of friends who correct eachother's grammar). And like many people, I write by ear -- so to match convention (rather than prescription) I will commit a host of atrocities like beginning sentences with conjunctions, splitting infinitives, and ending with prepositions.


Where I do tend to be critical of people:
1. Subject/verb agreement (particularly with I, me, who, whom)
2. Incorrect useage of semicolins and commas</STRONG>

Not to too dramatically puncture your certainty, many of those rules don't bear close scrutiny in real life. Blindly following them is not always where it's at. But for the willingness to challenge the teachings of unimaginative first grade teachers, writing can become staid, pedantic and uninteresting.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by Kaglan:
<STRONG>Oh... and regarding the placement of punctuation inside or outside of the quotation marks. The rule dictated here varies from country to country and from style manual to style manual, so it isn't worth getting excited over.</STRONG>

That's good to hear, although all of the manuals I've seen call for punctuation within the quotes. But, like Frank Sinatra, I may start doing it My Way.

<STRONG>I think typographically, it looks better to have the punctuation inside the quotes . . . </STRONG>

It doesn't make sense to me visually or structurally, but I guess it evolved that way for a reason. In any case, if I have to fret over it any more, I'm going to go NUKULAR.

[Joost]

Another bugbear:
Apple has unveiled their new rackmount server.

If that doesn't look daft to you, try it the other way around:
Apple have unveiled its new rackmount server.

Neither works. MacNN and MacCentral, among others, are guilty of the former.

[pathogen]

Thankyou. This has been a public service announcement.

[bewebste]

OK, I just have to post one of my favorite parts of the Beavis and Butthead movie here:

BORK: Chief, you know that guy whose camper they were whacking off in?
FLEMMING: (appalled) Bork! You are a federal agent. You represent the United States Government... Never end a sentence with a preposition. Try again.
BORK: Oh, ah... You know that guy in whose camper they... I mean that guy off in whose camper they were whacking?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
<STRONG>The whole splitting infinitives thing is also myth. It began because snotty English grammarians in the 19th century wanted English to conform to Latin grammar rules. English rules were apparently too plebian.</STRONG>

This is also why, theoretically, it is correct to say, "It is I," while it's incorrect to say "It is me." The former was *never* in common use, but due to those same elitist boneheads, common usage was suddenly deemed incorrect by a prescriptive grammar.

-spheric*

[namannik]

Originally posted by Joost:
<STRONG>Another bugbear:
Apple has unveiled their new rackmount server.

If that doesn't look daft to you, try it the other way around:
Apple have unveiled its new rackmount server.

Neither works. MacNN and MacCentral, among others, are guilty of the former.</STRONG>

How does neither work? The first one, to me, sounds absolutely correct, and the second sounds horribly wrong. I think it might be a U.S./England discrepancy, as I think was mentioned earlier in this thread. Anyway, if neither is correct, then what would be correct?

EDIT: Oh, I see it now. There's a disagreement between "has" and "their" in the first case, and "have" and "its" in the second case. The sentance should read, "Apple has unveiled its new rackmount server."

[ 05-13-2002: Message edited by: namannik ]

[zigzag]

Originally posted by namannik:
<STRONG>

How does neither work? The first one, to me, sounds absolutely correct, and the second sounds horribly wrong. I think it might be a U.S./England discrepancy, as I think was mentioned earlier in this thread. Anyway, if neither is correct, then what would be correct?

EDIT: Oh, I see it now. There's a disagreement between "has" and "their" in the first case, and "have" and "its" in the second case. The sentance should read, "Apple has unveiled its new rackmount server."

[ 05-13-2002: Message edited by: namannik ]</STRONG>

I'd still like a linguist (a cunning linguist?) to explain this difference in usage (also the "I'm going to hospital" vs. "I'm going to the hospital" thing).

If you think of a corporation as a single entity, which it is in the legal sense, then "Apple has unveiled its new server" would seem to be correct. But if you think of a corporation as a collection of people, "Apple have unveiled their new server" would seem to be correct.

It doesn't really matter - I'm just curious as to how and why the usages differ.

[ 05-13-2002: Message edited by: zigzag ]

[Laauuren]

My pet peeves? I can't stand when people misuse "that" and "which" (no offense). You should use "that" with restrictive phrases, while "which" is reserved for nonrestrictive clauses. Another way to think of it is that you should use a comma plus "which" right before a dependent clause. For example:

Originally posted by Kaglan:
<STRONG>Perhaps those variations which are acceptable in spoken English in your locale are not the same variations that are acceptable here.
</STRONG>

The "which" should be a "that" because everything that follows the "which" is necessary in conveying the meaning of the sentence.

Okay I'm sure that was more confusing than it was worth. But don't worry, I have one more pet peeve that's easier to explain. I can't stand when people use affect instead of effect and vice versa. Affect is a verb, and effect is a noun.

[MikeM32]

I find that most of us tend to at least "try" to use proper spelling and grammar. What always sets off a big red flag for me is those that actually say things like "More Better" or "Most best".

UGHHH!!!! Yes people like that actually exist.

Mike

[DBursey]

Effect can be used as both noun and transitive verb, as in 'The desired effect of the speech was to instill in the audience a desire to effect change'.

The use of affect as a noun is outdated, but was common in old english as a subjective expression of emotion or sentiment.

[Joost]

Originally posted by zigzag:
<STRONG>

I'd still like a linguist (a cunning linguist?) to explain this difference in usage (also the "I'm going to hospital" vs. "I'm going to the hospital" thing).

If you think of a corporation as a single entity, which it is in the legal sense, then "Apple has unveiled its new server" would seem to be correct. But if you think of a corporation as a collection of people, "Apple have unveiled their new server" would seem to be correct.

It doesn't really matter - I'm just curious as to how and why the usages differ.

[ 05-13-2002: Message edited by: zigzag ]</STRONG>

zigzag's right.

The idea of treating a company as a group of people, rather than as a single entity, seems to be a throwback from the UK. "Apple have unveiled their..." used to be the preferred style in British newspapers and magazines. Increasingly, though, UK style follows the "has" and "its" construction.

While I prefer the "has" and "its" approach, both styles are technically correct. But to mix them is sloppy.

[kaceygones]

One of my biggest grammar peeves is the she and I/her and me mistakes.

David and I went fishing.
Stephanie went fishing with David and me.

The thing I have trouble with is when to use a comma, semicolon or the double dash thing. I'll never figure that out.

kacey

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by DBursey:
<STRONG>Effect can be used as both noun and transitive verb, as in 'The desired effect of the speech was to instill in the audience a desire to effect change'. </STRONG>

Yes. But using "effect" to replace "affect" as a verb is wrong.
"Affect" (v.t.) and "effect" (v.t.) have different meanings.

Affect: to generally make a difference to something.
Effect: to cause.


Examples:

The demonstrations will affect peace talks.
(The talks are happening anyway, but the demos will influence what is said.)

The demonstrations will effect peace talks.
(The talks are not happening, but the demos will make them happen.)

-s*

[philzilla]

i didn't read the whole thread, but have we done this one yet?

"blah blah ect"

ect? Electro Convulsive Therapy? i should coco! you deserve it!

et cetera: and other unspecified things of the same class; and so forth.

give the next blighter 50 lashes!!!

[DBursey]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
<STRONG>

Yes. But using "effect" to replace "affect" as a verb is wrong.
"Affect" (v.t.) and "effect" (v.t.) have different meanings.

Affect: to generally make a difference to something.
Effect: to cause.


Examples:

The demonstrations will affect peace talks.
(The talks are happening anyway, but the demos will influence what is said.)

The demonstrations will effect peace talks.
(The talks are not happening, but the demos will make them happen.)

-s*</STRONG>

Agreed. In expanding on the noun/verb forms and their usage, I didn't infer that the meanings of these words are interchangeable.

Beef of the day: Irregardless!

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by Nonsuch:
<STRONG>Deaf people using ASL don't "disregard" grammar, their grammar is simply different from ours. I don't know too many specifics, but I know they make no distinction between "a" and "an" (no need for it) and I think they're much less strict about prepositions than speaking folk are. Perhaps someone more knowledgable could weigh in?</STRONG>

Yep, you're right. ASL do not use 'the, I, a, an, to, the' or any other short words. If you say "May I go to the restroom?", we say "Me go bathroom?". It may sound stupid but if you sign it, it'll "sound" like right.

Most of the time, we do not read ASL by letters but rather one sign for one word. That's why deaf people is usually bad at grammar and only know few vocabulary.

[kaceygones]

Originally posted by DBursey:
<STRONG>Beef of the day: Irregardless!</STRONG>

Mine is the word nonsensical.

My spell checker accepts it as a word, but I don't like it.
kacey

I hate when people use ['s] (apostrophe s) to make a noun plural.

eg. "There were many cloud's in the sky."