Is grammar/spelling going down the drain?

kneemos

AerynSun wrote: »

It's a thing that you run in the print media. Kinda like stuff you see on the interwebs, but it actually gets printed out with real ink, on real paper, and distributed en masse to the general public (whether they buy the publication or get it for free a la Metro Herald on the morning Dart).

The thought of all of those trees dying, only to have spelling and grammar errors perpetuated through them... brings an unhappy tear to my money-grubbing eye.

A newspaper?
I think it's the smugness that winds people up.

Gordon

People have been complaining about spelling and grammar errors for decades, maybe even centuries. This is most likely because language is evolving, and the very fact that people _don't_ stick rigidly to the rules of current English/language allows our words to change through time, and our punctuation, and even our grammar. Language evolution is constant, you can tell this if you try to read a text from a couple of centuries ago.

Doesn't mean I don't like to stick to the rules and have tidy text, but a good rule of thumb is: you've got to know the rules in order to know which rules to break.

Eeden

nomdeboardie wrote: »

We're on the way to loosing the correct written versions of some words completely...

I used to be completely anal about grammar and spelling mistakes; then I realised that a lot of grammar rules are just stupid, and that as long as you can communicate what you mean, that's all you need.

Some people (for example with dyslexia, etc) just can't do proper spelling. It's not a moral failing or laziness.

Obviously, if you work for a newspaper or similar, you should try to get things right. But rules about things like (for example) splitting infinitives are often a hangover from Latin grammar, which has nothing to do with English grammar.

You will often find that the "correct" versions of some words are relatively recent, and recent "errors" have been used for decades, or even longer.

Getting angry about these things is often just an attempt to promote your own superior education and intelligence. Sometimes there can be a touch of xenophobia about grammar nerds, as well.

AerynSun

kneemos wrote: »

A newspaper?
I think it's the smugness that winds people up.

Newspapers, magazines, posters, banners... anything that involves actual ink on actual paper (or whatever synthetic material is being used). The planet can't afford the assault on the environment for the sake of some poorly-spelled advertisements.

Smug? Meee? Little old me?

AerynSun

Eeden wrote: »

Sometimes there can be a touch of xenophobia about grammar nerds, as well.

Ah, that's true now. I'm African. And I do like to stick it to the European man with my high standard of well-articulated written work!

wil

I think it's very much down to context. On or should that be in an on-line forum, talking (mostly) shyte, it's more informal speak to not overdo the grammering anyway.

If you have a serious point to get across then the legibility factor is more important but you still have to take into account context, choice of word, turn of phrase or emotional impact.

Newspapers and professionals etc., for them writing is a craft, a trade so they should show that. You wouldn't accept a poor paint job on your car, why should they be any different.

I actually find GNNs (those who react to so called GNs) to be equally as pedantic as GNs themselves. It's like they are waiting to be offended.
Just like trolls, IGNORE.

Femme_Fatale

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Not illegible, but unreadable. In the circumstances, I feel I should point that out.

Illegible refers to bad handwriting, while unreadable refers to poor writing.

Ah, fuk it! Of all the threads...

shopaholic01

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Ah, fuk it! Of all the threads...

I have to say I'm laughing at all the 'last edited by X' taglines appearing at the end of posts.

*Furiously checks post*:pac:

Monkeybonkers

kneemos wrote: »

Standards are good but grammar Nazi types can be very pedantic and anal,pisses people off rightly.

You could have left out the 'and' in that sentence.

Is that the opposite of being a grammar nazi?

nomdeboardie

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Do you not mean ALOT of money.

http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.ie/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

:pac::pac::pac:
I couldn't believe this wasn't from "The Oatmeal"...thought TO must have rebranded or been ripped off, but apparently TO's author endorses hyperboleandahalf

Gordon

pedantic and anal

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

You could have left out the 'and' in that sentence.

'pedantic anal'? I imagine that wouldn't be as romantic.

Stavro Mueller

Maybe we just think standards are slipping because we're now getting to see people's spelling/grammar on social media, messages etc. Years ago you'd not have known that your best friend didn't know their there's from their they'res. Or something

None of it explains why the word "of" seems to have replaced "have" though. We need to hunt down the first person who typed this and boil them in oil.

Eeden

cymbaline wrote: »

Maybe we just think standards are slipping because we're now getting to see people's spelling/grammar on social media, messages etc. Years ago you'd not have known that your best friend didn't know their there's from their they'res. Or something

None of it explains why the word "of" seems to have replaced "have" though. We need to hunt down the first person who typed this and boil them in oil.

Standards have been slipping forever! Same as the Youth Of Today are always worse that the Youth Of My Day!

Where will it all end? We won't be able to communicate at all! :eek:

AerynSun

cymbaline wrote: »

None of it explains why the word "of" seems to have replaced "have" though. We need to hunt down the first person who typed this and boil them in oil.

I could of explained it you, if you'd of just axed me. :rolleyes:

Stavro Mueller

Got to be a midlander.... They're really fond of axing their loved ones

TheShizz

Am I right in saying that there was a criminal error on the front page of The Sun newspaper the other day?

The story was about some Irish Islamic extremist who had plotted to kill Prince Harry, but the headline was something like; "Nut's plot Prince Harry murder" or something of that nature. No need for the apostrophe?

wil

The Backwards Man wrote: »

.... Professional writers that do this regularly are nothing short of contemptible though, imo.

Loved that movie "Contemptible Me" just sayin

AerynSun wrote: »

I could of explained it you, if you'd of just axed me. :rolleyes:

well get reddy too be axed:p

AerynSun

TheShizz wrote: »

Am I right in saying that there was a criminal error on the front page of The Sun newspaper the other day?

The story was about some Irish Islamic extremist who had plotted to kill Prince Harry, but the headline was something like; "Nut's plot Prince Harry murder" or something of that nature. No need for the apostrophe?

For shizzle my nizzle, if there was one extremist, then it should have read:
"Nut's plot: Prince Harry murder"
But if there were two or more extremists, then it should have read:
"Nuts plot Prince Harry murder"

But it's The Sun... so...

AerynSun

wil wrote: »

Loved that movie "Contemptible Me" just sayin

well get reddy too be axed:p

I'm sew very touché'd: your axing me early, knot even weighting four Valentines's Day *blusher*

Monkeybonkers

Gordon wrote: »

'pedantic anal'?

Sounds sore! :P

Apparently 'anal' now stands for 'and all'. Still sounds sore :pac:

TheShizz

AerynSun wrote: »

For shizzle my nizzle, if there was one extremist, then it should have read:
"Nut's plot: Prince Harry murder"
But if there were two or more extremists, then it should have read:
"Nuts plot Prince Harry murder"

But it's The Sun... so...

Ah I'm with you, as in "this is one nut's plot to kill Prince Harry". It was probably - and hopefully - just one of them so.

dxhound2005

A deranged man breaks free from a mental institution and rapes a woman in the laundry before running for it.

The headline?

"Nut Screws Washer and Bolts".


Sorry.

Gordon

TheShizz wrote: »

Am I right in saying that there was a criminal error on the front page of The Sun newspaper the other day?

The story was about some Irish Islamic extremist who had plotted to kill Prince Harry, but the headline was something like; "Nut's plot Prince Harry murder" or something of that nature. No need for the apostrophe?

Was it the one in the star?

Looks fine to me. The grammar.

Femme_Fatale

Yeh it was referring to one nut and his plot to do yadda yadda.

AerynSun

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Yeh it was referring to one nut and his plot to do yadda yadda.

Are you entirely and convincingly certain that it's 'yadda yadda', as apposed to 'yadda-yadda'?

superglue

kneemos wrote: »

Standards are good but grammar Nazi types can be very pedantic and anal,pisses people off rightly.

Ya Dey Do B Anal Anal So Dey Do!!1!

Frank Lee Midere

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

Spelling has never been better, even 15 years ago only a certain percentage of the population wrote words down daily; students, doctors, journalists and that, but now everyone writes sh1t online or whatever.

Sure. Nobody wrote anything 15 years ago. Except on stone tablets.

wil

dxhound2005 wrote: »

A deranged man breaks ...etc
Sorry.

A dearranged man walks in to a bra..

sorryless

shopaholic01

superglue wrote: »

Ya Dey Do B Anal Anal So Dey Do!!1!

Does be.

Frank Lee Midere

The Sun's article was correct: the Irish nut had a plan to attack the queen. It was his plan. So the possessive apostrophe was correct.

As for their and there, it's often caused by autocorrect; however there are people who get it wrong in both cases all the time. It's so close, they know they can't use there ( or their) all the time, and yet so far.