RE: Grammatical annoyances (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message

lighthearted -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 8:33:45 PM)

rampant apostrophes...
all the dominant's around here
not enough twue submissive's
ate too many cheeseburger's
[:D]

edited for lameness



ghitaPVH -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 8:43:02 PM)

I always have to go back and fix "I could care less" to "I couldn't care less" and I see alot of people make the same mistake. Both in chat/email and in verbal speech. Drives me nuts.


ghita



Daddysredhead -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 9:16:26 PM)

I hate when people can't spell properly in the subject line of a thread they are creating.  What the hell?  If you want to look like an idiot, do that shit over and over.  I've seen a couple of repeat offenders for this and it just makes me wonder if they got past the 6th grade in school.  [8|]



Emperor1956 -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 9:36:58 PM)

FR.  Oh, this is a wonderful thread.  So many grammatical peeves to choose from.  I'm a prescriptivist.  I'm a slave to those great Dominants, Strunk & White.  I actually have worshipped at Kate Turabian's feet.  And I have a small Fowler shrine in the office.  Yes, when it comes to the English language, I'm an admitted anal-retentive.  Uh...does "anal-retentive" have a hyphen?

E.



BKSir -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 9:54:22 PM)

My biggest two pet peeves are, in this order:
1:  'U', 'B', 'R', '2', 'Y' and 'C' are NOT WORDS!  Nor are 'Rly',  'Bcuz', 'oic'  and others of their kind.  If you  don't have the respect to  spell out a couple three letter words, then I refuse to have the respect to talk with you.  Nor do I have the time to waste on your idiocy.

2:  And this one I can have a bit of leniency on, for a very short period of time, but I hate when people can't tell the difference between 'To'/'Too'/Two, or 'Their'/There'/They're', and other homonyms.  This is 4th grade english class, at the absolute latest.

Of course, on example number two, I can understand illiteracy, either functional or true, and will do my best to assist in overcoming it.  But when dealing with people whom I know do not have any sort of learning impediment, I have no patience or leniency for such a thing.



Leatherist -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 9:58:58 PM)

I wonder if you could do like a face slapping scene with those "words"

Like,you cup the side of his face with one hand, and have him read what he wrote to you.....

And he says "U".

WHAP!!!!!!

How was that spelled again? Y...O...U  ?  Is that right?
 
Ok,let's move along here,
 
 *gulp* "bcuz"

WHAP!!!!!!!!

Please, do me the honor of spelling that for me, *correctly*.
[;)]
 
 
 
 
 
 



sunshinemiss -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 10:48:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

"Proactive" is a real word and it doesn't mean either "active" or "reactive."  It's not redundant.

("Figment of one's imagination"--now THAT'S redundant.  By definition, a figment resides in one's imagination.)



But, but, but LandM

I thought figments were what fig newtons were made out of.  Ohhhh you burst mah bubble!



sunshinemiss -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (7/31/2008 10:51:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Emperor1956

Uh...does "anal-retentive" have a hyphen?

E.


No.

sunshine,
grammar goddess



Shadow-tiger -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/1/2008 1:59:14 AM)

I have been recently reminded of another annoyance. When people use lol in sentences in such a way that it takes on a form akin to the word stop in telegrams.

Ship has hit an iceberg lol Not enough life boats for everybody lol Send help fast lol

I hardly ever see the other forms such as rofl and fdl either. Kids on the internet these days, no sense of what acronyms are good for!



Lordandmaster -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/1/2008 9:22:58 AM)

I see LMAO all the time.



Roselaure -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/1/2008 5:19:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

"Proactive" is a real word and it doesn't mean either "active" or "reactive."  It's not redundant.

("Figment of one's imagination"--now THAT'S redundant.  By definition, a figment resides in one's imagination.)


I don't think I said it wasn't a "real" word.  Every word was made up sometime, "proactive" appears to have been made up in the 30s or 40s (depending on which source you go for) and popularized by Stephen Covey.  It's a word used by people for whom "active" is not active enough.  To me that falls into the same category as "very unique".  Just one of my many personal pet peeves.



dcnovice -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/1/2008 5:20:58 PM)

quote:

Ship has hit an iceberg lol Not enough life boats for everybody lol Send help fast lol


Those LOLs may explain why other ships didn't move quickly enough.



dcnovice -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/1/2008 5:22:58 PM)

quote:

Uh...does "anal-retentive" have a hyphen?


LOL! (Sorry, Shadow!)

PBS used to sell a T-shirt saying "does anal-retentive have a hyphen?"

I never bought it, though, because the lowercase d would have driven me berserk.



Lordandmaster -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/2/2008 8:07:56 AM)

It doesn't really matter when the word was invented; it's not redundant, and it doesn't mean the same thing as "active."  Just look it up in OED.  There's a technical definition first, and then the definition that most people use:

quote:

Of a person, action, policy, etc.: creating or controlling a situation by taking the initiative and anticipating events or problems, rather than just reacting to them after they have occurred


That is not the same thing as "active."  We PROACTIVELY invaded Iraq.  We also ACTIVELY invaded Iraq--but that's a different sentence with a different meaning.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Roselaure

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

"Proactive" is a real word and it doesn't mean either "active" or "reactive."  It's not redundant.


I don't think I said it wasn't a "real" word.  Every word was made up sometime, "proactive" appears to have been made up in the 30s or 40s (depending on which source you go for) and popularized by Stephen Covey.  It's a word used by people for whom "active" is not active enough.  To me that falls into the same category as "very unique".  Just one of my many personal pet peeves.



BlueSpirit -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/2/2008 8:31:11 AM)

There is a saying:

Those that like to show themselves to be an authority on grammar and spelling often do so because they are an authority on nothing else.

The point of language is to get an idea across, the rest is just fluff.



Roselaure -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/2/2008 8:37:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

It doesn't really matter when the word was invented; it's not redundant, and it doesn't mean the same thing as "active."  Just look it up in OED.  There's a technical definition first, and then the definition that most people use:

quote:

Of a person, action, policy, etc.: creating or controlling a situation by taking the initiative and anticipating events or problems, rather than just reacting to them after they have occurred


That is not the same thing as "active."  We PROACTIVELY invaded Iraq.  We also ACTIVELY invaded Iraq--but that's a different sentence with a different meaning.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Roselaure

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

"Proactive" is a real word and it doesn't mean either "active" or "reactive."  It's not redundant.


I don't think I said it wasn't a "real" word.  Every word was made up sometime, "proactive" appears to have been made up in the 30s or 40s (depending on which source you go for) and popularized by Stephen Covey.  It's a word used by people for whom "active" is not active enough.  To me that falls into the same category as "very unique".  Just one of my many personal pet peeves.



"Rather than just REacting".  Right.  Acting.  "Proactive" is not necessary. 

I'm just geeky enough to love talking about this sort of thing.



Roselaure -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/2/2008 8:40:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueSpirit

There is a saying:

Those that like to show themselves to be an authority on grammar and spelling often do so because they are an authority on nothing else.

The point of language is to get an idea across, the rest is just fluff.



And the point of eating is to keep body and soul together.  But there's nothing wrong with either enjoying a fabulous meal or taking an interest in the intricacies of the language.



BlueSpirit -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/2/2008 8:51:35 AM)


Does an artist have to use paint the same way as another? Wouldn’t we consider that a kind of tedium?
Strict rules stifle innovation.
 



LadyRainfire -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/2/2008 8:51:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shadow-tiger

I have been recently reminded of another annoyance. When people use lol in sentences in such a way that it takes on a form akin to the word stop in telegrams.

Ship has hit an iceberg lol Not enough life boats for everybody lol Send help fast lol

I hardly ever see the other forms such as rofl and fdl either. Kids on the internet these days, no sense of what acronyms are good for!


I read this post and then shortly afterwards saw a post on another thread where "LOL" was used in this exact manner. I lost it, I couldn't stop laughing for 5 minutes. [sm=lol.gif]  And still giggle when I think about it.



sunshinemiss -> RE: Grammatical annoyances (8/2/2008 9:20:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlueSpirit

There is a saying:

Those that like to show themselves to be an authority on grammar and spelling often do so because they are an authority on nothing else.

The point of language is to get an idea across, the rest is just fluff.



Here's what I said on page two, same thread:
 
I hate when people correct other people's grammatical mistakes... If you know what someone is saying, it's just plain bull shit rude to correct them.  I don't walk around correcting people's speech... "so, waddya gonna do tanight?"  I don't say "correct pronunciation is:  so, what are you going to do tonight"  Get the fuck off your high horse I say...


Now, I agree that amongst native speakers that what you have said is true.  As you can see I have certain... strong feelings about it... However, I teach English as a Second Language, and without grammar OH GOD... Try explaining "how much" versus "how many" or .... "some" and "any" to people who are not native speakers. 

well wishes,
sunshine



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.711914E-02