Fight the Grammer Nazis

[xoxoxoBruce]

Fake language rules can come from respected sources, but that’s no reason to believe them.

None are? None is? They’re both correct.

The girl that I marry. No, it doesn’t have to be whom I marry.

Since you asked. It’s totally legit to use since for because, unless it would cause ambiguity.

Healthy choices. Many of us have been taught that it’s healthy people but healthful foods.

“Till” was there first. In recent decades, somebody launched the mischievous rumor that till is a substandard form of until.

Verbing nouns.

“And” can start a sentence. So can But and However.

Misspelled is not misused. Errors like “faster then a speeding bullet” and “taking a lot of flack” are mistakes in spelling, not comprehension.

The adverb can be “wrong.”

You only live once. Spotting “misplacements” of only is a hobby for some picky readers — they’d rewrite that sentence as “you live only once,” so there’s no way to misinterpret it.

linkhttp://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/id..._rules/?page=1

[Clodfobble]

“Till” was there first. In recent decades, somebody launched the mischievous rumor that till is a substandard form of until. In fact, till is ancient English, and until was formed by combining on and till. If you want to disparage a member of this family, go with ’til, the entirely superfluous 20th-century addition.

That's fascinating! I had no idea.

[Yznhymr]

Gag me with a spoon.

[Juniper]

I never criticize anyone's spelling, punctuation or grammar in discussion board posts or e-mails because the Law of Karma (or something) says that if someone does, he or she is virtually guaranteed to have one of the aforementioned issues with his own post or e-mail.

It's happened to me. Ugh. So embarrassing. I had a brain fart and forgot how to spell "mischievous." It did not go uncorrected.

Besides, it's just rude. People tend to do this when they can't think of any other way to respond in a debate. "Blah blah." "Oh yeah? Well, you can't spell."

The language is evolving. You can tell the difference between someone who knows the rules and breaks them intentionally, for some effect, and someone who just doesn't get it. Or doesn't care.

The only ones I really criticize are the ones who don't care.

[casimendocina]

Originally Posted by Juniper

1. Besides, it's just rude. People tend to do this when they can't think of any other way to respond in a debate. "Blah blah." "Oh yeah? Well, you can't spell."

2. The language is evolving. You can tell the difference between someone who knows the rules and breaks them intentionally, for some effect, and someone who just doesn't get it. Or doesn't care.

So true for both points.

[Rhianne]

Gr8 thread.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Gr8? Gr8? What kind of grammer/spelling is that!

[Happy Monkey]

Grammar.

[xoxoxoBruce]

In only 7 posts.

[Happy Monkey]

I held off for a while.

But please note:

Misspelled is not misused. Errors like “faster then a speeding bullet” and “taking a lot of flack” are mistakes in spelling, not comprehension.

I was correcting spelling, not comprehension.

[Sundae]

I don't criticise. At least I don't think I do.
Sometimes an intelligent person obviously misuses a phrase, word, spelling etc in which case I'll point it out. Not as a criticism, but because I'm sure they'd prefer to know. IRL I'll pick people up on pronunciation. I hope I don't come across as mean, but myself I'd rather be told. Of course there are many typos, slip ups or things that just don't matter and I don't want to ally myself with people that froth at the mouth about those.

Some things I've learned are cultural differences, some are regional. Again - better that I know that.

Do I judge people on their spelling and the writen presentation of their posts? Yes, I do, to an extent. I was going to write sorry, but I'm not sorry. I do not hold anyone to a particularly high standard - my grammar and spelling are workaday. And I know my punctuation is pretty appalling - I consult the internet when writing formally.

But anyone who consistently uses text abbrevs or regularly misuses homonyms will give me a certain opinion about their communication skills.

I'm ashamed to say I didn't see anything wrong in "faster than a speeding bullet", so I'd probably irritate purists myself. I know my enunciation would make experts faint, anyway. And I'd not like UG to parse my posts

I suppose it depends on your definition of Grammar Nazi.
I'll not be breaking down any bookcases any time soon anyway.

[Juniper]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

I don't criticise. At least I don't think I do.

Some things I've learned are cultural differences, some are regional. Again - better that I know that.

Exactly. And at the risk of belaboring the obvious, "criticize" is the American spelling. Or, shall I say, belabouring the obvious?

Which reminds me. A few years ago I wrote an article for a Canadian magazine. I asked the editor, should I try to write it in "Canadian-ese?" Meaning, things like labour, colour, flavour, criticise, etc.?

She said no, Americans just get it all wrong anyhow. Their editors would fix it right up for me, and she appreciated that at least I knew the difference.

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by Sundae

I don't criticise.

Originally Posted by Juniper

Exactly. And at the risk of belaboring the obvious, "criticize" is the American spelling. Or, shall I say, belabouring the obvious?

To correct a year-old misunderstanding, I put criticise in bold for emphasis in reading. It should have been in italics of course. I was saying that yes I noticed errors and yes they bugged me, but if I responded it was not my intention to be critical.

Any.
Way.
Sorry.

I didn't know it was called an Oxford comma.
I was taught to write without it though.

There are many ambiguous sentences in written English.
I once read the sentence "After finishing school, x went on to pursue a career in..." and thought "Hang on, I thought only rich girls went to finishing school? Is that a deliberate joke?"

Er, no. The sentence made perfect sense but I'd read something else into it.

[Lola Bunny]

Originally Posted by Sundae

I didn't know it was called an Oxford comma.
I was taught to write without it though.

The Oxford comma (I never knew it has a name!) was introduced around the early 90's. When we were learning how to write, we weren't supposed to put a comma before the word 'and.' From what I heard, we had lawyers to thank for the grammar change. They needed that extra comma to make things clearer in legal documents.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by Lola Bunny

The Oxford comma (I never knew it has a name!) was introduced around the early 90's. When we were learning how to write, we weren't supposed to put a comma before the word 'and.' From what I heard, we had lawyers to thank for the grammar change. They needed that extra comma to make things clearer in legal documents.

The Oxford comma (?) has been around much longer than the early 90's. It was taught as an optional use of the comma when I was in high school back in the 60's.