It's Only Grammar! (Full Version)

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



Message

ThatDaveGuy69 -> It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 3:50:36 PM)

I know this thread exists elsewhere and has been beaten to death but fer chrissakes, people, please try to put just a little bit of effort into what you write!  Our words here are the only way we have of getting to know each other short of meeting in person.  And like it or not, we all judge each other based on th evidence presented.

Here is a quick reminder of the most common mistakes:

there = location - The ballgag is right there on the wall.
their = possesive - I went to a new dungeon and had to play by their rules
they're = short for they are - You know those rules? They're in place for a reason.

to = location/direction - She is going to the dungeon.
too = also/amount - I want to play in the dungeon too!
         This dungeon has too many rules!
two = 2 - The dungeon has two DM's tonight.

than = refers to choices - I would rather be flogged than get a root canal.
then = time reference - I have to hit the ATM, then go to the dungeon.

here = location - I have the key right here in my pocket
hear = refers to sound - The dungeon is well insulated so people outside can't hear the screams.

weather = refers to meteorlogical conditions - Oh the weather outside is frightful...
whether = refer to choice - Going to the dungeon depends on whether we can get a ride.

I vs. me
Shelia and I went to the dungeon.
Simple rule: take the other person out of the sentance: too many people would say "Shelia and me went..." or "Me and Shelia went..."  Take "Shelia" out and you wind up with "Me went..."  Very obviously incorrect.  Also, proper grammar says to put yourself last: "Shelia and I" instead of "I and Shelia"




In my senior year of high school I had an English Lit class and we spent (wasted) over a month on grammar.  I always did well on the quizzes and when the other kids asked me how I knew it I just replied that I learned in back in 4th grade - WHEN THEY TAUGHT IT THE 1ST TIME!

Not trying to rip anyone - merely trying to pre-empt some incorrect usage.
And oh how I wish CM had a spell checker.  I'm a fairly good speller but I'm also pretty lazy :D

Shields up, flame away!

~Dave






faerytattoodgirl -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 3:53:59 PM)

some of us never got the chance to finish or go to school.  i am one of them.  due to health.  i might have a grade 9-10...at best.  greater than 60% absentee due to that health.

never planned to go back either...no reason to.  so i like my short sentances.



windchymes -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 3:59:02 PM)

Ok, then could you please explain that whole "who/whom" thing to me???

(Not you, faerie) [;)]



faerytattoodgirl -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 4:14:34 PM)

who is a rock band...
whom is the people that listen to them.

yes i know you didnt want me to explain...i couldnt resist.



LookieNoNookie -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 4:14:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69

I know this thread exists elsewhere and has been beaten to death but fer chrissakes, people, please try to put just a little bit of effort into what you write!  Our words here are the only way we have of getting to know each other short of meeting in person.  And like it or not, we all judge each other based on the evidence presented.

Here is a quick reminder of the most common mistakes:

There = location - The ballgag is right there on the wall.
Their = possesive - I went to a new dungeon and had to play by their rules
They're = short for they are - You know those rules? They're in place for a reason.  (Caps are required at the beginning of a sentence...would have been acceptable however, had you used "quotes").

To = location/direction - She is going to the dungeon.
Too = also/amount - I want to play in the dungeon too!
   This dungeon has too many rules!
Two = 2 - The dungeon has two DM's tonight.

Than = refers to choices - I would rather be flogged than get a root canal.
Then = time reference - I have to hit the ATM, then go to the dungeon.

Here = location - I have the key right here in my pocket
Hear = refers to sound - The dungeon is well insulated so people outside can't hear the screams.

Weather = refers to meteorlogical conditions - Oh the weather outside is frightful...
Whether = refer to choice - Going to the dungeon depends on whether we can get a ride.

I vs. me
Shelia and I went to the dungeon.
Simple rule; (semi colon....not colon) take the other person out of the sentance: too many people would say "Shelia and me went..." or "Me and Shelia went..."  Take "Shelia" out and you wind up with "Me went..."  Very obviously incorrect.  Also, proper grammar says to put yourself last: "Shelia and I" instead of "I and Shelia"

(Delete extraneous space here).


In my senior year of high school I had an English Lit class and we spent (wasted) over a month on grammar.  I always did well on the quizzes and when the other kids asked me how I knew it ("the correct phrasing" / "the correct answer") I just replied that I learned in (it...not "in") back in (the) 4th grade - WHEN THEY TAUGHT IT (very good...correct usage and placement of "it") THE 1ST TIME!

(I'm) not trying to rip anyone - (I'm) merely trying to pre-empt ("preempt"...no hyphen required) some incorrect usage.

(Sentence break, "stacking" is incorrect).

And oh how I wish CM had a spell checker (Firefox has one).  I'm a fairly good speller (indeed you are) but I'm also pretty lazy (ditto) :D

Shields up, flame away!

~Dave







tweedydaddy -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 4:42:50 PM)

I think Gammar is important, after all, he makes a good job of playing frasier, though we like Niles better.



NorthernGent -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 4:44:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69

I learned in back in 4th grade - WHEN THEY TAUGHT IT THE 1ST TIME!



It's a matter of personal taste. My school days were spent thinking of any one of the following: the previous history lesson, WW1 poetry from English Lit, next Saturday's football, or Claire's tits three desks down to the right. I really wasn't interested in whether or not a noun is an adverb and that's a sentiment I pretty much hold today.

I'd take independent thought over the ability to regurgitate an apostrophe.



atursvcMaam -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 4:57:20 PM)

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Grammar was fighting of the indians singlehanded.

Should that have been Grandma?  Should that have been written as singlehandedly? 



TNstepsout -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:11:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: windchymes

Ok, then could you please explain that whole "who/whom" thing to me???

(Not you, faerie) [;)]


This is a pretty good explanation:

"I know: subject and object sound pretty abstract, but it's easy. If we think about people, the subject of the sentence is the person doing something, and the object of the sentence is having something done to them. If I step on Squiggly, then I am the subject and Squiggly is the object.

Still having a hard time remembering? Here's my favorite mnemonic: If I say, "I love you," you are the object of my affection, and you is also the object of the sentence (because I am loving you, making me the subject and you the object). How's that? I love you. You are the object of my affection and my sentence.  It's like a Valentine's Day card and grammar mnemonic all rolled into one.

OK. So you all asked about who versus whom, but what I think you really want to know is just when to use whom, because most people don't go around throwing unneeded whoms into their sentences. So remember, you use whom when you are referring to the object of a sentence. Use whom when you are referring to the object of a sentence.

For example, it is "Whom did you step on?" if you are trying to figure out that I had squished Squiggly. Similarly, it would be "Whom do I love?" because you are asking about the object -- the target of my love. I know, it's shocking, but the Rolling Stones were being grammatically incorrect when they belted out the song "Who Do You Love?" which I think was originally written by Bo Diddley.

So when is it OK to use who? If you were asking about the subject of these sentences, then you would use who. For example, "Who loves you?" and "Who stepped on Squiggly?" In both these cases the one you are asking about is the subject -- the one taking action, not the one being acted upon.

Still too hard to remember? OK, here's the quick and dirty tip. Like whom, the pronoun him ends with m. When you're trying to decide whether to use who or whom, ask yourself if the answer to the question would be he or him. That's the trick: if you can answer the question being asked with him, then use whom, and it's easy to remember because they both end with m."

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/who-versus-whom.aspx



ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:24:37 PM)

LookieNookie: thanks :)

Although in my defense, the listed items were, in fact, part of a list.

Than = refers to choices - I would rather be flogged than get a root canal.

I'll happily admit I'm wrong on this - right after I look it up in the grammar book I "liberated" from my high school ;)

I just get a little cheesed when I read "I would rather be flogged then get a root canal."  Unless, of course, the author meant he/she wanted to be flogged BEFORE getting the root canal.  That would be different :D

I'm also not terribly impressed by people who somehow take pride in their lack of education.  FTD excepted.  Kind of like proclaiming "I don't read" or "I don't watch TV".

Here in the US, people who went to private schools (typically Catholic schools) tend to look down on those of us who went to public schools.  Some of the dumbest people I've ever met went to Catholic schools and were "taught" but nuns.  Of course I know some pretty dumb public school kids, too.  Whatcha gonna do...

Oh, and I survived the English Lit class despite having Pamela's ass-length hair to play with in front of me and Chrissie's cute little feet in my lap.  Those were the days...  :)

FTD: Just out of curiosity: has your lack of education hampered you in terms of working?  While I managed to graduate HS in the allotted 4 years, I never got any sort of college degree.  And I KNOW that's screwed me out of a lot of good jobs.  My brother dropped out of HS and had a real tough time of it.  He joined the Army for a couple of years and then found that still wasn't enough to get most of the jobs he applied for.  Once he got his GED that changed dramatically.

BTW: I tend to drop a lot of e's and t's if I'm not paying close attention.  My way-cool backlit keyboard is started to die :(

Lookie: I don't think I can explain who/whom.  I can usually get it right and/or tell when it's wrong.  But I would have to look it up to explain it.  Can you take that one?

Thanks again,

~Dave



ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:29:21 PM)

TNstepsout:

I love you, too :D

And that's a damn-good explanation that I will remember for at least the next 5 minutes...

~Dave



faerytattoodgirl -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:30:52 PM)

quote:

has your lack of education hampered you in terms of working?


my lack of health has hampered any hope in working.



seeksfemslave -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:32:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: windchymes
Ok, then could you please explain that whole "who/whom" thing to me???
(Not you, faerie) [;)]

Butting in I say lets have a go but bear in mind I made an error, gasp, on the maths thread.
"whom" has at least two distinct uses ...
the Dative case: usage following a preposition as follows.
For whom the bell tolls
To whom it may concern
For/to here are the prepositions.

The Accusative case: usage when referring to the object in a sentence
basic sentence structure is.... Subject verb Object
so
Johnny called Sylvie whom he had known for many years
Sylvie is the object, in more ways than one, but in this case grammatically.
or
Johnny who did not know Sylvie very well decided to call her and etc etc etc etc
Johnny is the subject of the sentence

Anybody disagree?

adding for any interested Brit: I bet I may well be one of the few on CM who actually had to "do" Latin at school.
I did not go to  grammar school but a technical school which amalgamated with a secondary modern to become one of the earliest comprehensives in the UK.

Trying to learn German will teach you some grammar.    and how.!



atursvcMaam -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:35:26 PM)

a quick rule of thumb for Who/whom.  Try to imagine the answer try installing i/me or she/her or he/him as the answer.
Who took the cookie from the cookie jar?  i did, he did, or she did.
You want me to give a hundred dollars to whom?  Maybe "me" is the only palatable answer, although "him" or "her" would be gramatically correct.



Termyn8or -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:46:03 PM)

Then there's always dependent and dependant.

T



Lordandmaster -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:47:03 PM)

"Whoever/whomever" is harder than "who/whom."  You can often do the "he/him" trick to figure out whether you need "who" or "whom," but that same shortcut will lead you astray if you try to apply it to "whoever/whomever."  The key with "whoever" and "whomever" is that their use depends on their function in the RELATIVE clause, not the main clause.  In other words, "I want to kill whoever disagrees with me" is CORRECT, even though most people are apt to think the right word must be "whomever" because it's the object of "kill."  But that's wrong; the key is that "whoever" is the subject of "disagrees" in the RELATIVE clause.  So "He wanted to kill whomever he disagreed with" would be correct too.



Lordandmaster -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:48:33 PM)

Those are interchangeable.  Some dictionaries recognize "dependant" only as a noun, others as either a noun or an adjective.  "Dependent" can always be either.  It's kinda like "farther" and "further," where "further" is always right, and "farther" refers only to distance.

And how many people fuck up "compliment" vs. "complement"?  "Backward" vs. "backwards"?

And I doubt 10% of the population correctly distinguishes between "discreet" and "discrete."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Then there's always dependent and dependant.



atursvcMaam -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 5:57:07 PM)

i'm a pacifist, the thought never entered my mind.



candystripper -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 6:02:42 PM)

It's not just a matter of whether we can communicate on a message board.  I found myself tutoring other law students in the early 1980's who had been permitted to attain Bachelor's degrees without mastering even the rudiments of grammar, most especially, that a dependent clause is not a sentence.
 
For example:
 
I went to the store, because I was hungry.
 
This sentence is complete, but contains a dependent clause "because I was hungry' which acts as an adverb to the verbs in the first clause...in short, it expands on the action of 'going to the store'.
 
Written like this:
 
I went to the store.
 
Because I was hungry.
 
The sentences do not truely make grammatical sense, though intuitively most of us would link them up.
 
Note, however, that 'what my lawyer really meant to write' is not an aid to interpretation of a contract....etc.  For a lawyer to be unable to manage grammatical rules is a serious matter....as if he were an illiterate.  I've run across this issue several times when trying to introduce translations of documents written in a foreign language.  Most courts require some evidence of the translator's expertise in the grammar, etc., of both languages, the original and the translation.
 
However, IMO, the Op is trying to close a barn door after the horse has left.  Common usage of the lanaguage is so different from what I was taught that I suspect the rules will have to migrate as well...and I think the use of an apostrophe for any reason is one such rule.  Another 20 years or so and we'll know.
 
Yes, it'd be refreshing if all the members on these boards checked their grammar and spelling...damn that disappearing edit button...I cringe every time I come across a post of mine with an error after the edit period is over.  I'm just not good at proofreading my own stuff.
 
Nonetheless, I think with a modicum of effort, virtually all posts can be deciphered.  I find when someone tells me I have misinterpreted their meaning, it's more often a dense and intelligently written post which I read a bit too quickly....or that they attempted to use sarcasm and I failed to 'see' it.
 
candystyripper  [sm=pole.gif]
 
P.S.  Ya, IME those of us who went to Catholic school do feel something about those who attended public school...but it's a sense of envy, not disdain, lol. 
 
 



LookieNoNookie -> RE: It's Only Grammar! (10/31/2008 6:07:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69

LookieNookie; (semi colon, not colon) thanks :). (You're welcome).

Although in my defense, the listed items were, (comma not required after "were"...part of previous structure) in fact, part of a list.

Than = refers to choices - I would rather be flogged than get a root canal.

I'll happily admit I'm wrong on this - right after I look it up in the grammar book I "liberated" from my high school ;) <--- period.

I just get a little cheesed when I read "I would rather be flogged then get a root canal."  Unless, of course, the author meant he/she wanted to be flogged BEFORE getting the root canal (which would require a comma after "then").  That would be different :D

I'm also not terribly impressed by people who somehow take pride in their lack of education.  FTD excepted.  Kind of like proclaiming "I don't read" or "I don't watch TV".

Here in the US (a period is required after the "U" and "S", unless of course you meant to suggest a "we" reference, overcapitalized of course), people who went to private schools (typically Catholic schools) tend to look down on those of us who went to public schools.  Some of the dumbest people I've ever met went to Catholic schools and were "taught" but nuns.  Of course I know some pretty dumb public school kids, too.  Whatcha gonna do...

Oh, and I survived the English Lit class despite having Pamela's ass-length hair to play with in front of me and Chrissie's cute little feet in my lap.  Those were the days...  :)

FTD: Just out of curiosity: has your lack of education hampered you in terms of working?  While I managed to graduate HS in the allotted 4 years, I never got any sort of college degree.  And I KNOW that's screwed me out of a lot of good jobs.  My brother dropped out of HS and had a real tough time of it.  He joined the Army for a couple of years and then found that still wasn't enough to get most of the jobs he applied for.  Once he got his GED that changed dramatically.

BTW: I tend to drop a lot of e's and t's if I'm not paying close attention.  My way-cool backlit keyboard is started to die :(

Lookie: I don't think I can explain who/whom.  I can usually get it right and/or tell when it's wrong.  But I would have to look it up to explain it.  Can you take that one? 

I actually know everything.

Thanks again, (You're welcome).

~Dave


T'weren't nothing wrong with your premise...just something about glass houses came to mind when I read it.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875