Please can we not use...

[Kernowfem]

I always think this way. One can be as academic as possible, but if you don't have a modicum of common sense you can forget it. Grammar police don't bother me. Being from Yorkshire we daily annihilate the queens English.

How words are written does not detract from who a person is in real life.

 

[Wyvern]

I may have the opposite of dyslexia, with a knack for using the English language tolerably well. Since I seem to have been born with it, I claim no credit.

As far as I am able I therefore avoid criticising others, one thing that does bother me currently is people using the word "like" instead of "as though". For a long while it was people confusing "affect" and "effect" - and I admit it isnt easy - but I haven't seen the either word being used lately. However - what about "despatch" and "dispatch"?

 

[LexyBoy]

Would you like to explain to the rest of us why it is I've been 'PWND'?

For starting a grammar thread using “can” in a situation where an alternative word would arguably* be more appropriate: of course we are capable of not using misunderestimate, truthishly etc; I think you were requesting that we should not, so perhaps “would” would of been more appropriate.

*to those who enjoy arguing/ranting about petty points of grammar, i.e. all posters on this thread.

(insert obligatory smiley face)

 

[Bayum]

For starting a grammar thread using “can” in a situation where an alternative word would arguably* be more appropriate: of course we are capable of not using misunderestimate, truthishly etc; I think you were requesting that we should not, so perhaps “would” would of been more appropriate.

*to those who enjoy arguing/ranting about petty points of grammar, i.e. all posters on this thread.

(insert obligatory smiley face)

We have all been through the education system to some degree, therefore it is reasonable to suggest that we all have knowledge of such matters. The use of 'can' in this context is me asking for people to follow such knowledge and teaching. For me to say someone 'should' use such language would arguably be of greater disrespect than asking someone to use what they have been taught. Therefore the context is appropriate - you are permitted to use such language, but it isn't being forced upon you.

 

[tbtc]

I always think this way. One can be as academic as possible, but if you don't have a modicum of common sense you can forget it. Grammar police don't bother me. Being from Yorkshire we daily annihilate the queens English

Tha' could argue that Yorkshire folk talk proper - here in Sheffield we still use words like "thee" and "thou" (although others in South Yorkshire think we say "dee" and "dow") - which is the way wot people used to talk. Has the world changed, or have I changed (as one of England's greatest poets once asked)?

But, I suppose that's the point of this thread - language changes - words rise and fall in popularity, word meanings evolve (sometimes because the need to explain something evolves - look at how this newfangled internet has seen some definitions stretched to fit a "new" thing).

Then again, people get their knickers in a twist about different things - for some people it's spelling mistakes on Twitter - I'm not a huge fan of "clickbait" - like thread titles such as "Please can we not use..." rather than "The Spelling And Language Thread" - but each to their own.

We'll probably have thread titles like "You Won't Belive What This Passenger Did Next" before long, given how links online are being "sexed up" to make us more likely to click on them. Hmm, there's one - "sexed up" - is that an example of the language evolving to respond to a new phenomena (the way that people try to over-sell things - be it to get you to click on their thread or a dossier about Iraq), or is it bad english? I CAN HAZ CHEESEBURGER AT BUFFET CAR NAO, PLZ?

 

[Emyr]

Urgh, clickbait. I've read a few blogs railing against those methods.

Apparently Chrome users can get a browser plugin which moderates the hyperbole in the titles.

 

[Railsigns]

For starting a grammar thread using “can” in a situation where an alternative word would arguably* be more appropriate: of course we are capable of not using misunderestimate, truthishly etc; I think you were requesting that we should not, so perhaps “would” would of been more appropriate.

Oh dear. Very poor indeed!

 

[Bayum]

Oh dear. Very poor indeed!

I thought I'd leave it to someone else to point out the irony in the post!

 

[PaxVobiscum]

So what are we suppose to call the top part of the plug that we remove when wiring the plug or replacing the fuse?

A plug top.

(Rather than a plug top top).

Which reminds me - anybody else remember carefully and neatly wiring one of the rubber Duraplugs which were once fashionable for power and garden tools, only to find that you had forgotten to thread the cable through the hole in the top of the plug?



:cry:

 

[7Pinza]

Come on, if anyone does make an error, let's not make an escape goat out of them

 

[ExRes]

They shood be hang up too dri an mayd anne exampol ov

 

[ac6000cw]

A plug top.

(Rather than a plug top top).

Which reminds me - anybody else remember carefully and neatly wiring one of the rubber Duraplugs which were once fashionable for power and garden tools, only to find that you had forgotten to thread the cable through the hole in the top of the plug?



:cry:

Yes, many times (and I've seen some plug tops hacked by cutting the cable 'collar' so the cable could be pushed into it, to avoid having to disconnect & reconnect everything....)

 

[Railsigns]

Yes, many times (and I've seen some plug top's hacked by cutting the cable 'collar' so the cable could be pushed into it, to avoid having to disconnect & reconnect everything....)

The plural of top is tops. No apostrophe.

 

[ac6000cw]

The plural of top is tops. No apostrophe.

Correct . My wife is much better at using apostrophes than me - I think I must have missed that bit at school....

Now where's that copy of 'Eats, Shoots and Leaves'

 

[Bayum]

Correct . My wife is much better at using apostrophes than me - I think I must have missed that bit at school....

Now where's that copy of 'Eats, Shoots and Leaves'

We use apostrophes to indicate possession or omission of letters.


Cannot can be contracted to can't and as such we have omitted the second n as well as the o.

We also use apostrophes to indicate possession, I.e. Mr Hudson's classroom, Ross' book. Generally the apostrophe comes after the end of the word that posseses the item, unless it ends in the letter s. We then put the apostrophe after the s, and I leave it at that. Some add another s after the apostrophe but I think it looks messy, I.e. Virus's.

 

[Railsigns]

We use apostrophes to indicate possession

An important, but frequently ignored, exception being the lack of apostrophes in the possessive words its, theirs, ours and yours.

 

[ac6000cw]

We also use apostrophes to indicate possession, I.e. Me Hudson's classroom, Ross' book. Generally the apostrophe comes after the end of the word that posses the item, unless it ends in the letter s.

Should it not be 'possesses' ?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Generally the apostrophe comes after the end of the word that posses the item, unless it ends in the letter s.

Is "posses" the recognised plural term of the word "posse" ?

 

[Bayum]

Is "posses" the recognised plural term of the word "posse" ?

Potentially.

It should have been 'possesses' as the poster above you correctly put. I made a hurried post after I had finished tutoring this morning whilst waiting for a deluge of sky water to pass.

 

[meridian2]

We also use apostrophes to indicate possessions.

Wrong.

An apostrophe is a portmanteau of a catastrophe of apostles.



*I'll get me coat.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . .

Grammar, punctuation, spelling (to an extent) matter very little in the big wide world.

I assume that you and I inhabit different worlds.

In the world I inhabit, opportunities are regularly denied to those whose 'grammar, punctuation and spelling' fall short of expectations; I include potential employment prospects, responses to ad hoc correspondence, and public sector funding. In each of these circumstances I and my colleages have regularly used criteria of these competences when making decisions which will have significant impact on the people making the applications.

I'm pleased to learn that in your own experiences your competences have not disadvantaged you.

 

[Bayum]

I assume that you and I inhabit different worlds.

In the world I inhabit, opportunities are regularly denied to those whose 'grammar, punctuation and spelling' fall short of expectations; I include potential employment prospects, responses to ad hoc correspondence, and public sector funding. In each of these circumstances I and my colleages have regularly used criteria of these competences when making decisions which will have significant impact on the people making the applications.

I'm pleased to learn that in your own experiences your competences have not disadvantaged you.

Don't worry.


I recognise that some in employment manage to find their job without having to write statements or application forms and the like, but I am really unsure as to how they manage to work on a daily basis within their job, particularly if as you say there is a lot of textual correspondence.

 

[ExRes]

Another oddity today on a thread I was looking at and have seen a number of times before, people trying to use 'definitely' and continually coming out with 'defiantly'

I've tried typing 'definitely' quickly, slowly, left handed and right handed, even while eating a chocolate digestive and simply can't understand how 'defiantly' comes into it at all, is it some sort of weird spellchecker that's had a late night out ?

 

[Yew]

Another oddity today on a thread I was looking at and have seen a number of times before, people trying to use 'definitely' and continually coming out with 'defiantly'

I've tried typing 'definitely' quickly, slowly, left handed and right handed, even while eating a chocolate digestive and simply can't understand how 'defiantly' comes into it at all, is it some sort of weird spellchecker that's had a late night out ?

The spell checker is definitely acting defiantly..

 

[Strat-tastic]

Maybe they are trying to spell it 'definately'.

 

[Emyr]

Defiantly autoincorrect.

 

[D6975]

QI afficianados will be aware that originally apostrophes always indicated missing letters.
The use to indicate possession is in fact a later extension of this as the English language evolved.

Belonging to John used to be written as Johnes
Belonging to England used to be written as Englandes.
So the apostrophe indicated the missing e.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Maybe they are trying to spell it 'definately'.

..or even"definatively" or even "defiantly"..

 

[GatwickDepress]

http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/

 

[Wyvern]

Going back to the title of this thread, what triggered my response is the use of the word "can" instead of "would"

For instance, someone might say "Can you open the window?" On days when I'm feeling awkward, I have an urge to reply "Yes I am able to. Would you like me to?"