[Vegas Bound]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

I hope irregardless was used jokingly...

Did I faux pas?

[Vegas Bound]

Originally Posted by Blue_6.2

Either very well placed satire or

Did I faux pas?

[SquawkVFR]

This is one of the few things, if not the only thing, that brings out the “Well actually” in me. People think the art of communication has declined and think that grammar and spelling was better in their generation. It’s not true at all.

People type (write if you prefer) like they speak. I will, however, concede much of the gibberish on here an indictment of the American education system. Trust me when I tell you, the people that need to know proper English, know proper English.

That’s why you see so much of this when people ask about why is my car making a thumpin noise wen I get in second gear at 100 miles ph on a uphill In Maine on a week en when the whether is 34ndegrss. I cant finger it out so,please help!

I should have went to,the dealer and I woul7mhavendid but it was a Sunday and they wasn’t open. What do,I do!


You pretty much get his point. So don’t let it bother you....you’ll cringe yourself to death...

[kevint]

Originally Posted by SquawkVFR

This is one of the few things, if not the only thing, that brings out the “Well actually” in me. People think the art of communication has declined and think that grammar and spelling was better in their generation. It’s not true at all.

People type (write if you prefer) like they speak. I will, however, concede much of the gibberish on here an indictment of the American education system. Trust me when I tell you, the people that need to know proper English, know proper English.

That’s why you see so much of this when people ask about why is my car making a thumpin noise wen I get in second gear at 100 miles ph on a uphill In Maine on a week en when the whether is 34ndegrss. I cant finger it out so,please help!

I should have went to,the dealer and I woul7mhavendid but it was a Sunday and they wasn’t open. What do,I do!


You pretty much get his point. So don’t let it bother you....you’ll cringe yourself to death...

I'm willing to let most things go as long as Comic Sans is never used again--that shit needs to be purged from written history. Using those words isn't new, either.

[SquawkVFR]

Originally Posted by kevint

I'm willing to let most things go as long as Comic Sans is never used again--that shit needs to be purged from written history. Using those words isn't new, either.

That was a Microsoft thing I think. You’re absolutely right, it’s the eye ball equivalent of fingernails on a chalkboard.

[arpad_m]

Latest trending fad is "would of" instead of "would've" or "would have", which gives me the creeps every time.

Since I was originally educated outside the US, can someone enlighten me where this is coming from? People no longer care, or were they never taught and are trying to spell out the weak "v" in the ˈwu̇-dəv they hear, or...?

[Rob3D]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Latest trending fad is "would of" instead of "would've" or "would have", which gives me the creeps every time.

Since I was originally educated outside the US, can someone enlighten me where this is coming from? People no longer care, or were they never taught and are trying to spell out the weak "v" in the ˈwu̇-dəv they hear, or...?

The reason is simple. You have “by the book” correct grammar and you have communication.

If I tell you “I would have gone to the store except it was closed.”

Or

“I would of went to the store but it was closed.”

Is there any confusion in what I just told you, or are you completely baffled by the improper grammar?

Here’s a great example of communication vs. text book grammar.



<<_P7. IS THIS QUOTE CLOSED? *>>"Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created<<*_S1 PASSIVE VOICE: are created *>> equal. <<*_S3. LONG SENTENCE: 29 words *>><<*_G3. SPLIT INTO 2 SENTENCES? *>>

Now we are engaged<<*_S1. PASSIVE VOICE: are engaged *>> in a great<<*_U9. IS THIS JUSTIFIED? great *>> civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure.<<*_G3. SPLIT INTO 2 SENTENCES? *>> We are met<<*_S1 PASSIVE VOICE: are met *>> on a great<<*_U9. IS THIS JUSTIFIED? great *>> battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place for those who gave their lives that the nation might live.<<*_S3. LONG SENTENCE: 27 WORDS *>> It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But<<*_S7. SENTENCE BEGINS WITH "BUT" *>>, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate�we cannot consecrate�we cannot hallow�this ground.<<*_S11. IS SENTENCE TOO NEGATIVE? *>> The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract.<<*S11. IS SENTENCE TOO NEGATIVE? *>> The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget<<*_U21. NEGATIVE: never forget *>> what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated<<*_S1. PASSIVE VOICE: be dedicated *>> here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.<<*_S3. LONG SENTENCE: 26 WORDS *>> It is rather<<*_S9. WEAK SENTENCE START: It is rather *>>for us to be here dedicated<<*_S1. PASSIVE VOICE: be here dedicated *>> to the great<<*_U9. IS THIS JUSTIFIED? great *>> task remaining before us�that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion�that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom�and that government of the people, by the<<*_S11. IS THIS SENTENCE TOO NEGATIVE? *>><<*_G3. SPLIT INTO 2 SENTENCES? *>><<*_G9. IS the BEING USED CORRECTLY? *>><<*_S3. LONG SENTENCE: 72 WORDS *>> people, for the people, shall not perish<<*_U21. NEGATIVE: not perish *>> from the earth.<<*_P7. IS THIS QUOTE CLOSED?*>>"

[arpad_m]

Thanks a lot for the examples, Rob3D. I always thought written communication needed to be held to a higher standard of grammatical correctness, simply on account of it being preserved (potentially) forever. I will concede that said standards evolve over time, so it isn't a straightforward affair.

Now I'm not trying to be the grammar police and never call this out in an actual topical thread, just found it interesting and, I'll be honest, a bit jarring. Then again, English is my second language and I may well be more sensitive simply because it was learned and not acquired in my case.

By the way, the argument that these wrong formats can still be understood is dangerous—all human languages have an excessive amount of redundancy to allow for mistakes to remain unobtrusive, but negligently chipping off "reserves at the fringes" eventually leads to erosion in what does actually matter (tenses, subject identity etc.). Also, communication patterns shape the brain throughout life and thus have longer term consequences on coherency of thought.

[Rob3D]

Dude. You live in Tennessee. If improper grammar jars you, then y’all cleaning yor britches in the warsher while watchin’ them volunteers on the tv, must make your head explode.

[JKSully]

I'm with Arpad, I cringe at the decline of the written language, too. Justify it all you want, but anything beyond a simple typo that is a legitimate mistake and I automatically make judgments about your intelligence (or more accurately, the lack thereof). The rules exist so that you know how to say what you really mean, and I know how you meant it when I read it or hear it. I once saw someone post a picture in memory of their deceased mother, with a poem on it - another person responded with the statement "I love that I lost my mother last year". By the rules, this person is glad their mother is dead - simple punctuation would have made their intent clear. (And I grew up with this person - the judgment I made about their lack of intelligence is fully justified, believe me.)

I also don't agree with some of the evolutions that people accept - the fact that even experts are OK with losing the Oxford comma rule is disturbing. An example I always like to use is this internet-famous one, which gives you a very different opinion about Nelson Mandela:

“Highlights of Peter Ustinov's global tour include encounters with Nelson Mandela, an 800-year-old demigod and a dildo collector.”

For what it's worth - the "would of" instead of "would've" is a phonetic spelling thing - most people think they are saying "of" so that's what they type.

[95 imp]

Eye dunt no whut ewe giz ar cumplayneng aboot.....

Et al seamz gud two mi....

[arpad_m]

now I need to wash out my eyes... thanks for the treat (and the info), guys

[trm2]

Originally Posted by 95 imp

Eye dunt no whut ewe giz ar cumplayneng aboot.....

Et al seamz gud two mi....

Cumplayneng aboot? Now you are adding Canadian?