THE RANDOM TERRAIN GRAMMAR THREAD

[Miss 2600]

It just occurred to me, I'm from Newfoundland Canada...

 

That just occurred to you, huh?

 

 

 

Ow's she going der by? Wha? Grammar? Well... spose... proper ting by, we's all should know ow'talk right. Washir name der agin buddy?

 

you've really gotta hear it to appreciate it

 

But yes, this guy is overacting in a comedic way, but still it's so true, it's funny

 

Ugh! I feel like I was a better person before viewing that video. I really can't understand enough to detect poor grammar. Plenty of F-bombs, though. He uses it after every other word.

Edited August 16, 2011 by Miss 2600

[Itchy Koala]

It just occurred to me, I'm from Newfoundland Canada... if just this bit of 'bad' grammar on this page has so many panties in a bunch, never come here, your brains will hemorrhage after your imaginary red pens go into overdrive.

 

 

Ow's she going der by? Wha? Grammar? Well... spose... proper ting by, we's all should know ow'talk right. Washir name der agin buddy?

 

you've really gotta hear it to appreciate it

 

But yes, this guy is overacting in a comedic way, but still it's so true, it's funny

 

Kind of the same thing in Nebraska. I go five minutes to my left and I hear the hicks with their country talk. Five minutes to the right and I hear the wannabe gangsters from Omaha talkin' dat slang gangsta sheeit.

[Jr. Pac]

Does anyone else know the definition of Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?

[Schizophretard]

Does anyone else know the definition of Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?

 

Something to say when you have nothing to say.

[Chuck D. Head]

Does anyone else know the definition of Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?

 

Something to say when you have nothing to say.

 

yeah......it's really quite atrocious.

[Jr. Pac]

If you say it fast enough you'll always sound procotious! Better use it carefully 'cus it can change your life!

*clears throat* For example, I said it to me girl and now me girl's me wife!

Edited August 16, 2011 by Jr. Pac

[+Andrew Davie]

Here's a good reason to work on your grammar...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj6QqCH7g0Q

[Cynicaster]

The evolution of language is pretty much unavoidable, but come on, to use this fact as a rationale for things like "would of" is nothing but a cop out.

 

 

I'm just explaining why I believe the only proper way to speak is to express yourself. If you all were able to tell that I meant would've and was able to correct my spelling then I successfully expressed myself. No one asked for a clarification by what I meant by would of because it was already clear.

 

I see what you're saying, but I, personally, completely disagree. This very same philosophy taken to its extreme is directly responsible for the modern prevalence of "text speak" gibberish (e.g., "hey wut r u up 2?"). It's clear what the message is saying, so mission accomplished, right?

 

I just don't understand why, if you have standards for use of your language these days, it's viewed as quaint. In working as an engineer I could hand in a report written in crayons on notebook paper, and still get the main points across. But would I do that? Of course not, because it would be lazy, look like crap, and diminish credibility.

 

If someone had perfect grammar, perfect spelling, knew the definition of every word, and was like a dictionary/thesaurus then they could still fail to express themselves. They could be using very uncommon words that people don't know the definitions to while explaining a very complex idea that they don't understand. They followed the rules of the language perfectly and chose the words with the best definitions but their audience didn't understand them. I would say that their perfection prevented them from speaking properly.

 

What you're talking about here isn't a failure of the erudite speaker to express himself/herself, it's a failure of him/her to recognize the language skills of the audience. There is a big difference.

 

It just made me want to be even less like them. I understood that clothing evolves and that there isn't a proper way to dress. They didn't understand that. All they understood is that it is proper to be like everyone else.

 

Two things:

 

1) This analogy is silly because there are no rules in fashion, whereas there are rules in grammar and spelling, regardless of how many people choose to pretend otherwise

 

2) If what you want is to stand out from the homogeneous masses, then have standards for language. That will set you apart from the crowd in a big ol' hurry.

Edited August 16, 2011 by Cynicaster

[+Andrew Davie]

I'm a bit of a grammar Nazi, and tend to be particular about these sorts of things. Recently, though, I've come to realise that language adapts and changes, and it's a moving target.

For example, it used to bug me when my kids would say "text me!". Well, I'd say, "text isn't a verb!" Only, now... through common usage... text IS a verb. It's even in the dictionary.

My point is, language is all about usage. It's a medium for conveying a message. As long as the message is clear, then language is doing its job.

Now it's a whole different kettle of fish if you're lazy and simply don't know the rules. There's one thing to be pushing new language and being adaptable, and there's a whole other thing being ignorant. If you think language doesn't matter, and spelling doesn't matter, then you're on the ignorant side of the table. It's all about context, too. Phone-style abbreviations r ok 4 informal comms... but if you're in a working environment I can't begin to stress how unprofessional and damaging it is to have bad grammar, spelling errors and an obvious lack of care about what you write. In short, it matters. OK, now feel free to pick through this for spelling errors, typos, and grammar fuckups. I'm not perfect... I just try to be.

[Jr. Pac]

I think the dictionary means text as in text ex. with typewriters or a keyboard. *Sings8 OOH CPUWIZ! Please lock this!

Edited August 16, 2011 by Jr. Pac

[Armonigann]

^ SHUT IT!!

[Schizophretard]

The evolution of language is pretty much unavoidable, but come on, to use this fact as a rationale for things like "would of" is nothing but a cop out.

 

 

I'm just explaining why I believe the only proper way to speak is to express yourself. If you all were able to tell that I meant would've and was able to correct my spelling then I successfully expressed myself. No one asked for a clarification by what I meant by would of because it was already clear.

 

I see what you're saying, but I, personally, completely disagree. This very same philosophy taken to its extreme is directly responsible for the modern prevalence of "text speak" gibberish (e.g., "hey wut r u up 2?"). It's clear what the message is saying, so mission accomplished, right?

 

I just don't understand why, if you have standards for use of your language these days, it's viewed as quaint. In working as an engineer I could hand in a report written in crayons on notebook paper, and still get the main points across. But would I do that? Of course not, because it would be lazy, look like crap, and diminish credibility.

 

If someone had perfect grammar, perfect spelling, knew the definition of every word, and was like a dictionary/thesaurus then they could still fail to express themselves. They could be using very uncommon words that people don't know the definitions to while explaining a very complex idea that they don't understand. They followed the rules of the language perfectly and chose the words with the best definitions but their audience didn't understand them. I would say that their perfection prevented them from speaking properly.

 

What you're talking about here isn't a failure of the erudite speaker to express himself/herself, it's a failure of him/her to recognize the language skills of the audience. There is a big difference.

 

It just made me want to be even less like them. I understood that clothing evolves and that there isn't a proper way to dress. They didn't understand that. All they understood is that it is proper to be like everyone else.

 

Two things:

 

1) This analogy is silly because there are no rules in fashion, whereas there are rules in grammar and spelling, regardless of how many people choose to pretend otherwise

 

2) If what you want is to stand out from the homogeneous masses, then have standards for language. That will set you apart from the crowd in a big ol' hurry.

 

Taking the opposite philosophy to an extreme could start an entire thread over a typo.

[Cynicaster]

I'm a bit of a grammar Nazi, and tend to be particular about these sorts of things. Recently, though, I've come to realise that language adapts and changes, and it's a moving target.

For example, it used to bug me when my kids would say "text me!". Well, I'd say, "text isn't a verb!" Only, now... through common usage... text IS a verb. It's even in the dictionary.

 

There's a word for that: NEOLOGISM

 

There's one thing to be pushing new language and being adaptable, and there's a whole other thing being ignorant. If you think language doesn't matter, and spelling doesn't matter, then you're on the ignorant side of the table.

 

That's pretty much how I feel about it.

 

I think there are merits to both the prescriptive and the descriptive philosophies on grammar.

 

On the one hand, if I hear a word or phrase used in a non-traditional sense, there is a very good chance it will make me twitch.

 

A prime example of this is the phrase "begs the question". Not a day goes by that I don't see at least one forum post saying something like "Classic consoles have no moving parts, whereas modern consoles do. This begs the question: will the modern consoles still be around in 30 years?" That is completely wrong. I don't feel like explaining why, so curious parties can click here: begging the question

 

On the other hand, I probably hear such non-traditional uses every single day without even realizing it, because I just assume that the usage or definition that I know is the way it has always been. An example I learned of recently is the term "card shark", used to describe somebody who can school you at poker. This phrase is actually a bastardization of the word "cardsharp".

[Rex Dart]

For example, it used to bug me when my kids would say "text me!". Well, I'd say, "text isn't a verb!" Only, now... through common usage... text IS a verb. It's even in the dictionary.

 

 

Phone-style abbreviations r ok 4 informal comms... but if you're in a working environment I can't begin to stress how unprofessional and damaging it is to have bad grammar, spelling errors and an obvious lack of care about what you write. In short, it matters.

 

Phone-style abbreviations are fine if you're typing on a phone. If you have a full keyboard in front of you, just type the damn words. It may extend the time that it takes you to write that message by a full three-quarters of a second, but it's worth it to look sober.

 

edit: Here's a tip. If your excuse for disgusting spelling and grammar ("But you can figure out what I meant!") can also be used to defend L33TSP34K, give it up & make a damn effort to be understood.

Edited August 16, 2011 by Rex Dart

[Schizophretard]

I text for how quick it is. I rather text my wife asking if we need milk than call her up and get into a big conversation. I won't text,"Do we need milk?". I'll just text,"milk". If she asks if she can borrow $20 I'll just text,"y". If I need help bringing in groceries I'll let her know I'm passing the corner store near our house by testing,"s". I have a phone with a keyboard just to send things like this even faster. I get pissed off if anything slows the process down. Sometimes my wife will text me,"Guess what?". An hour later I'll find the time to text,"What?". She will text back,"Just guess." It drives me crazy. Just send me all the information I need as quickly as possible. I want people to shorten words like because into cuz because the less space they use the less I have to scroll down to read the message. If you have to misspell words and use improper grammar to make the process faster then I'm all for it. Text messaging is like a pager for messages giving me all the information I need as quickly as possible. If you want to have a conversation then call me but I probably won't answer because I'm busy doing other things.

[jaybird3rd]

A big part of the problem, especially among younger people, is that they do not seem to read or write, not to any significant extent or with any regularity. Mark Bauerlein talks a lot about this (and cites supporting research) in his book, The Dumbest Generation: the reading and writing the kids have to do in school is minimal, and they almost never choose to read during their leisure hours. They spend most of their time online, and because there are so many ways to customize their experience, they tend to "filter out" or ignore anything that might enlighten or challenge them, opting instead to receive only entertainment-related content, or information about what their friends are doing.

 

I think this contributes to the malapropisms that crop up so often in online conversation: "you Midas well", "for all intensive purposes", and so forth. People hardly ever read these phrases, so they repeat them the way they hear them, but they don't always hear them correctly. It also contributes to a poor grasp of English grammar, because the only way to learn to write well is to read lots of good writing and to practice writing consistently. I also agree about "l33tsp34k" and cryptic texting-style abbreviations: it disrespects the readers because it forces them to mentally "unpack" your writing into a complete sentence. If you don't put any extra effort into making your writing understandable, readers won't put any extra effort into understanding you. If you have something worthwhile to say, say it well, and if you do it often enough, it won't be any harder than "texting" would be.

 

Predictable Objection #1: "What about the Harry Potter books, hmmm? Kids are reading those!" The popularity of the Harry Potter books among young people is more of an exceptional case: kids are reading them because their friends are reading them, not because they've suddenly learned to love reading, and they don't seem to move on to other types of reading.

 

Predictable Objection #2: "Bah! Every generation says the same thing about their kids, and our parents probably said the same thing about us! So go to bed, old man!" Even if this is true (which is questionable), I would think it supports my point. We haven't gotten to the present level of functional illiteracy in one fell swoop. It happened because of a long pattern of letting younger generations get just a little bit lazier with their language skills. Anybody who cares about language at all has to call attention to it sooner or later, and since everyone spends so much time on forums like this one, this seems to be as good a place as any to do it.

 

If anything, we should all think of AtariAge as the perfect place to improve the quality of our writing. There's a built-in audience of people here who share a common interest in classic gaming, and since we're always writing posts on the subject to one another, why not use it as an opportunity to practice our writing skills in the process?

[Itchy Koala]

A big part of the problem, especially among younger people, is that they do not seem to read or write, not to any significant extent or with any regularity. Mark Bauerlein talks a lot about this (and cites supporting research) in his book, The Dumbest Generation: the reading and writing the kids have to do in school is minimal, and they almost never choose to read during their leisure hours. They spend most of their time online, and because there are so many ways to customize their experience, they tend to "filter out" or ignore anything that might enlighten or challenge them, opting instead to receive entertainment-related content, or information about what their friends are doing. The popularity of the Harry Potter books is often cited as a counterexample, but those books are an exceptional case: kids are reading them because their friends are reading them, not because they've suddenly learned to love reading, and they don't seem to move on to other types of reading.

 

I'd say you hit the nail on the head there. When I was in elementary school I was always reading in my free time, now 10+ years down the road that foundation has helped me tremendously. My vocabulary, spelling, writing, etc. has always been above average. I urge all parents to encourage their kids to read, it's very important, especially at a young age.

 

Although, I will admit once I hit high school I began to read less, now my grammar skills are slipping, and my spelling isn't as great as it used to be. Which is just more proof of the importance of reading..

[Jr. Pac]

My writing and reading skills are not average (not bragging). Much above. I LOOOOVE to read, and do it alot. I'm not too into Harry Potter. I read one page of Diary of a Wimpy Kid, returned it, and bought The Secret Garden and Anne of Avonlea. Thanks fpr pretty much callin me dumb.

Edited August 16, 2011 by Jr. Pac

[Rex Dart]

My writing and reading skills are not average (not bragging). Much above. I LOOOOVE to read, and do it alot. I'm not too into Harry Potter. I read one page of Diary of a Wimpy Kid, returned it, and bought The Secret Garden and Anne of Avonlea. Thanks fpr pretty much callin me dumb.

 

Yeah? You should pick up Lord of the Flies. It's awesome, and you'll be ahead later on when they make you read it for school.

[+Random Terrain]

A big part of the problem, especially among younger people, is that they do not seem to read or write, not to any significant extent or with any regularity. Mark Bauerlein talks a lot about this (and cites supporting research) in his book, The Dumbest Generation: the reading and writing the kids have to do in school is minimal, and they almost never choose to read during their leisure hours. They spend most of their time online, and because there are so many ways to customize their experience, they tend to "filter out" or ignore anything that might enlighten or challenge them, opting instead to receive only entertainment-related content, or information about what their friends are doing.

Although I know it's true, it's still hard to belive. Before I got internet access near the end of 1999, I had to look up things in my dictionaries, thesaurus, encyclopedia, grammar books, Associated Press Stylebook, or I had to go to the library.

 

After I got on the Internet, I could look up almost anything in seconds. No flipping through hundreds of pages or driving an hour to get to a library. I use Google and the WordWeb English thesaurus and dictionary for Windows multiple times every day. I don't understand people who mentally curl up in a ball and act like all they really need to know they learned in kindergarten.

 

There was a time when I said wheel barrel instead of wheelbarrow. I also said Star Track instead of Star Trek. I didn't even know that the word trek existed until I was in school for at least a few years. I no longer pronounce certain words and phrases incorrectly because I learned the correct way over time. That's how it's supposed to work. We learn new things and correct errors as we go along. I also visit pages like the one below once in a while to make sure I'm still on track:

 

http://homeworktips.about.com/od/wordswemispronounce/Words_We_Often_Mispronounce.htm

 

 

I know more than a few people of various ages who pronounce and spell words the same way they did when they were 7 years old. If they learned that dest is how you pronounce desk, that's how they'll pronounce it for the rest of their lives. They're ignorant and proud of it. They're over 18 and no longer have to go to school, so that means they can cheerfully turn off their brains.

 

Back in the 1980s, I still had a lot of problems with idioms, so I got idiom books from the library. I read a little on my own and asked my mother to read a lot of the information out loud to me. Although I knew that I had learning disabilities, I didn't know that I had Asperger's Syndrome, but it makes sense now. I could have stayed ignorant about idioms, but I did something about it before the Internet existed. If I would have had the Internet back in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, I could have learned all kinds of stuff faster and easier. It's hard for me to understand how there can be so many people online who won't look up anything unless it's about a pop star or an anime character. It only takes seconds. No need to walk or drive to a library. It's all right there on the magic computer screen.

 

 

Take a look at this again:

 

They spend most of their time online, and because there are so many ways to customize their experience, they tend to "filter out" or ignore anything that might enlighten or challenge them, opting instead to receive only entertainment-related content, or information about what their friends are doing.

 

It reminds me of the following two things from Avoid the Aging Trap by Muriel Oberleder:

 

Why Old and Young Need Feedback

 

The principle is the same for people of all ages. Anyone who is put on the spot may become irrational in arguments. This is usually corrected by feedback: someone gives you another point of view, and subsequent experience brings you back to normal reasoning.

 

But feedback is often denied to the elderly, because people don't want to bother giving them another point of view, or they may not want to upset them and so will give false feedback. "Ah, well, I'll just play along." Or they may simply be respectful: after all, we are taught not to contradict our elders. But this hardly helps an older person to get back on track!

 

Of course feedback is a two-way business. Nobody relishes being wrong, and many older people, because they are so vulnerable, resent it. In fact, some may choose to bow out altogether (this is called disengagement), rather than remain involved—and subject to criticism.

 

The problem is, without normal give-and-take a person lives in a vacuum. That is why an old person seems to lose the ability to learn.

 

Stimulation and Closure: Key to Learning

 

Exactly how and why we learn is a mystery, but it is certain that we cannot learn without stimulation. And once stimulated, we cannot relax until we have learned. When people are interrupted at a learning task, studies show, they will go back to it again and again. If they are not allowed to complete it, anxiety and irritability will mount, interfering with other future learning.

 

We need a feeling of completion, or 'closure,' in order to learn. The reward of satisfaction when a task is completed is what motivates and stimulates us. People who are constantly frustrated in their drive for closure begin to avoid stimulation, experiencing it as a dangerous feeling.

 

The reason many old people seem to voluntarily withdraw from the mainstream of life, as noted gerontologist Bernice Neugarten pointed out, is that isolation protects them from the 'danger' of stimulation.

 

Of course, the old person pays a high price for this kind of 'protection.' We all know what isolation does to both young and old, and it is probably what happened to that dotty uncle or aunt.

 

Until a generation or two ago, the static lives of most old people were reflected in a learning deficiency that really has nothing to do with old age. But this provided a basis for the myth—the myth that has such a hold, even though the modern generation of older people is disproving it every day.

 

 

The Internet should be helping us all get a little better each year, but millions of kids and people of all ages are using the Internet to voluntarily turn themselves into mental senior citizens. Correcting errors and learning new things would be too big of an assault on their egos, so they must keep themselves wrapped in their little cocoons.

[Pioneer4x4]

My 2¢ (probably again) is if someone informally makes a typo/error just ignore and deal with it unless it is something that will be printed or at the corporate level. If someone uses things like "would of" (or heaven forbid "wood of") "could of" "I could care less" or other things, let them know politely that they are wrong, those are not accidental errors, they are intentionally incorrect and do not help anyone if left uncorrected.

Regional words entertain me, but I wouldn't use them in anything official or even family related like an invitation. "When yinz come down for the party, watch for the slippy sidewalk!" While that is something that probably get said all the time here in the 'Burgh, don't actually write it that way, red it up for the others! And if you are using alternate words for speed/fun/to look cool... And you get many replies like WTF R U SAYING? then maybe you should try to be more literate.

My favorite response is "I too English well speaking".

[Pioneer4x4]

At work, this was in a service ticket

User is having problems opening XXXXXX sight going threw YYYYYY. She can open all other applacation but thr sharepoint site. Help Desk had user restart PC and check firwall this is a ZZZZZZ laptop.

 

 

XXXXXX is a departmental application

YYYYYY is our remote access software package name

ZZZZZZ is our company name.

 

In 3 statements they buggered up

"sight" instead of "site"

"threw" instead of "through" (This is just dumb)

"applacation" instead of "application" (I would say typo, but from experience it is not)

"thr" must be "their" and I ass-u-me that they didn't know which their(thier)/they're to use so they punted with "thr".

"firwall" instead of "firewall"

Plus there are some punctuation issues.

 

And this is typical from this person, in a corporate technical environment, accuracy and details are cruicial. Basically, call the person and find out for yourself what is actually going on since they can't bother or aren't able to do it correctly

 

In school I never liked grammar, now I realize how important a good education is, and one thing that should be taught more is WHY it is important to know, not just what to know.

Edited August 18, 2011 by Pioneer4x4

[toiletunes]

Many years ago, my mother learned the limitations of spellcheck at her bank job after giving her boss a report about the pubic library.

[Pioneer4x4]

Many years ago, my mother learned the limitations of spellcheck at her bank job after giving her boss a report about the pubic library.

Let me guess, a place where you can share the enjoyment with others as long as you are quiet, and after hours, make deposits at the box under the tree on the sidewalk.

[jahfish]