there grammers pothetic

Your going on about peoples grammer, and you cant even spell pathetic. And its "There grammer is pathetic" not "There grammers pothetic".

You should check yourself first mate.

Are we talking about stereotyping a group based on our limited knowledge of just a few?

You can apply your yard stick as you see fit. That is your right. I would only caution against assuming too much.

Cheers





[edit on 26-10-2009 by redoubt]

reply to post by redoubt

---

No, we are talking about the opposite of stereotyping, actually.
(Which is why I took the time to elaborate in a relatively lengthy fashion about a few of the points that could be made about this matter.)

But I have stated my "case" so often - and in so many words - within this thread as well as in previous posts, that I don't think, not anymore, anything I say is going to make a difference - because nobody is reading it.

I think he was being sarcastic, in the thread title, lol.

As far as i am concerned, as long as i can get the jist of what people are writing, i am ok with it. The one thing that annoys me, is when people put all there post in one block of writing, without any paragraphs. I just ignore those massive paragraphs, it is so hard to read, when people put it all in one. They need to break what they are saying into paragraphs. Thats the only gripe i have about reading on this board.

Even though my grammar might not be perfect as you english scholars, you can always just ignore what i am saying, if you want, thats your right.

That's almost as bad as the OP.

If you're going to call someone out, get it right.

Your sentence should be...


"You're going on about people's grammar and you can't even spell pathetic.
It's "their grammar is pathetic", not "There grammers pothetic"



I think the OP was taking the piss with their title.


Oh man..... this thread is just hilarious.


(can't wait for someone to do me next )

The Grammar Lesson

Steve Kowit

A noun's a thing. A verb's the thing it does.
An adjective is what describes the noun.
In "The can of beets is filled with purple fuzz"

of and with are prepositions. The's
an article, a can's a noun,
a noun's a thing. A verb's the thing it does.

A can can roll - or not. What isn't was
or might be, might meaning not yet known.
"Our can of beets is filled with purple fuzz"

is present tense. While words like our and us
are pronouns - i.e. it is moldy, they are icky brown.
A noun's a thing; a verb's the thing it does.

Is is a helping verb. It helps because
filled isn't a full verb. Can's what our owns
in "Our can of beets is filled with purple fuzz."

See? There's almost nothing to it. Just
memorize these rules...or write them down!
A noun's a thing, a verb's the thing it does.
The can of beets is filled with purple fuzz.



Why for you kick my grammar and call me get stuffed.

I know some rednecks that may be upset with you. When you say: "there Grammers is pathetic"(note-must be said with stereotypical deep southern American accent). They may hear you saying:"There! grandma's is pathetic". I suggest you run in case they take offense and grab grammers(grandma's when translated from stereotypical deep southern drawl) shot gun and correct your version of their grammar(Grandma's).

10 errors I can see

Haha! This is a riot! It should be "Their grammar is pathetic."

We can't even grammar police ourselves without error!

Edit TYPO! Really it was a typo.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Trexter Ziam]

flock cough my brothers its not about how the letters are on the page but about the bomb in the envolope my cousins.



[edit on 26-10-2009 by osama bim laden]

reply to post by notreallyalive

---

Oh that's good then because we don't use English down here - SO THERE

i really wish i could anti star this post, if their was such a thing.

this is a message board, a forum , a place for everyone and anyone to post their points of view. Not everyone has the best skills in writing , typing or spelling, alot of peope suffer dysleksia and even though their spelling is of and punctuation is wrong doesnt mean that they lack intelligence.

personaly, i think the most brainless thing i constantly see on ATS (other than no pics = fake replys to UFO sightings) is when an op with a very valid point is flamed and made to look stupid, not because of the subject matter but because of the spelling! Arguing peoples spelling and punctuation in a post on ATS solves and prooves NOTHING, all it shows is that the person having a go about the spelling is analy retentive and most likely not worth discusing anything with as their more interested with the formation of sentances and not the formation of truth and facts!

if anyone notices if i have any spelling mistakes or punctuation errors in this post ... well you can go swivel as this is not a school exam ! i left that 15 years ago!

(i would also like to point out, im just talking about normal chat, i think things like using a shortened internet chat / TxT is mega lame! )



[edit on 26-10-2009 by boaby_phet]

reply to post by alyosha1981

---

When someone speaks the language though, you shouldn't really have to go back and check the structure and grammar of a sentence. It should come naturally; especially when it's a first language.

Many other languages have grammar that is way more complex than in English. German, for example, has four grammatical cases, three genders, adjective endings, and these fun sentences where the verb is put on the end for no apparent reason; and all these have to be in agreement for a sentence to make sense sometimes. A native German speaker doesn't, from what I've seen, make as many (if any) mistakes with their German grammar as English speakers do with English grammar.

As long as we're on the topic, lately I've been noticing an upsurge in phrases like "could of" and "must of". Last I knew, it should be "could have" and "must have" That's why the contraction is "could've", and not "could'f".

I think that if you have any respect for whoever may be reading what you've written, you'll take the time to express yourself in a clear, understandable fashion.

I wonder why that might be! I heard they had ovens for people who wrote or spoke in a way that seemed odd to certain educators, in Germany at one time.

I've been a legal secretary for many years. My livelihood depends on knowing and using proper grammar and spelling, as well as catching errors in the text that attorneys give me. I'm highly competent at this task, but I still make mistakes. The presence of errors in a person's writing is a poor measure of the person's intelligence, education, or knowledge.

English is a difficult language to use "properly". The grammar is a beast. Spelling is even worse. There is often not the slightest connection between the spelling of a word and its pronunciation. Slaughter and laughter. Tough, cough, though, plough, hiccough, through. Come on, who the heck can spell those words correctly; or figure out how they should be pronounced? For, four, fore, to, too, two, one, won, eight, ate, and so on, and so forth. Or is that fourth?

I know some extremely bright people who can't string a proper sentence together to save their lives. Their spelling is atrocious, their grammar primitive, yet they are geniuses. Just as some people simply cannot grasp mathematics, others have problems with language.

Though I find spelling and grammar mistakes mildly annoying, I don't mind them nearly as much as I do sloppy thinking. If someone has something to say, I can usually get past their bad grammar and spelling mistakes. Seldom is the writing so bad that I can't understand it. But when someone is just talking bollocks, I find myself growing impatient, regardless of how good their writing is.

I think what I'm saying is that, while form is important, it's not as important as substance. If I can only have one or the other, I'll take the substance.

My grammar sucks. No excuses here. When I was in school, English class was a very painful subject. I had no interest in it, therefore I did not learn what I could. Looking back I wish I did. My vocabulary is very limited and sometimes it is very hard to understand what someone is talking about. I use spell check and a dictionary a lot...lol.

reply to post by chiron613

---

i 100% agree their, its much better to have an OP/reply contribute to a topic with poor speelling and punctuation than it is to see someone flame and harrassed for using poor spelling, if anything the latter shows more of a "lack of thinking" than anything. (and yes, i think my grammar is off in that sentance )

atlasastro - thats not cool bro! ... that was the nazi's, not germans.

I don't care about other people's grammar, but I do care about mine. I am a horrible typist, so I sometimes type "then" instead of "than". And I HATE that because I know the difference, but my fingers have a mind of their own.

I always look it up if I don't know the proper form. A few interesting ones are:

its vs. it's

If it is possessive, there's no apostrophe. (The cup tipped on its side)
If it is a contraction for "it is", then add the apostrophe. (It's a blast)

who vs whom

Who - He
Whom - Him

If the answer to the "who" question is "he", then use "who".
For example: Who is going to the party? HE is.

If the answer to the "who" question is "him", then use "whom".
For example: To whom are you speaking? I'm speaking to HIM.

Affect vs. Effect

MOST of the time,

Effect is a noun. This drug has a side effect.
Affect is a verb. Will this drug affect you?

Exceptions:
To effect change (effect properly used as a verb)
Affect is a psychological term meaning "mood" (He showed fairly good affect)

That concludes today's grammar lesson.

true, true...but, it is a way for people to express themselves in an intelligent manner, to lend credence to their point, and gravitas to their opinion.