Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812?

Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (Full Version)

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

Message

LanceHughes -> Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/14/2012 8:05:34 PM)
A while back, peonForHer complimented me on being able to give a hint for who / whom which I'll repeat here: Use whom (with 'm') when you're expecting a him (with 'm') answer. Likewise Use who (w/o 'm') when you're expecting a he (w/o 'm') answer. Who is at the door? He is at the door. Did you see who hit whom? He hit him. Did you see who got hit? He got hit. Did you see whom hit who? Him hit he. SkkREEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeech. --------------- But peonForHer's compliment contained a challenge, namely that of finding a way to remember the difference between accept and except. YIKES! I just know which to use, but how to help my friends here? And whom cares anyway? Him cares, that's whom cares.... SkkREEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeech. So after thinking on my 20-minute driving commute for a month or 3 - no accidents - well, some close - we have: We accept applications - except from the English. Accepting that man over there, we all saw it. NO! The bride excepted the gift. NO! The bride accepted all the gifts except those from her sister-in-law to be. And now..... we open the thread to accept all exceptions to this simple rule.

tsatske -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/14/2012 8:40:31 PM)
I remeber because except is the one with an X in it, and the one where you are eXcluding something. But I like yours.

yourdarkdesire -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/14/2012 10:38:54 PM)
Love the who/m! I never knew that.

DaNewAgeViking -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 3:41:56 AM)
Keep in mind that English isn't a language. Languages have rules, and there no rules to English; only exceptions. [sm=banghead.gif]

PeonForHer -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 4:13:04 AM)
quote: We accept applications - except from the English. I've gone with tsatske on the X in 'except' as reminder in the past - but I, too, like that one better. [;)] Oh, and because of your who/whom reminding-trick - I've finally got on top of that grammatical rule. Ta!

LadyPact -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 4:16:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaNewAgeViking Keep in mind that English isn't a language. Languages have rules, and there no rules to English; only exceptions. [sm=banghead.gif] Not exactly. It's "American" that isn't a language. American is only a derivative of English.

MadamKNY -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 4:23:48 AM)
It"s funny, when English is your second language the error native speakers make seem, most of the times, hard to understand. I never thought accept an except could make someone confused. As I didn't underarms why people used your and you're interchangeably. Well, later I learned they sound/are pronounced the same, then it made sense, first you knew the sound of your/you"re. I wonder, does accept and except sound/are pronounced in the same way?

MadamKNY -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 4:28:54 AM)
By the way, I typed this from my iPod, quickly reading I saw an underarms, that was autocorrect for understand. Thank you, apple. And by "error" I meant errors. All the rest I assume as my genuine mistakes. :-)

yourdarkdesire -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 8:37:11 AM)
Ack-cept vs. X-cept

LanceHughes -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 5:14:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: yourdarkdesire Ack-cept vs. X-cept True (sort of.) BUT both sides of your equation are exageratted. No one pronounces the "S" side of "X-cept" More like "ek-cept." Similarly, the "ack!" (a suprise when you drop the coffee cup in your monitor) sound is shorter, and more like "ak-cept." TRUE? So we have "ak-cept" vs. "ek-cept" and then the pronunciation of the initial vowels depend on geographic location, NO? Southerners tend to draw vowels out, making this case sound identical. You'd have to get above the Mary-Marry-Merry line to really tell. I think MadameKNY has it pegged

littlewonder -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/15/2012 9:17:51 PM)
. [image]local://upfiles/134279/9BE0FBE879794582B584EE446BEFB6C7.jpg[/image]

TNDommeK -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/16/2012 2:28:57 PM)
OMG the who/whom thing helps out, I never know when to use either one.

angelikaJ -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/16/2012 3:32:38 PM)
Fr: I vs me My trick when I am uncertain is to make it plural... If "we" fits then it is I and if "us" fits then it is me.

dcnovice -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/16/2012 4:43:49 PM)
FR The irony with who and whom, of course, is that the ability to tell someone erred actually indicates that the m wasn't really necessary. Most of the time, the word's position in the sentence tells you its case. That said, I'm an old-fashioned editor, and I continue to maintain the distinction, though I increasingly see even major publications that don't.

onceshattered -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/16/2012 10:32:39 PM)
I will admit that affect and effect are the ones that get me every single time. I consider myself to be fairly bright, but these two words make me feel extremely stupid.

epiphiny43 -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/16/2012 10:52:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaNewAgeViking Keep in mind that English isn't a language. Languages have rules, and there no rules to English; only exceptions. [sm=banghead.gif] FAIL. Logical fallacy. There can be no exceptions if there are no rules. Please don't make me have to explain this? English, either UK or USA, simply has an extraordinary amount of exceptions and irregular verbs, compared to the nearby Romance and other Germanic tongues.

limpshorty -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/17/2012 7:33:59 AM)
English is what happens when an illiterate people are conquered and driven out of a dozen places, over a few thousand years. The languages of the conquerors are serially imposed upon the languages of the conquered. But the conquered are more numerous, and language is a mode, as opposed to a mean or median. And the conquered last longer. So, English has rules. Rules from languages that no longer resemble it. Split infinitives are against the rules, because, in Latin, they are impossible. People say that ain't is ungrammatical. When pressed, they will drop back to saying that as a contraction of ain not it is archaic. BZZZZZT. Yes, ain is archaic, no one uses it. But ain't has been in common usage since Old English. It just ain't high-falutin. Ambrose Bierce said that a dictionary is “A picture of a moment in the history of a language; often mistaken by pedants for a rule book.” Grammar is important, without some care to follow the mode of the day, what you say and what is understood may be far different than you expected. But context is everything. If you are being formal, and expect judgments to be made by others on the content of what you say, grammar becomes much more important. Slavishly following grammatical convention is fine, as long as not everyone does it. Someone has to go fertilize the roots from which New English will grow. In another hundred years, or two, only the French will speak French. They got serious grammar Nazis there. limpshorty

SpyUnderCover -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/22/2012 10:31:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: onceshattered I will admit that affect and effect are the ones that get me every single time. I consider myself to be fairly bright, but these two words make me feel extremely stupid. Affect and effect can sometimes confuse me as well. How about these? Elude and allude: Elude is to evade or escape the grasp of. Allude is to make indirect reference to. Allusion and illusion: The first is an indirect reference to something; the second is a misleading image or trick. Medal, metal, meddle, and mettle. Medal - a small object (usually made of metal) given as an award. Metal - substances like gold, tin, or copper. Meddle - to interfere . Mettle - strength or fortitude. Pedal, peddle, and petal. Pedal - a lever pressed by the foot, like on a bicycle or piano. Peddle - to sell, as in "peddling one's wares." Petal - part of a flower. Phase and faze. Faze means to disturb or disconcert, usually used in sentences like, "He wasn't fazed when I pulled out my crop." Callous and callus. The former means being "hardened," as in feeling no emotion. The latter is what you get on your hands and feet, that is, skin that is "hardened." But you can also say you have, for example, "callous hands." Cyprus and cypress. Cyprus is the Mediterranean island. Cypress is the tree. Bait and bate. Bait is what you use to catch fish. Bate means to restrain, as in "He waited with bated breath." Spy

FullCircle -> RE: Grammar Nazi - version 87 or is it 9,812? (9/22/2012 10:38:17 AM)
No, bated breath is what pornstars suffer from. We all know this.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.173828E-02