there grammers pothetic, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 18 times

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 04:13 AM by Happyfeet

We call people like you Grammar nazis.
While bad grammar does bother me, I don't usually let it bother me much. Even I sometimes type things like ure and dont when I need to be fast.

Bad grammar has its place, correct grammar and punctuation does too, just like standard and nonstandard English.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 04:19 AM by MissMegs

reply to post by Silver Shadow

Isn't that a homo-nympho?

Seriously though, I'm closer to 40 than 35, and everything about grammar and spelling was drummed into us at school.

I like to see correct grammar, and spelling, but if it doesn't detract from the way it reads then I think that's ok too.

P.S. I think Americans say aluminium funny!

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 04:28 AM by Wes225

Last time I checked this is a conspiracy site, not first grade education. Stop whining and start conspiring.

Somewhat second line...

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Wes225]

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Wes225]

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 04:47 AM by Vanitas

Originally posted by notreallyalive
Are you one of those people who care about using correct grammar?

I am.
I have spent quite a few words on this very site writing my thoughts on the importance of clear and accurate expression (in any language, obviously)... and BTW, it was reviewing those old posts, just now - spurred by this thread - that I was hit in the face with a few crucial clues regarding my own on-site development. This last part is off-topic, but I'll have to return to it briefly at the end of this post.

It's rude to correct people and not really worth the time but on the other hand correct grammar truly reflects on the perception people hold of ATS!

No, it is not rude. On the contrary, it's very valuable and should be highly appreciated. I certainly appreciate corrections; I know I've learned more from them than from any other source of learning. (And BTW, whoever may be reading this, I am still waiting for the corrections anticipated in this post of mine...)

What is rude, in my opinion, is to subject others to one's lack of regard for culture in general and for everything that correct verbal expression stands for. (And it is a symbol, no doubt about that.)

In the not-so-distant past, I would have elaborated - profusely! - on the symbolic status of language, as I perceive it...
Not anymore.
I have been noticing for a while now how curt (comparatively) my replies have become.
But it was only now, after reading through some of those old threads of mine, that I noticed the basic difference: how earnestly I wrote those thoughts, how I strove (or strived - whatever :-) to express my thoughts as accurately as I could - and how negligently (again, comparatively) I express myself now.

That can't be good.
And I know it is a direct consequence of having seen so many thoughtful words (not mine - I do read other people's posts, too :-), so much elegance of thought and expression, go ignored, dis-regarded, unheard.

Maybe it is precisely this sort of "fatigue" what is wearing down the culture of public (common) verbal expression - and certainly its perceived value.
It may very well be a contributing factor: the dead weight of the lowest common denominator.

(And I wonder... twenty years from now, will there be anyone left able to laugh - sorry: to LOL - at the dialogues in Shaw's ""Pygmalion""?

)

The problem, of course, goes much deeper than mere "elegance" of expression: in my opinion (and I am repeating myself, but I don't expect many people to notice it), "fuzzy" talk = "fuzzy" thought.

So, even if this is off-topic (for which I apologise, and I mean it), I believe it may be something worth thinking about.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Vanitas]

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 04:57 AM by detachedindividual

reply to post by notreallyalive

I agree OP.

There are three or four forums that I visit regularly, and this has to be the worst when it comes to this.

I can appreciate the odd little mix up (I'm often typing "it's" instead of "its") but there are so many examples of basic errors, consistently, that it's clear it's a real problem for many.

One of my biggest gripes is reading through a thread and being confronted by a "wall of text", little to no punctuation; it's impossible to be able to read the tone and pace.

But, having said that, in the real world out there, the situation is far worse. I'm constantly baffled at work by my superiors and their complete inability to write. My manager always writes in a mixture of upper and lower case, so ThaT aNYthIng sHe WRiTEs LookS lIKE tHIS.

When we're going through paperwork completed by employee's, their abuse and misuse of English is shocking, and we then have to pass these documents on to the client!

But, this is what happens when people succumb to accepting txt spk as acceptable. Language is devolving back to something akin to the poverty stricken of the Victorian era, where only an elite had access to adequate education and the poor people struggled to put a sentence to paper. It's quite sad to see.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 04:58 AM by Orion65

Originally posted by MissMegs
reply to post by Silver Shadow

Isn't that a homo-nympho?

Seriously though, I'm closer to 40 than 35, and everything about grammar and spelling was drummed into us at school.

I like to see correct grammar, and spelling, but if it doesn't detract from the way it reads then I think that's ok too.

P.S. I think Americans say aluminium funny!

That's funny that you mention aluminum (or as you say, aluminium with the extra "i"). I used to date a guy from Ireland and I thought HE said aluminum funny. So then he proceeded to educate me regarding the history of the word, and how we Americans have it wrong. It looks like wiki agrees with him:

Present-day spelling Most countries spell aluminium with an i before -um. In the United States, the spelling aluminium is largely unknown, and the spelling aluminum predominates. The Canadian Oxford Dictionary prefers aluminum, whereas the Australian Macquarie Dictionary prefers aluminium.

The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) adopted aluminium as the standard international name for the element in 1990, but three years later recognized aluminum as an acceptable variant. Hence their periodic table includes both. IUPAC officially prefers the use of aluminium in its internal publications, although several IUPAC publications use the spelling aluminum.

Getting back to the topic at hand, I recall his grammar being better than mine as well.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 05:05 AM by Vanitas

Originally posted by detachedindividual

But, this is what happens when people succumb to accepting txt spk as acceptable. Language is devolving back to something akin to the poverty stricken of the Victorian era, where only an elite had access to adequate education and the poor people struggled to put a sentence to paper. It's quite sad to see.

Only, now there is no monetary/social excuse for such a lack of basic culture.
And those who are aware of the problem have no excuse for turning a blind eye either.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 05:07 AM by Vanitas

Originally posted by Happyfeet

We call people like you Grammar nazis.

Who are the "we" you're talking about?

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Vanitas]

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 05:16 AM by Vanitas

reply to post by notreallyalive

BTW, I just have to mention the militant newcomer that has taken public message boards by storm in the past two years or so:

DEFIANTLY.

Not related to defiance, mind you: no, it's the newest misspelling of "definitely" - AKA "definately" in the late 1990s-early 2000s.

(Who would've thought that misspellings are subject to fashion...?

)

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Vanitas]

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 05:16 AM by Silver Shadow

reply to post by MissMegs

Being an Aussie, we call it "aluminium", the genuine Queens English, as she is spoke here.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 05:25 AM by jaden_x

star and flag from me.
if you're going to type a bunch of words anyway, at least get the basic ones right and screw the rest. it's tough trying to read something and having to pause to figure out if something happened over there, of if they're doing something..

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 05:44 AM by endisnighe

One of my pastimes is researching obscure words and applying them. It is fun to try and employ them in everyday communication.

One of the first sites I joined, with my moniker-endisnighe-someone actually called me on a fictitious name.

The joke was on my detractor though, I had researched the name before I started using it.

nighe-Coming from the Scottish Gaelic terminology. The bean nighe, is a Scottish fairy, seen as an omen of death and a messenger from the Otherworld.

OP-The Americanized version of the English language is one of the most back "asswards" conflagration of twisted spellings, tenses, first person perfect, additions from other languages, etc etc etc. I had to take English 101 in college twice because of the abhorrent instruction in high school. The problem, the classes were kept at the speed of the slowest students. (Even this sentence, I had to think about the use of tense to get it correct)

You know what they say, the chain is only as strong as the weakest link. America, has brought that saying to a whole new level of idiocy. Let us make everyone the weakest link. Public schools at their-there-they're best?

Most of it is caused by speed typing anyway. Star but no flag.

[edit on 10/26/2009 by endisnighe]

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 05:55 AM by Chadwickus

We need MC Hammer to do some schoolin'!

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 06:06 AM by MissMegs

Interesting.

I was taught in school that English is one of the hardest languages to learn, because it is the only language that has 'exceptions after the rule'.

Putting it out there to find out....

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 06:07 AM by redoubt

reply to post by notreallyalive

Are you one of those people who care about using correct grammar? Does it drive you crazy when others use there instead of they're?

There is a large and growing rift between those who can read and write, and those who merely reed and right.

It can probably, at least in part, be attributed to the gutting of public education and the current conveyor belt system that turns out less than acceptable graduates. There is also the new reality that, in many cases, neither parents or teachers are all that capable themselves.

But beyond all that, ignorance does not immediately imply a personality of similar dysfunction. Just because Johnny can't write doesn't mean that Johnny is a knuckle-dragging meth user. In short, we shouldn't judge a book by its cover... or in this case, its spelling.

Best

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 06:11 AM by Trexter Ziam

To the OP - your punctuation is pathetic! There are not one, not two, not just three errors, there are roughly a dozen or more grammatical errors in your first few posts.

My grammar is the pits and I don't have spellcheck; but then, I'm not the one starting a post about grammar.

People in glass houses should not throw rocks.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 06:12 AM by Vanitas

Originally posted by MissMegs
Interesting.

I was taught in school that English is one of the hardest languages to learn, because it is the only language that has 'exceptions after the rule'.

And I was taught in school that English is one of the easiest European languages to learn...
And it's true.

Its exceptions are minimal in number and easily learnt, compared to many, many other languages.

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 06:30 AM by Unresponsible

My fourth grade teacher pleaded for all her students to "read everything and anything", presumably because she sensed the gradual decline of formal English education within the classroom.

There's no teacher of any language quite like immersion.

That said, if all anyone reads all day are text messages and misuses of words like 'loose' then...

I wonder if there are grammar Nazis in other cultures, or is it purely an Anglo phenomenon?

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 06:32 AM by Vanitas

Originally posted by redoubt

But beyond all that, ignorance does not immediately imply a personality of similar dysfunction. Just because Johnny can't write doesn't mean that Johnny is a knuckle-dragging meth user. In short, we shouldn't judge a book by its cover... or in this case, its spelling.

No, but it does signify - certainly very often - an unwillingness to learn (AKA good old sloth), poor observation skills, or disregard for commonly accepted standards; and since these standards are cultural, unrelated to any sort of political/economic oppression (unless, of course, one is a demagogue fishing for the votes of the semi-literate

), that could imply an antisocial personality.
None of which is a very desirable quality in the eyes of prospective employers, for example.
And all of which does signify a possibly faulty IQ (because the current IQ tests actually measure adaptability).

Charlemagne could not read or write (except sign his own name); but he wanted to, and tried hard to learn.

THAT is what sets him (and all those like him today, e.g. in those parts of the world where even elemental education is not a given) apart from those who do not want to learn and who cannot be bothered with applying even the simplest rules of written polysyllabic expression.

And on a strictly personal note, I reserve the right not to be bothered with them.

So there.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Vanitas]

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 06:36 AM by angelx666