# [pet peeve/rant] Grammar, people!!



## Mouseferatu (Nov 15, 2004)

In a word... _*AAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!*_

It's a messageboard. I don't expect formal writing. I don't _use_ formal writing. I expect, tolerate, and make mistakes. But if you're going to write in English, and it's your native language, for Pete's sake, try to get it _mostly_ right!!

"Should have," not "should of." If you think you've heard people say "should of," what you've actually heard is "should've." It is never grammatically correct to say "should of." _Never_.

"Less" vs. "fewer." These are not interchangable, people. If you can count them, you have fewer. If you can't, you have less. I have less water. I have fewer _cups_ of water. I'm spending less money (as money is not a unit of measurement), but fewer dollars. This is the line for 12 items or _fewer_.

There is no such word as "gots."

I have multiple dice. I have one _die_. You cannot use "dice" as a singular; it's a plural word.

I'm sure there are others, but that'll do for now.

Rant--tentatively--over.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 15, 2004)

Do you at least feel better now?


----------



## Piratecat (Nov 15, 2004)

Less caffeine, Ari. Less caffeine.  Otherhow folks'll got fewer respect for you're patience.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 15, 2004)

lol

I do feel better now, actually. I just have to empty the grammar bladder every so often.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 15, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Otherhow folks'll got fewer respect for you're patience.




 

Here, kitty, kitty. I have a nice sock-full of quarters I'd like to show you. Multiple times.


----------



## The Other Librarian (Nov 15, 2004)

I'll support your rant, but only up to a point.  You're right, this is not formal writing, and I suspect many of the posts would qualify as brainstorming/rough first draft type stuff, where the focus should, rightly, be on getting raw ideas down.  I make gadzoodles of grammar gaffes on here, and I fix them sometimes, if they bother me or make my meaning unclear.

Also, language changes.  It only bugs me when syntactical rules are violated, as in your "should of" case.  The other examples you cite depend more on word meaning, which is notoriously protean.  As far as I'm concerned, "gots" is a word.  If you can use it in a sentence, and it conveys an agreed meaning, it's up for grabs.  Not that I suggest using it on a resume or cover letter, but fine for informal jibber-jabber.  

The "die/dice" example, I think, is pretty much a lost cause.  English has always tended to eliminate inflections in favor of  word order and context.  And dialects will always play with the "official" rules, which is great.  All encompassing media is ironing out a lot of those differences, but I'm hoping it never crushes variation and dialect completely.  If I have to put up with colloquialisms to preserve growth and variety, so be it.


----------



## GlassJaw (Nov 15, 2004)

The misused words that annoy me the most are "your" and "you're".  I can't tell you how much those irk me.    

Your = possessive.  Ex.  Are these your books?
You're = you are.  Ex.  You're really cool.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 15, 2004)

Oh, I know--and accept, albeit grudgingly --that language changes. But I think those changes can sometimes be harmful to communication.

I'll admit, "gots" just bothers me because it sounds wrong. But I believe there's a useful distinction between "less" and "fewer," and between "die" and "dice," so I'm going to keep fighting those. 

If it makes you feel any better, I've already dropped some of my Grammar Battles because I decided they were lost causes, or didn't really have a useful distinction. I used to be a real hard-nose about the difference between "hung" (a picture) and "hanged" (a condemned criminal), for instance, but I've more or less abandoned that one, except when I'm feeling really contrary.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 15, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> except when I'm feeling really contrary.




This isn't you feeling really contrary??


----------



## Chorn (Nov 15, 2004)

I feel the need to echo Mouseferatu's rant with a <AOL>me too</AOL>.  I must add to it my hatred of people who can't be arsed to use proper capitalization and punctuation.  Writing in all lowercase with sentences strung together haphazardly with ellipses shows disrespect for the reader by making it hard to read.  If you can't be bothered to communicate your thoughts properly, why should I waste my energy trying to decipher them?


P.S. My grammar is hardly the best so I don't have too much of a leg to stand on in criticisizing, but at least I try to obey basic rules on grammar if I can remember them.  Plus, I hit up Dictionary.com if I don't remember how to spell a word so I can spelz it reel gud!

P.P.S. My hate of bad grmamer know no limit.  Someone's bound to say it sooner or later.


----------



## talinthas (Nov 15, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Less caffeine, Ari. Less caffeine.  Otherhow folks'll got fewer respect for you're patience.



 argh!  you're killing the grammarian within me, pkitty!  trying to parse this just broke me =)


----------



## Henry (Nov 15, 2004)

Boy, you GOTS ta feel better now, with fewer stress to deal with. But, if it makes you feel any better, i'll be more better careful with my grammer and spellingosity, from now on.

I've had those days, myself.


----------



## The Other Librarian (Nov 15, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> But I believe there's a useful distinction between "less" and "fewer," and between "die" and "dice," so I'm going to keep fighting those.




I see your point on less/fewer, but dice/die is so arbitrary to begin with.  Why not dice/douse, as in mice/mouse, or lice/louse?


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 15, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> It is never grammatically correct to say "should of." _Never_.




Everyone should of course be aware of this already...

-Hyp.


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 15, 2004)

I've been reading and thinking a lot about the line between written and spoken language, and how technology allows (or sometimes forces) us to blur that line.  I think some of this isn't (just) sheer ignorance -- it's due to the fact that some posters treat a post "more like speech", where spontaneity and speed are valued more than in writing.  

And these same people may not feel a strong need to revise/edit -- again, just as in speech where "once it's out of your mouth there's no fixing it."  Each person will place a different value on the "correctness" of their message board posts depending on how much they think of EN World as a "conversation" vs. a written archive.  If it IS a conversation, then what has already been said is in the past and needs no correction.  And if it IS a conversation, getting the idea out of your head and into a post quickly while the idea is still fresh is more important than written correctness.


----------



## Piratecat (Nov 16, 2004)

The thing is, Eric, that it's a conversation where we're substituting grammar and spelling (and smilies) for the normal nuances of vocal tone and expression. While we're online we don't have anything to represent us other than the quality of our ideas and the means in which we express them. It's an interesting way to judge people, because it means that some people come across very differently online than they do in real life.



			
				Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I used to be a real hard-nose about the difference between "hung" (a picture) and "hanged" (a condemned criminal), for instance, but I've more or less abandoned that one.




My Dad always said that a man is hung and a criminal is hanged. It was a subtlety that I didn't understand until I was into my teens.


----------



## talinthas (Nov 16, 2004)

Exactly, eric.  People like to cite IMs and message boards and chats in computer games as evidence of the decline of language, but they fail to note the context of these messages.  when people are talking, they aren't concerned as much with the cleanliness of their conversation, so much as quickly conveying their point.  When people write articles, or posts that are meant to explain ideas or whatever, there is a lot more care put into them.

 it's an interesting phenomenon of communication.


----------



## DaveStebbins (Nov 16, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Everyone should of course be aware of this already...



You forgot the commas after 'should' and 'course.'


----------



## MrFilthyIke (Nov 16, 2004)

This whole discussion makes me want to *AXE* y'all a question...


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 16, 2004)

MrFilthyIke said:
			
		

> This whole discussion makes me want to *AXE* y'all a question...



That was my favorite running gag from the Futurama TV show... any time Leela says, "Can I axe you something?"  I just giggle.


----------



## barsoomcore (Nov 16, 2004)

All I can say is I throw out, unread, ANY resumes or cover letters that come across my desk with a SINGLE grammatical mistake.

If you can't get your LETTERS bug-free, man, I don't want get anywhere NEAR your code.

And I'll just state that nobody ever went wrong making sure their post was built out of correct grammar. Whence comes this need for speed that somehow justifies laziness? Why is it MORE important to get your thoughts out QUICKLY? Surely badly phrased thoughts only SLOW DOWN conversation, no matter how quickly they're posted. Certainly there has been spectacular evidence of that right here on EN World from time to time...

My brain is unshakable in its belief that if people spent more time considering what they were saying, there would be less disagreements and misunderstandings. But my brain gets like that sometimes.


----------



## tarchon (Nov 16, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> There is no such word as "gots."
> 
> I have multiple dice. I have one _die_. You cannot use "dice" as a singular; it's a plural word.




Oh... I see... so like "He gotce hisself some dice."


----------



## Thotas (Nov 16, 2004)

I'm joining with Barsoomcore on this one.  The conversation vs. writing analogy fails to convince me because this is writing, and there is edit-capability.  And now I'm just waiting, because as short as this post is, there is undoubtedly some howler of a grammatical or spelling gaff in it that I'm just not seeing.


----------



## Mark (Nov 16, 2004)

i wander whose gonna here an obay?


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 16, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Everyone should of course be aware of this already...
> 
> -Hyp.




"Everyone should, of course, be aware of this already..."

Sorry, Hyp. You're not getting me on that one.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 16, 2004)

Barsoomcore, I agree with you 100%, but that should be either "_fewer_ disagreements and misunderstandings" or "less _disagreement and misunderstanding_."



(Sorry, I just couldn't help myself. Please don't hit me. )


----------



## Abraxas (Nov 16, 2004)

> All I can say is I throw out, unread, ANY resumes or cover letters that come across my desk with a SINGLE grammatical mistake.




How do you know if there is a mistake if you don't read them?


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 16, 2004)

Hey, I'm not trying to say what should or shouldn't be, I'm just trying to come up with an explanation.  Feel free to be prescriptive; I'm just being descriptive.  

My theory is that some people aren't particularly careful with their writing on a message board because it doesn't matter to them.  It doesn't pay off.  It's all going to come down to what people think is important.  

There are different kinds of writing (for different purposes) and on the internet some of them are more ephemeral than others.  In a chat room, for example, would you stop and correct everyone who made a typo?  Or a grammatical mistake?  I hope not -- you would not be aiding the process of communicating, you would be hindering it.  There are some people who see a message board as only one miniscule step above a chat room in terms of feeling the need to use "gooder English." 

Now, I will add ... if you are an 8th grader at Waunakee Middle School and you hand me a paper that contains chatisms like "u r" (for "you are"), then "u" and I "r" gonna sit down and have a talk about finding the right level of correctness for your school work!  Knowing your audience is important, and _if_ (a big _if_) your goal is to communicate with and impress those who _do_ care about correctness (for example, many fine people at EN World, or a teacher at school, or a potential employer), then it might be worth your while to use more care, learn grammar rules that you frequently have trouble with, and edit your work.  

And finally, I don't think a rant where people say, "Come on, do it right!" is going to make anyone go "Gosh, that certainly clarifies _their_ vs. _they're_ vs. _there_ and _your_ vs. _you're_!  Thank goodness I read that rant!"  But then I think rants are an ineffective means of communicating anything.  You're preaching to the choir while simultaneously attacking those you wish would change and making them defensive.  Not effective!


----------



## Angcuru (Nov 16, 2004)

Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
SYNTAX!    SYNTAX!!!
Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
GRAMMAR NAZI! 

.....ah, seemed funny at the time.  Feel free to ignore!


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 16, 2004)

I think it would be funnier if I knew what tune I was supposed to be singing it to!  

(And, yes, I ended that sentence with a preposition.  Woo hoo, the freedom!)


----------



## tarchon (Nov 16, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> "Everyone should, of course, be aware of this already..."
> 
> Sorry, Hyp. You're not getting me on that one.




The commas are not required there. They'd be needed if the expression significantly "interrupted" the sentence (to use Strunk and White's expression) or if it were parenthetical, but the latter clearly doesn't apply and the former is largely a matter of authorial opinion, which Hypersmurf has clearly rendered.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 16, 2004)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> And finally, I don't think a rant where people say, "Come on, do it right!" is going to make anyone go "Gosh, that certainly clarifies _their_ vs. _they're_ vs. _there_ and _your_ vs. _you're_!  Thank goodness I read that rant!"  But then I think rants are an ineffective means of communicating anything.  You're preaching to the choir while simultaneously attacking those you wish would change and making them defensive.  Not effective!




Oh, I don't expect to change any minds. Mostly just venting.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 16, 2004)

The Other Librarian said:
			
		

> I see your point on less/fewer, but dice/die is so arbitrary to begin with.  Why not dice/douse, as in mice/mouse, or lice/louse?




Well, yeah, the specific nature of the plural is arbitrary. But the problem I'm addressing has people dropping the singular entirely, and that's the part that I think is actually a communication issue.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 16, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> This isn't you feeling really contrary??




Nope. This is me feeling _moderately_ contrary. Nobody on these boards has ever seen me _really_ contrary.


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 16, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Oh, I don't expect to change any minds. Mostly just venting.



Ah ha, mission accomplished then!   I kinda figured.  

But it's funny -- I started going back through some of my old library school papers from the mid 90s -- at that time the Internet was shiny and new for me and I was still wrapping my brain around how it was going to change me and my profession.  Here's a description of my first forray into an internet discussion group.  Keep in mind that the obvious conclusions drawn were brand new as far as I was concerned. 



> The first part of my self-study involved my signing on to or observing various Internet discussion groups that were specifically geared toward school media specialists.  I was not surprised to learn that there were such narrowly-defined groups out there; heck, if you can join *TAOGM-L* ("The Art of Game Mastering" -- a discussion group for people who referee role-playing games) or post news to *alt.carl.maldens.nose* (the name says it all), surely a well-defined profession like school media would have at least a few different forums for discussion.
> 
> Internet discussion groups, ideally, exist to facilitate communication between folks with similar interests and problems.  This discussion is not at all like sitting around a table with everyone in the group.  It's more like playing phone tag and always getting the other person's answering machine.  You leave a message and hope someone will get back to you.  If someone with some initiative, time, and the right information gets your message, you'll get a response.
> 
> ...



It's that "chatty" bit that I think I've been harping on.  That line between writing and speaking started getting blurry for me even back then.


----------



## NiTessine (Nov 16, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> "Less" vs. "fewer." These are not interchangable, people. If you can count them, you have fewer. If you can't, you have less. I have less water. I have fewer _cups_ of water. I'm spending less money (as money is not a unit of measurement), but fewer dollars. This is the line for 12 items or _fewer_.




Hmm. This I did not know... Must be because I spent the majority of my English classes sleeping or planning adventures or designing player characters... Thanks.


----------



## Henry (Nov 16, 2004)

My personal favorites are degrees of miscommunication brought on by mondegreens...

"For all intensive purposes"... (For all intents and purposes)
"Would of known"... (Would've known)
"doggy-dog world"... (Dog-eat-dog world)
"She'll be mist"... (She'll be missed)

I have seen MANY of these throughout the posts at ENWorld, and rather than try and correct them, I'll sometimes just use them correctly in my reply.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 16, 2004)

*Looks at NiTessine's post, then glances meaningfully at Eric*


----------



## EricNoah (Nov 16, 2004)

Hey -- I'm dreaming D&D while I'm teaching!  It goes both ways!


----------



## mythusmage (Nov 16, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Everyone should, of course, be aware of this already...
> 
> -Hyp.




Correction made.


----------



## mythusmage (Nov 16, 2004)

*Die and Dice*

Your character could die if you use bad dice in combat.

And along those lines, a question for you all...

In those fantasy RPGs where a player must roll to see if his character's spell goes off or not, would you say that magic in those games is die cast?


----------



## billd91 (Nov 16, 2004)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> I think it would be funnier if I knew what tune I was supposed to be singing it to!
> 
> (And, yes, I ended that sentence with a preposition.  Woo hoo, the freedom!)





I think we're all wondering about the tune to it... but this should help
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/21/

As for me, I don't worry about people's web grammar unless it's so bad that it makes the message too hard to read. This ain't brain surgery. It's just hacking off a message or two for a hobby passtime. It all seems so futile to rage against it. 

To help put it in a little more perspective, check out Miracle #3 in this list:
http://wallofjokes.shacknet.nu/Religious/Miracles_Not_Mentioned_Bible.html


----------



## Algolei (Nov 16, 2004)

Y'all spelt "gramma" wrong.  Eric's gramma would surely berate you.


----------



## rogueattorney (Nov 16, 2004)

Here's a few that kill me:

"Then" and "Than"  (I had never seen anyone mix this up until the advent of the Internet.  They're not even pronounced the same, at least in my part of the country.)
I like chocolate more thAn vanilla.
First, we'll go to the store.  ThEn, we'll go home.

"Their", "There", and "They're"
It is their car.  It belongs to them.
There it is.
They're coming over to dinner.

"Its" and "It's"
It's about time.
The dog wags its tail.

"Your" and "You're"  (These aren't even pronounced the same in my neck of the woods.)
Your mother said to call her.
You're needed at the courthouse.

"To", "Too", and "Two"
Go to the bathroom.
I'm coming, too.
There are two dogs here.

These are the big ones.  There are others:  hour and our, know and no, etc.

Sorry, I just needed to vent.  It's even worse when you see these in court documents, academic papers, etc.

R.A.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Nov 16, 2004)

Me write bad.  
Me not too smart.  
Me feel hurt. 
You be mean.
Me don't like you any more.  
Me show you my typing finger now.  
See, me write bad.  



Hey, I have a disclaimer in my sig!


----------



## RangerWickett (Nov 16, 2004)

I dislike when people spell "lose" as "loose."  Also, as I posted earlier in a different thread, I think people use -body when -one would be more appropriate for the situation.  If the tone is serious, you don't want to say, "The giant cats are about to attack.  Nobody will survive."  For the greatest level of ominous-ness, you want to say, "The giant cats are about to attack.  No one will survive."


----------



## barsoomcore (Nov 16, 2004)

I don't mind typos or the occasional error -- nobody's perfect.

But I will say (to be descriptive for a second instead of madly railing against the ways of the world) that when a person doesn't appear to have spent sufficient thought on their communication to even bother trying to structure it grammatically, I'm much less inclined to spend sufficient thought on it to understand it.

Well-structured communication indicates orderly thought. To some degree. Obviously it's possible to obfuscate (who can pass up a chance to use THAT word? Not me) with grammatically correct language, so there's other criteria for "well-structured" than just grammar, but correct grammar is an important component.

I blame post-modernism (there's very little I can't blame on post-modernism, if I put my mind to it). Particularly I mean poetry _post_ Modernist. Eliot and Pound and so on -- these guys had proper grammar down, and when they did break it (which they did less often than you might think) it was to a purpose. Even Joyce knew what he was doing that way (and for me to say anything not denigrating about Joyce is a gesture of great generosity). But nowadays people think poetry is actually a license to ignore grammar (except for Anne Carson, who's a genius), and that spills into high-school English classes (we got encouraged to "express ourselves" a lot more than we got encouraged to "express ourselves in a logical manner"), and, obviously, civilization as we know it comes to an end.

But that happens every couple of years.

Still, I blame the post-modernists. Bastiches.

Go read Anne Carson. She's a poet.


----------



## tarchon (Nov 16, 2004)

I've always been annoyed when people use "apocalypse" to mean "eschaton."


----------



## DaveStebbins (Nov 17, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> "Everyone should, of course, be aware of this already..."





			
				mythusmage said:
			
		

> Correction made.



Yeah, but I got there first; on page one, even.

-Dave
showing off his semi-colon   (incorrectly)


----------



## mythusmage (Nov 17, 2004)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> Yeah, but I got there first; on page one, even.
> 
> -Dave
> showing off his semi-colon   (incorrectly)




What is the most notable anatomical feature of truckers?

Their semi-colons.


----------



## RangerWickett (Nov 17, 2004)

tarchon said:
			
		

> I've always been annoyed when people use "apocalypse" to mean "eschaton."




Good one.  I had to look it up, and I hadn't realized the difference.  Well, to be honest, I hadn't known 'eschaton' was a word.


----------



## barsoomcore (Nov 17, 2004)

Eschatons are immanetized. Apocalypsi are prevented by Vampire Slayers.


----------



## BSF (Nov 17, 2004)

Abraxas said:
			
		

> How do you know if there is a mistake if you don't read them?




I believe Barsoomcore is using "unread" to imply reading the resume or cover-letter to completion.  In this case, if he notes an error, the document is immediately re-filed in the appropriate bin.  



			
				Angcuru said:
			
		

> Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
> Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
> Grammar, Grammar, Grammar, Grammar,
> SYNTAX!    SYNTAX!!!
> ...




I see that Billd linked to the 'toon.  Badgers!  

I acknowledge the arguements regarding speed or conveying an idea in a post, or a chat or an IM.  I just do not understand them.  I am a slow typist.    I barely broke 60 wpm in my typing class 20 years back.  However, I still chat in a relatively efficient manner while using correct punctuation, capitalization and decent grammar.  My grammar is not perfect, and it does degrade when I am in a hurry.  Anybody that has read my Ceramic DM stories can agree upon that.  In fact, I am sure Barsoomcore and Piratecat will readily agree with me on this.  Nevertheless, I do try to keep my posts coherent and I occasionally have difficulty understanding why other people cannot make that effort.

I do understand that there are many folks that do not speak, or write, english as a first language.  I readily accomodate errors in consideration for the fact that the poster may be multi-lingual while I am not.  But the majority of posters on EN World should have a basic grasp of the english language and should be able to present thoughts and ideas in a coherent manner.  

My posts are the first, and likely the only, impression I make on you.  Why wouldn't I want to make a good first impression?  Using capital letters and punctuation is not that difficult.  Avoiding poor grammar is a little more difficult.  However that difficulty should not give you license to avoid improving your grammar.


----------



## reveal (Nov 19, 2004)

Try this sucker out:

http://eatsshootsandleaves.com/ESLquiz.html


----------



## s/LaSH (Nov 20, 2004)

On the 'die-dice' thing, here's my (unfounded) theory:

Blame the dictionary makers. Until a few centuries ago, spelling was by no means standardised. When you made an english word plural, you ended it sibilantly. The word 'die', a polyhedron featuring numerically-labelled sides, could be pluralised as dies, dise, dice, or anything else that looked right.

When someone got the clever idea of making a book of words, a diction-ary, they didn't quite get this standardisation thing. 99.9% of words got standardised. But for some reason, whether laziness or just worrying about confusion with the verb 'to die', the plural of die (n.) became dice, not dies.

The pronunciation is the same, more or less; 'dice' seems to be more sibilant these days, although I suspect that's its dissociation from 'dies' in spelling causing a dissociation in pronunciation.

Someone should start a petition to correct the spelling to a standard form...

PS: I can type grammatically. I find it much harder not to do so. Perhaps this comes from reading rather than watching TV in my youth (not so long ago, really), and thus I am devoid of hope for the future of the language, when most reading comes from TXTmsgs and the Internet...


----------



## talinthas (Nov 20, 2004)

to go back a handful of posts, 'then' and 'than' are pronounced identically in the californian dialect, and i've had troubles remembering which is which since i learned how to spell.


----------



## Uzumaki (Nov 21, 2004)

I pronounce them differently, but most people I know don't. It's most likey because, in their heads, they're not differentiating.

I've always had a habit of correcting people on their grammar. A woman I work with tells me to "pull things taunt."


----------



## tarchon (Nov 21, 2004)

talinthas said:
			
		

> to go back a handful of posts, 'then' and 'than' are pronounced identically in the californian dialect, and i've had troubles remembering which is which since i learned how to spell.




There are some dialects in which they're not distinct, but I haven't encountered that in Cali among Anglo native speakers (it's more rural and Southern and Hispanic).  It's fairly common for second-language speakers not to be able to perceive or articulate the difference though (/æ/ is a fairly unusual vowel in international terms), and often second-generation speakers have trouble with it because their parents or ethnic communities don't make the distinction.  Part of the reason that the distinction tends to get lost is that the vowel /æ/ ("hat","cat","than"... - note that this is the phoneme /æ/ - "than" and "cat" usually have different allophones, pronunciations) is often distinguished partly by nasalization, but the /n/ tends to nasalize preceding vowels (the extent of this is dialect dependent), so the contrast between short "en" and short "an" can become fairly subtle.  It seems to me that dialects noted for strong nasalization (e.g. North Midlands, especially the western Great Lakes) have a greater tendency to preserve it.

Cot/caught is another vowel pair that may or may not be distinct, depending on dialect, and the merger is a common trait of Western dialects.


----------



## Mark Chance (Nov 21, 2004)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> I think it would be funnier if I knew what tune I was supposed to be singing it to!
> 
> (And, yes, I ended that sentence with a preposition.  Woo hoo, the freedom!)




Sentences can be ended with prepositions as long as the preposition's object is antecedent to the preposition and the meaning of the sentence is clear. Otherwise, ending sentences with prepositions is something up with which we should not put.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 21, 2004)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> Sentences can be ended with prepositions as long as the preposition's object is antecedent to the preposition and the meaning of the sentence is clear. Otherwise, ending sentences with prepositions is something up with which we should not put.




My favorite example of which is:

"What did you bring that book I did not want to be read to out of up for?"

Say it aloud. It makes sense, despite being a formal grammatical nightmare.

That said, the whole "preposition at the end" bit is _not_ something I have a problem with. It's a rule that has no grammatical purpose. It's a holdover from Latin, hasn't applied to spoken English in _ages_, and--most importantly, where my own criteria are concerned--has no bearing on meaning or understanding. 

Hypocrisy? Perhaps, but I can live with that.


----------



## Tom Cashel (Nov 21, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I have multiple dice. I have one _die_. You cannot use "dice" as a singular; it's a plural word.




*NEVER SAY DIE!*



			
				barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Eschatons are immanetized.




_Ewige Blumenkraft!_


----------



## Qlippoth (Nov 22, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> That said, the whole "preposition at the end" bit is _not_ something I have a problem with.



Aha!


----------



## iblis (Nov 22, 2004)

I'd like to see what there is in the case for the defense.

The shear amount of gramattical and spelling/typoes mistakes. i find in *printed books* for exmaple, novels even is; truely shocking-- so mcuh that your not goin tobeleve me I no

*&*lEt alone th dman Unternef!1!!!1!***

Wait!

See?

You still understood what was being communicated to you, even with all that dastardly inaccuracy assailing you, and even when there wasn't a lot to understand anyhow.

I s'pose a pertinent question might be : "Is an internet forum for the many, or for the few?"

If y' know wo' I mean.

If not, OK...how about : "Should one's level and standard of prior education be a determining factor when, on internet fora, others decide whether to read one's posts and give them fair consideration?"

Just to make sure this is all taken in the right context though...

I am not implying anything about ENWorld, or the people who frequent it, when I write this stuff. I'm simply trying to convey that there is, quite probably, another *valid* side to the argument, and by so doing I intend to promote further analysis and discussion, not flames. In fact, IMO, ENWorld is a lot better than many other places, when it comes to upholding fairness for all.


----------



## Algolei (Nov 22, 2004)

iblis said:
			
		

> I'd like to see what there is in the case for the defense.
> 
> The shear amount of gramattical and spelling/typoes mistakes. i find in *printed books* for exmaple, novels even is; truely shocking-- so mcuh that your not goin tobeleve me I no
> 
> ...



You doofus!  I read that three times trying to figure out what the FAQ you were talking about!

So no, I _didn't_ understand what was being communicated to me, not at first.  You have wasted my time trying to make a point which you yourself have just disproven.  Which makes it a good point.  Because by pointing at it you ended up pointing at the point you were pointing from.  Point!

Point point point point point?  Point point point.

That's it, I'm gonna get me some ice cream and watch the Simpsons.


----------



## iblis (Nov 22, 2004)

Algolei said:
			
		

> You doofus!  I read that three times trying to figure out what the FAQ you were talking about!
> 
> So no, I _didn't_ understand what was being communicated to me, not at first.  You have wasted my time trying to make a point which you yourself have just disproven.  Which makes it a good point.  Because by pointing at it you ended up pointing at the point you were pointing from.  Point!
> 
> ...





Hehe. Yep, fair call really.

I _am_ a doofus. Wait, what's a doofus? :/


----------



## Chacal (Nov 22, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> "What did you bring that book I did not want to be read to out of up for?"
> Say it aloud.



Well, I would try that if I thought that having my co-workers looking at me while I'm doing strange noises could help my english.

bad english parser -FNORD/Chacal


----------



## Algolei (Nov 23, 2004)

iblis said:
			
		

> Wait, what's a doofus? :/



_*I*_ don't _*know!*_  Teh MTV was on behind me while I was posting, anything could've slipped in there.

I still haven't deciphered this line, by the way:



> *&*lEt alone th dman Unternef!1!!!1!***



(I can't look at it without thinking, "It seems to have a base in Indo-European....")


----------



## iblis (Nov 23, 2004)

Algolei said:
			
		

> (I can't look at it without thinking, "It seems to have a base in Indo-European....")



 Unternef was meant to be Internef, I seem to recall. Kinda overdid the overdoing a tad. Drat. ***Let alone the damn Internet!!!*** is the raw version of course - or close enough. Actually, I think I might've made a typo while deliberately making other typos!

Nyeh, well. That, not exactly, then, did work, I can see. That is the time I try pleading the case against grammarian preferential behaviour that is last, absolutely. Well, until next time, that is, at which point I'll no doubt have a worse go of it still.


----------



## jaerdaph (Nov 23, 2004)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> Less caffeine, Ari. Less caffeine.  Otherhow folks'll got fewer respect for you're patience.




Yeah, you need fewer caffeine, Mouse. You gots to cut back!


----------



## Sebastian Francis (Nov 23, 2004)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> In a word... _*AAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!*_
> 
> [long pedantic rant deleted]




I bet you get uptight when people say "data" intead of "datum", right?

Come on, chill out.  Language changes and evolves.

Personally, I'm far more pissed off over the rampant spelling errors on webforums than I am over grammar.  But that's a whole different thread...


----------



## Algolei (Nov 24, 2004)

iblis said:
			
		

> ***Let alone the damn Internet!!!***



Oh!  I couldn't even get past the first word, I thought it was IEt.  And IE suggests "Indo-European" to me.  Subconsciously.  I guess.

Plus you spelt "alone" correctly, which naturally could throw anyone off the scent.

Now I must go watch _Inuyasha_ and complain that the characters' mouths don't move to the words.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Nov 24, 2004)

Sebastian Francis said:
			
		

> I bet you get uptight when people say "data" intead of "datum", right?
> 
> Come on, chill out.  Language changes and evolves.




Nope. "Data" vs. "datum" doesn't bother me.

That said, yes, language changes and evolves. That's not an excuse for people who can't be bothered to use it/learn it properly.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 24, 2004)

Sebastian Francis said:
			
		

> I bet you get uptight when people say "data" intead of "datum", right?




Don't forget 'criteria' for 'criterion'... and 'bicep' for 'biceps'.

-Hyp.


----------



## tarchon (Nov 24, 2004)

"jive" for "jibe"
"specie" as the singular of "species"
"persay," ya gotta love "persay"


----------



## hong (Nov 24, 2004)

You know, as long as people realise that the plural of biceps is bicepses and the plural of data is datae, I'm cool.


----------



## DaveStebbins (Nov 24, 2004)

Algolei said:
			
		

> And IE suggests "Indo-European" to me.



*THAT's* where you're going wrong. When you start with an incorrect base assumption, everything else after that seems like gibberish.   

-Dave
B.S. *I*ndustrial *E*ngineering, SUNY Buffalo, 1989
P.E. *I*ndustrial *E*ngineering, 1999


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 24, 2004)

hong said:
			
		

> You know, as long as people realise that the plural of biceps is bicepses and the plural of data is datae, I'm cool.




Bicepses is an accepted plural form 

Datae, er, isn't, but you get that.

-Hyp.


----------



## barsoomcore (Nov 24, 2004)

Hice

Meese

Jackai

English plurals are fun.


----------



## Algolei (Nov 26, 2004)

DaveStebbins said:
			
		

> *THAT's* where you're going wrong. When you start with an incorrect base assumption, everything else after that seems like gibberish.
> 
> -Dave
> B.S. *I*ndustrial *E*ngineering, SUNY Buffalo, 1989
> P.E. *I*ndustrial *E*ngineering, 1999



If I didn't assume stuff  I'd never get anywhere.  

For instance, I gotta BS too.  But we must all assume my S doesn't stand for what your S stands for.


----------



## hong (Nov 26, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Bicepses is an accepted plural form
> 
> Datae, er, isn't, but you get that.




Oh, please.

Bacteria -> bacteriae
Katana -> katanae
Ninja -> ninjae

It's not like data -> datae is so hard to accept, now is it?

The level of ignorance on this mailing list is just shocking, I tell you, shocking.


----------



## Tom Cashel (Nov 26, 2004)

Why do Hong and Mythusmage look exactly alike?







It's just plain wrong.


----------



## mythusmage (Nov 27, 2004)

We're a bilocating small cat who really lives in Roanake VA and runs a long term *Powers and Perils* campaign for a flock of pre-med ravens.


----------



## hong (Nov 27, 2004)

Huh?


----------



## mythusmage (Nov 27, 2004)

You want to know the truth, in my case the little chap is a kitten having an epiphany. In Hong's case he's drunk. In the case of cats it's often the same thing.


----------



## Tom Cashel (Nov 27, 2004)

Cats that can bi-locate, have epiphanies, get drunk and look like any cat they want?

_shudder_

I have to go lock the doors and windows now.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 28, 2004)

Tom Cashel said:
			
		

> I have to go lock the doors and windows now.




Didn't you ever hear of the Cat Who Walks Through Walls?

-Hyp.


----------



## hong (Nov 28, 2004)

Huh?


----------



## Algolei (Nov 28, 2004)

huh?


----------



## Dakkareth (Nov 28, 2004)

While it's true, that orthographic and grammatical errors can severely impede the understanding, I'd have you consider, that for a considerable number of people here English *isn't* their native language. It's no excuse for completely mangling sentences and expecting to be understood, but you should be aware of this added difficulty. No matter how much time I spend reading English books and visiting English boards, I still make mistakes.

Also it should be noted, that typos happen and that it's often hard to find one's own mistakes. I used to look down upon people using 'their' instead of 'they're', 'than' instead of 'then', etc until I noticed, that it happened to me, too. If I'm typing quickly it simply happens and I can't find and correct every single instance.

That said, I *adore* the person with the 'Department of Internet Education' signature explaining the difference between 'lose' and 'loose' - *this* is constructive action, complaining about the decline of language isn't.



> Bacteria -> bacteriae
> Katana -> katanae
> Ninja -> ninjae
> 
> It's not like data -> datae is so hard to accept, now is it?




No complains about bacteriae, but the plural of 'katana' and 'ninja' (coming from the Japanese language and not from Latin) should be 'katana' and 'ninja'. 'Ninjatachi' also might be a valid plural, but I'm not sure on this. 'Data' is technically speaking a plural word (the singular being 'datum'), thus 'datae' is nonsensical.


----------



## Christopher Lambert (Nov 28, 2004)

I blame the education system. Where I went to school, they stopped teaching spelling at grade 7 and grammar at grade 9. From grade 10 onwards they wanted to teach us literature ... often the boring kind.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Nov 28, 2004)

Dakkareth said:
			
		

> 'Data' is technically speaking a plural word (the singular being 'datum'), thus 'datae' is nonsensical.
> 
> No complains about bacteriae...




Doncha hate it when that happens?  

'Bacteria' is a plural, the singular being 'bacterium'...

-Hyp.


----------



## Dakkareth (Nov 29, 2004)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Doncha hate it when that happens?
> 
> 'Bacteria' is a plural, the singular being 'bacterium'...
> 
> -Hyp.




Zing! 

If I had thought twice ... but alas, karma seems to be more than just a fancy concept


----------

