Your/You're... and other grammar mistakes

redfacedbear

I often see 'weary' being used instead of 'wary' - it bugs me.

Liam Byrne

pickarooney wrote: »

You risk being wrong if you use a 'z' in 'analyse' the same way you risk being wrong if you use an 's' in zebra.

You also risk being by being so sure you're right that you don't bother to check.

We were referring to words ending in "....se", which is what that rule applies to. :rolleyes: And we weren't referring to "sneeze" or "haze" either (which would have been a half-relevant comeback for you).

I'll make a deal with you; we'll still to relevant examples, and I won't start making up example "words" like "chooze", "cheeze", if you don't start talking about "sooz" (where the animals are kept) or those "Astecz" that used to live in Peru.......

Now pleaze excuze me while I go for a znoose........all thiz typing iz making me zleepy

Lotsafish

I understand why some people have problems with other people correcting grammar and I can see how it looks sometimes. But personally I like to be told when I've done it wrong.

az2wp0sye65487

AARRRGH wrote: »

Choose/Chose

Choose is sort of for present tense, and chose is for past tense. It's easiest to explain with an example:

Class dismissed.

AARRRGH

Raymond Ancient Newspaperman wrote: »

I used "sort of" because you could say "what is he going to choose?" when referring to the future. If you get me!

walshb

Victor_M wrote: »

Saw/Seen

I saw him earlier -Correct
I seen him earlier - Incorrect

The amount of people that make this mistake amazes me.

Ye, but in speech, I think folks can interchange, right or wrong, it's quite obvious what is meant. I don't see this example as one that would bug me, but do get your point.

Now, been and being does bug me when I see it written.

I haven't being doing my training

He's been a real fool lately

Hellm0

Unlike computers, humans have the ability to decipher syntactically inconsistent statements and derive intended meaning. If you are unwilling to utilize this rather amazing ability then perhaps you would prefer to communicate in C?

Else

Deal with it.

Liam Byrne

Hellm0 wrote: »

perhaps you would prefer to communicate in C?

Else

Deal with it.

You left out the curly brackets!!!

perhaps you would prefer to communicate in C?

} Else {

Deal with it.

}

Mind you, don't we also need an "if" statement ? Even computers need that, in order to decipher which path to take.

A "try....catch" loop construct might be better......"try and decipher and understand, if not, try again, if not, try again, if not......get bored, give up trying to figure out what the other person is trying to say, realise that they're not using their "amazing ability" to figure out that they're causing problems in terms of making themselves understood, and hindering themselves, and decide to give up feck off to the pub......

jif

this illustrates it very well.

jif

Hellm0 wrote: »

Unlike computers, humans have the ability to decipher syntactically inconsistent statements and derive intended meaning. If you are unwilling to utilize this rather amazing ability then perhaps you would prefer to communicate in C?

Else

Deal with it.

Headache?

Deal with it.

If you require something stronger Solpadinne has the power t.....:p

Hellm0

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You left out the curly brackets!!!

perhaps you would prefer to communicate in C?

} Else {

Deal with it.

}

Mind you, don't we also need an "if" statement ? Even computers need that, in order to decipher which path to take.

A "try....catch" loop construct might be better......"try and decipher and understand, if not, try again, if not, try again, if not......get bored, give up trying to figure out what the other person is trying to say, realise that they're not using their "amazing ability" to figure out that they're causing problems in terms of making themselves understood, and hindering themselves, and decide to give up feck off to the pub......

You just proved my point sir! Though my post was not formatted correctly, you understood the content.

On a side note, I am not sure if C actually has try catch blocks (which are not loops). I know C# has them. They are only useful for error handling anyway and would not be used in a logic tree. If anything, I would probably define such a process using a language like LISP anyway.

Liam Byrne

Hellm0 wrote: »

You just proved my point sir! Though my post was not formatted correctly, you understood the content.

That still doesn't make it right; it took more effort and - if I wasn't a techy - I might have given up, or said "what ?".....basically, if one wants to be heard, it's in one's own interest to say things clearly.

Hellm0 wrote: »

On a side note, I am not sure if C actually has try catch blocks (which are not loops). I know C# has them. They are only useful for error handling anyway and would not be used in a logic tree.

Ah, the basic "C" was before my time......and I was referring to wrapping them in a loop, in an effort to show that there's a limit to how many times someone will try to read/interpret something before they give up; i.e. while a computer would accept the input and act accordingly, a person can re-read it to see if that might help them make any sense of it.

But that's my point proven right there; you didn't quite get that from my post; despite it being in English and both spelt and punctuated correctly, it STILL required an added explanation from me......why add to that existing potential for confusion by messing up the first post with text-speak, bad grammar & punctuation and other stuff ?

GrammarNazi

OP, if you require a new username at any point, PM me.

Tom Cruises Left Nut

ejmaztec wrote: »

fyp:pac:

I just realised what fyp means when used in this context.

I have been reading it as harsh abuse towards fellow posters for years. I'll have to go back and read every thread again now ! ARGH !

Tom Cruises Left Nut

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You left out "its" and "it's" ......

The only case where the apostrophe doesn't imply ownership, because that contruct is already used for the abbreviated "it is"......

So:

It's 9 o'clock [it is]
It's raining [it is]
It's been a tough year [it has]

The dog chased its tail

Construct

Tar.Aldarion

See you guys in the Spell Czech forum!

Bonavox

AARRRGH wrote: »

Ohhh I forgot about Their/There/They're

You know that adding an extra two "H"s to the end of oh is grammatically incorrect, don't you?

Davidius

I know the difference between words and the mistakes I make are more due to slips as opposed to believing that I'm using the correct spelling. You can't expect me to read or check the crap that I write!

Could we not just use maths lads?

pickarooney

Liam Byrne wrote: »

We were referring to words ending in "....se", which is what that rule applies to. :rolleyes: And we weren't referring to "sneeze" or "haze" either (which would have been a half-relevant comeback for you).

Talk about selective memory.... you specifically and irrefutably mentioned the word 'organise' as a 'correct' spelling with the direct implication that 'organize' was an incorrect spelling. Why not just accept that you might have been wrong instead of making ridiculous attempts to somehow appear right by removing the 'I' (and then rolling two)?

As amasing as an Aztec in Peru.

mandysmithers

The mistakes I can't stand at all are when people say 'could of', 'would of', and 'better then'. They just don't make any sense!!! Other grammatical errors such as mixing up they're/there/their are understandable, but for f&ck sake...you're just thick if you make those mistakes.



Another one that really pisses me off, is when people think they're correct by saying "John cooked dinner for Mary and I", thinking that they sound 'posh' and that they're using the correct grammar. It's called the Toff's Error. I hate it. If you take out 'Mary and', the sentence would read: John cooked dinner for me. You would never say: John cooked dinner for I. However, I can see how this mistake could be made. Usually it's made by people who think that their grammar is perfect.

pickarooney

mandysmithers wrote: »

You would never say: John cooked dinner for I.

Unless you were Jamaican.

bertie4evr

I'm afraid to post her in case I make a mistake

mandysmithers

bertie4evr wrote: »

I'm afraid to post her in case I make a mistake

Would that be in case you send her to the wrong address?!

bertie4evr

I REALLY did not mean that.

Liam Byrne

pickarooney wrote: »

Talk about selective memory.... you specifically and irrefutably mentioned the word 'organise' as a 'correct' spelling with the direct implication that 'organize' was an incorrect spelling. Why not just accept that you might have been wrong instead of making ridiculous attempts to somehow appear right by removing the 'I' (and then rolling two)?

As amasing as an Aztec in Peru.

I stand over that, because it is the Americanised spelling; and while it's accepted (so I'll stand corrected on that) the main issue is that people use "ze" on all sorts of words, including those that are meant to have only "se" endings (and their corresponding "ed" past tense).

At least I've mentioned only the relevant type of words, rather than confusing the issue by sticking "z" in the middle of others irrelevant to the discussion.

"organise" = always right
"organize" = acceptable, apparently
"analyse" = always right
"analyze" = never right

Even the link that you posted only says that for some words, "ze" is incorrect", which is strange for a dictionary site, so unless there's a specific list of words where "ze" is acceptable, I'll stick to my point, backed up by that link - when in doubt, use "se", because you'll never be wrong.

AARRRGH

Bono Vox wrote: »

You know that adding an extra two "H"s to the end of oh is grammatically incorrect, don't you?

Yes, but it's obviously me trying to emphasise "oh" rather than thinking ohhh is the valid form.

SarahChambers

Errors of omission are nowhere near as bad as when people put commas etc where they don't belong eg: You're car is red, I have two new bike's

Much better to just leave grammar out altogether if you don't understand it, that way there is always a chance that you simply forgot it, while putting it where it doesn't belong demonstrates a lack of understanding.

walshb

SarahChambers wrote: »

Errors of omission are nowhere near as bad as when people put commas etc where they don't belong eg: You're car is red, I have two new bike's

Much better to just leave grammar out altogether if you don't understand it, that way there is always a chance that you simply forgot it, while putting it where it doesn't belong demonstrates a lack of understanding.

But there is no exact time or place to put commas. Different folks apply the comma to
different parts of their sentences. It's not as precise a rule as say, where to put a full stop, or a question mark.

You know, usually a comma never precedes the word and, but some instances requires it to.

Best way to do it is to verbally speak the words and when you want to pause, or feel like a pause, insert a comma.

AnonoBoy

SarahChambers wrote: »

Errors of omission are nowhere near as bad as when people put commas etc where they don't belong eg: You're car is red, I have two new bike's

You do realise that they're apostrophes not commas you're talking about there, don't you?

SarahChambers

AnonoBoy wrote: »

You do realise that they're apostrophes not commas you're talking about there, don't you?

Yes I know that, I did say commas etc, which indicates that I am talking about commas, apostrophes, colons, semicolons and all other punctuation. I realise that this may have been unclear given the examples I chose.

AnonoBoy

SarahChambers wrote: »

Yes I know that, I did say commas etc, which indicates that I am talking about commas, apostrophes, colons, semicolons and all other punctuation. I realise that this may have been unclear given the examples I chose.

It was extremely unclear. Saying "apostrophes etc." would have been much more reader-friendly as a reader of your post, such as my good self, could get the false notion that you thought the puncuation marks in your examples were called commas and that you didn't know what you were talking about.

Perish the thought I hear you say. Indeed.

Apology accepted.


Hours of what the kids would call 'lulz':

http://www.apostropheabuse.com/

TheZohanS

SarahChambers wrote: »

Yes I know that, I did say commas etc, which indicates that I am talking about commas, apostrophes, colons, semicolons and all other punctuation. I realise that this may have been unclear given the examples I chose.

I think if you're going to pass judgement you need to make sure your own grammar is perfect.


For example it's "etc.", not "etc".

As long as people try their best that's cool in my book.

AnonoBoy

TheZohan wrote: »

I think if your going to pass judgement you need to make sure you're own grammar's are perfect.

For example its "etc.", not "etc".

As long as people tries they're best that's cool in my book. 's

Early first draft of The Zohan's post that I got sent by IM just a minute ago. :eek:

Just as well Mods have proof-readers on standby.

DublinWriter

TheZohan wrote: »

As long as people try their best that's cool in my book.

WRONG!

I detest the whole 'moral relativity' argument when used as an excuse to let people off the hook for not even knowing their own mother tongue.

Basic punctuation in the English language is not feckin' rocket science; sure there are some very obscure rules governing the use of the apostrophe, but there's no excuse for not knowing the two basic possessive and contractive uses of the apostrophe.

I nearly lose it every time I drive by a local garage with a sign up saying Trade In's Accepted - and this is isn't a small operation, it's one of the biggest Renault dealerships in the country!

Bad grammar and punctuation to me is about as offensive someone with B.O.

TheZohanS

DublinWriter wrote: »

WRONG!

I detest the whole 'moral relativity' argument when used as an excuse to let people off the hook for not even knowing their own mother tongue.

Basic punctuation in the English language is not feckin' rocket science; sure there are some very obscure rules governing the use of the apostrophe, but there's no excuse for not knowing the two basic possessive and contractive uses of the apostrophe.

I nearly lose it every time I drive by a local garage with a sign up saying Trade In's Accepted - and this is isn't a small operation, it's one of the biggest Renault dealerships in the country!

Bad grammar and punctuation to me is about as offensive someone with B.O.

Nobody is perfect.

AnonoBoy

DublinWriter wrote: »

Bad grammar and punctuation to me is about as offensive someone with B.O.

There was a lad I went to college with. Used to turn in the worst written term papers. Horrible puncuation and spelling and even worse grammar. So I offered to help him becuase I felt bad.

He came over to my house one evening and it was only when I was sitting close to him at the kitchen table going through the finer points of possessive adjectives did I notice that he reeked of sweat and pot noodle.

You'd have hated him DublinWriter.

SarahChambers

TheZohan wrote: »

I think if you're going to pass judgement you need to make sure your own grammar is perfect.


For example it's "etc.", not "etc".

As long as people try their best that's cool in my book.

I wasn't aware of that................ but I have to say that could open a whole can of grammatical worms.

ejmaztec

AnonoBoy wrote: »

There was a lad I went to college with. Used to turn in the worst written term papers. Horrible puncuation and spelling and even worse grammar. So I offered to help him becuase I felt bad.

He came over to my house one evening and it was only when I was sitting close to him at the kitchen table going through the finer points of possessive adjectives did I notice that he reeked of sweat and pot noodle.

You'd have hated him DublinWriter.

Those smell-checkers are handy.

tolosenc

The amount of people who don't know the difference between mass- and count-nouns...

dunnomede?

Long Onion wrote: »

For what it's worth, I do see the valid point that, in the grand scheme of things, grammatical errors are not the biggest issue facing humanity. But I do think that we are slipping backwards in terms of language useage. Text speak is becoming an issue and fewer and fewer people really understand the rules of our language.

My Father is a lecturer in journalism and the Uni has had to introduce a basic grammar module for the students to adress the woeful standard of literacy. If we can't point out the mistakes to people, they won't learn.

Whether or not the rules actually matter once the message is understood is, of course, a personal isuue, but I am saddened by the lack of concern that people show for learning the basics.

That said, I do like sex and now you're post have me confusded.

I hvnt red l psts, ane1 lse pik up n dat?
I haven't read all posts, did anyone else pick up on that?

Tzetze

The difference between seen and seeing or been and being is lost on a great many people. How hard can it be to understand and use past/current tense when applicable?

I think that most people who make these errors are those who learned their language through spoken word, and would rather watch tv than read something.

pookie82

This is an excellent thread. Bad punctuation and grammar are horrifically common in this country, mainly because as a nation no one seems to think it relevant that we're taught grammar properly in school. I didn't even know about sentences having subjects and objects until I came to learn German in secondary school, and I knew less still about the subjunctive or optative, or something being in a nominative or accusative case, or the intricacies of word order and syntax in language. Sadly, it was only through studying another language that I came to learn the grammatical rules that govern my own.

I'm not sure why it's like this. I'm also not sure why people get so terribly offended by threads like this. There's no shame in striving to speak and write your native tongue correctly, and it's not hard work to get some of the most basic rules right (such as those pointed out in the first post).

The mixing up of "have" and "of" always astounds me. How did that even happen??? "I should of known". When people use that I always hear it in a South African accent :-) It hurts my eyes.

I would love an acceptable substitute for the do-be tense though. We NEED a do-be tense. If anyone can give me a good substitute for the do-be tense (which exists in Irish but not in English as far as I know) I will pm them a tenner.

pookie82

Tzetze wrote: »

I think that most people who make these errors are those who learned their language through spoken word, and would rather watch tv than read something.

I agree. The "of"/"have" mix up is born of the spoken word being misinterpreted. The only real way to brush up on spelling and grammar is to read and read and read.

Liam Byrne

pookie82 wrote: »

I would love an acceptable substitute for the do-be tense though. We NEED a do-be tense. If anyone can give me a good substitute for the do-be tense (which exists in Irish but not in English as far as I know) I will pm them a tenner.

"Strangers in the night, exchanging glances......"

pookie82

Liam Byrne wrote: »

"Strangers in the night, exchanging glances......"

:D:D

I'll give you a fiver for effort

pookie82

DublinWriter wrote: »

WRONG!

I detest the whole 'moral relativity' argument when used as an excuse to let people off the hook for not even knowing their own mother tongue.

Basic punctuation in the English language is not feckin' rocket science; sure there are some very obscure rules governing the use of the apostrophe, but there's no excuse for not knowing the two basic possessive and contractive uses of the apostrophe.

I nearly lose it every time I drive by a local garage with a sign up saying Trade In's Accepted - and this is isn't a small operation, it's one of the biggest Renault dealerships in the country!

Bad grammar and punctuation to me is about as offensive someone with B.O.

I don't understand it when people go to the trouble of inserting a possessive apostrophe when there's no need for it. Leaving it out is far more understandable than randomly deciding for no good reason that one must go in, neglecting to check it out and paying to have it laminated/sprayed onto a sign.

I have a teddy bear with a slogan on the front with this kind of error. Someone spent their precious time SEWING ON AN APOSTROPHE THAT DIDN'T NEED TO BE THERE. Madness.

ejmaztec

In my local town, a guy opened a shop selling antiques. Above the shop was a large, "professionally" done sign. All that was written on the sign was "Antique's". I tried to explain to him that he should get the sign "fixed", and then went on to talk about the apostrophe.

After a minute, or so, I gave up. It just didn't sink in. The sign would still be there, had the building not been demolished a couple of years later.

SarahChambers

TheZohan wrote: »

I think if you're going to pass judgement you need to make sure your own grammar is perfect.


For example it's "etc.", not "etc".

As long as people try their best that's cool in my book.

I dnt get dat, i cud rite n txt spek nd stil make a valid point

TheZohanS

SarahChambers wrote: »

I dnt get dat, i cud rite n txt spek nd stil make a valid point

Oh please God don't!

Holmer

ejmaztec wrote: »

In my local town, a guy opened a shop selling antiques. Above the shop was a large, "professionally" done sign. All that was written on the sign was "Antique's". I tried to explain to him that he should get the sign "fixed", and then went on to talk about the apostrophe.

After a minute, or so, I gave up. It just didn't sink in. The sign would still be there, had the building not been demolished a couple of years later.

There's a woman who lives near me who recently opened a Pilates studio. So now she has a big sign outside her house:
"Pilate's Studio"

I always want to stop the car and add a slogan like "for when you want to wash your hands of stress"