Show Entries

Common English errors
Entered on: October 23, 2007 7:33 AM by Radmobile

This may seem nerdy to post, but I found a cool site for explaining errors in writing.  I thought it would be good to put up here for such arguments as yea/yeah/yay.  Another one I've seen a lot on other message boards is "could of."  I saw it more often than the correct form "could have."  So much more often in fact that it had me questioning myself.  Check it out, it has some neat ones.

NEWS 452 - 11 Comments
From: Jackzilla Entered on: October 23, 2007 8:16 AM

BigFatty - Here's the pertinent part:

When you want to write the common casual version of “yes,” the correct spelling is “yeah

From: BigFatty Entered on: October 23, 2007 10:07 AM

Um.... I am not being correct.  I am not one of those squares, conforming to the man!  I am a rebel - ya, thats right.  Why write a casual expression that is actually LONGER than the proper one??  I guess a dumbass would.  

Those of us who hate typing will stick to the simple 2 letter version - thanks.  If it makes people think I am writing in Swedish.... well, the message is the same, so I don't care. 

From: Ross Entered on: October 23, 2007 10:57 AM

The trouble with these kinds of things is that "correct" is only correct at one place and time.  Active languages are constantly evolving, and that doesn't mean just the addition/deletion of new words: the rules of grammar evolve, too.  

So while you have to have rules, and misuses of things like they're/their/there are a pet  peeve of mine, I take things like this with a grain of salt:  if enough people choose to disregard the rule, the rule eventually goes away.  For instance, who really takes care not to end sentences with prepositions anymore?  At certain levels of writing it's still frowned upon, but I'd wager that it's becoming less and less common to ding someone for doing it.  

From: BigFatty Entered on: October 23, 2007 11:37 AM
And huge nerd points for Rad for wading through that poorly designed webpage. Good grief, you must have been EXTREMELY bored at work to be going through all those entries.  I'll make sure to talk to dad to make sure you get more work thrown your way.  Plus, Ann needs to know you have enough time for a 2nd edition..... stop the presses!

From: Radmobile Entered on: October 23, 2007 12:05 PM
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying about a 2nd edition.  I fully accept the nerd points though.  I like the entry about "for all intensive purposes."  The one about "literally" is funny too.  That's one of my biggest pet peeves.  When people use that word wrong, they're using it in the exact opposite way it was intended, but I hear it all the time.
From: NickNick Entered on: October 23, 2007 12:34 PM
I think Fatty is using 2nd edition literally.
From: Ross Entered on: October 23, 2007 12:44 PM

Yeah, we have a running joke in my office about one coworker who kept saying "This sucks balls.  Literally.  Literally."  And we'd laugh, and he'd repeat that it "literally" sucked balls - he had no idea what the word literally actually meant.  

Intensive purposes bothers me too.

From: Jackzilla Entered on: October 23, 2007 1:24 PM

Rad - I believe what Fatty meant by "2nd edition" is in regards to the Rad Daily Times that Ann may be subscribing to.

I was just talking to Angie the other day about people using "literally" wrong and how annoying it was.  Intensive purposes?  That's a new for me. 

From: Radmobile Entered on: October 23, 2007 1:42 PM
Ah, a 2nd edition of the times. That makes sense I suppose. It does appear I have enough time on my hands to warrant a second subscription. Although I'm sure she'll be more excited about the website than I was.
From: Swerb Entered on: October 26, 2007 9:57 PM

What's interesting is, I have to conform to Associated Press grammar rules in my line of work, and it's often idiotically contrary to how people actually speak. A couple of my pet peeves: split infinitives, like "my sores have finally gone away" is always changed to "my sores finally have gone away," which to my ear, sounds clunky as hell. Or "it reminds me of movies like 'Pulp Fiction' and 'Star Wars'" would be changed to "it reminds me of movies such as 'Pulp Fiction' and 'Star Wars'," because the literal definition of "like" doesn't work - although such usage of the word has infiltrated our speaking in recent years, which should alter its definition, right?

Even worse is some of the nomenclature regarding technology. First, any reference to the Web of Internet is capitalized. Who the fuck knows why. Then, we can't use the word "blog" - for a while it was "Web log," which is totally retarded, and now it's "Web blog" which is even retardeder. And it has gone so far that the title of my blog has to be in quotes - so the full reference is "read John Serba's Web blog, 'Project Mayhem.' " It's complication for its own sake. 

But, just like Ross mentioned, ending a sentence with a preposition? These days, who cares. I do it all the time, and it's never changed. The point being, if the intent of the statement is clear, does any of the other shit really matter?

Don't get me started on this word nerd stuff. I'll send all of you home crying and wetting your pants.

Plus, this should be a sure-fire way to kill the hell out of this thread. 

From: Ross Entered on: October 26, 2007 10:22 PM
"Web blog"?  Are you shitting me?  Who told you that's how it was supposed to be?  Why, I oughtta.... let me at 'em!  

[Log In to Add Comment]

a division of

© 2003 Ross Johnson
RSS Feed