Author Topic: Grammar nazi  (Read 184565 times)

mlejw6

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Alexandria, VA
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #550 on: March 25, 2016, 10:04:55 AM »
Why can't people use apostrophes correctly anymore? My theory is that with the rise of acronyms like DVD and BFF, people think apostrophes suddenly denote pluralization. But, it's [it has!] leaked into everyday words like "company's" to denote more than one company. WTF??? I see these mistakes all over the forums and in web articles. I even saw one in the Washington Post the other day. Ugh.

This is why I always type CDs or BFFs or DVDs. Not CD's. Unless I am talking about the CD's quality of audio, or some such. "I have many CDs that I should sell because I don't listen to them anymore."  "My daughter's BFFs are coming over to play."

Also:
  • It's means it is or it has
  • Its means "belongs to it"
  • Who's means who is or who has
  • Whose means who this belongs to
Those are the weird ones.

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 22318
  • Age: 66
  • Location: NorCal
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #551 on: March 25, 2016, 01:03:56 PM »
Why can't people use apostrophes correctly anymore? My theory is that with the rise of acronyms like DVD and BFF, people think apostrophes suddenly denote pluralization. But, it's [it has!] leaked into everyday words like "company's" to denote more than one company. WTF??? I see these mistakes all over the forums and in web articles. I even saw one in the Washington Post the other day. Ugh.

This is why I always type CDs or BFFs or DVDs. Not CD's. Unless I am talking about the CD's quality of audio, or some such. "I have many CDs that I should sell because I don't listen to them anymore."  "My daughter's BFFs are coming over to play."

Also:
  • It's means it is or it has
  • Its means "belongs to it"
  • Who's means who is or who has
  • Whose means who this belongs to
Those are the weird ones.
I'm clear on all of that, but whatever happened to "it's" to indicate possession? Is that gone with the wind or were the nuns (and their rulers) at my Catholic school wrong?

Paul | pdgessler

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 93
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Appleton, WI
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #552 on: March 25, 2016, 01:39:09 PM »
I'm clear on all of that, but whatever happened to "it's" to indicate possession? Is that gone with the wind or were the nuns (and their rulers) at my Catholic school wrong?

They were wrong:
« Last Edit: March 25, 2016, 01:42:59 PM by Paul | pdgessler »

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #553 on: March 25, 2016, 02:16:25 PM »
Why can't people use apostrophes correctly anymore? My theory is that with the rise of acronyms like DVD and BFF, people think apostrophes suddenly denote pluralization. But, it's [it has!] leaked into everyday words like "company's" to denote more than one company. WTF??? I see these mistakes all over the forums and in web articles. I even saw one in the Washington Post the other day. Ugh.

This is why I always type CDs or BFFs or DVDs. Not CD's. Unless I am talking about the CD's quality of audio, or some such. "I have many CDs that I should sell because I don't listen to them anymore."  "My daughter's BFFs are coming over to play."

Also:
  • It's means it is or it has
  • Its means "belongs to it"
  • Who's means who is or who has
  • Whose means who this belongs to
Those are the weird ones.
I'm clear on all of that, but whatever happened to "it's" to indicate possession? Is that gone with the wind or were the nuns (and their rulers) at my Catholic school wrong?

They were wrong.  "It's" does not in any context indicate possession.

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 22318
  • Age: 66
  • Location: NorCal
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #554 on: March 25, 2016, 02:20:48 PM »
Why can't people use apostrophes correctly anymore? My theory is that with the rise of acronyms like DVD and BFF, people think apostrophes suddenly denote pluralization. But, it's [it has!] leaked into everyday words like "company's" to denote more than one company. WTF??? I see these mistakes all over the forums and in web articles. I even saw one in the Washington Post the other day. Ugh.

This is why I always type CDs or BFFs or DVDs. Not CD's. Unless I am talking about the CD's quality of audio, or some such. "I have many CDs that I should sell because I don't listen to them anymore."  "My daughter's BFFs are coming over to play."

Also:
  • It's means it is or it has
  • Its means "belongs to it"
  • Who's means who is or who has
  • Whose means who this belongs to
Those are the weird ones.
I'm clear on all of that, but whatever happened to "it's" to indicate possession? Is that gone with the wind or were the nuns (and their rulers) at my Catholic school wrong?

They were wrong.  "It's" does not in any context indicate possession.
God, what a relief!

bobechs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1065
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #555 on: March 29, 2016, 05:55:47 PM »
God, what a relief!


Weren't they working for God?  Why give Him any credit?

jooles

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #556 on: April 06, 2016, 11:43:21 AM »
Today's annoyance

"Could of"

Really?  HAVE!  "Could have"

Oh and that reminds me of another

"I half to go to the store."  Shaking my head.  How do these people get along in the world? I do not know.

jooles

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #557 on: April 06, 2016, 11:47:32 AM »
They don't own the house, you do.

More or less, yes, but as I noted in my earlier post, "[t]he exact nature of the [bank's] interest [in the property] varies by jurisdiction". At common law, "a legal mortgage of freehold property was made by the same form of assurance and framed on the same principles as an absolute conveyance, subject, however, to a proviso for redemption". Halsbury's Laws of England, Vol 77 (2016), ¶ 161 [free link not available, but PDF attached].

In other words, at common law, a mortgage was literally a deed through which the purchaser of the property conveyed legal title to the bank, but retained equitable title in the sense that if the purchaser paid off the loan in full, she would have the right to compel the bank to re-convey legal title to her. This substantially remains the law in certain US states. E.g., US Bank National Association v. Ibanez, 458 Mass 637, 649 (Supreme Jud Ct 2011) ("In ... Massachusetts, a mortgage is a transfer of legal title in a property to secure a debt. Therefore, when a person borrows money to purchase a home and gives the lender a mortgage, the homeowner-mortgagor retains only equitable title in the home; the legal title is held by the mortgagee.") (citations omitted).

Of course, other jurisdictions use a different system where the bank's security interest takes the form of a lien rather than the form of ownership of legal title. For example, in Illinois, a mortgage does not convey legal title to the creditor. See generally Maniez v. Citibank, 937 NE 2d 237, 247 (IL App Ct 2010), citing Harms v. Sprague, 105 Ill 2d 215, 223 (Supreme Ct 1984).

Cathy, the rest of humanity will continue to frustrate you for the rest of your existence.  We'll never catch up, not one of us.

jooles

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #558 on: April 06, 2016, 11:55:36 AM »
So is supposed to be used in something like, "The grass is tall, so it will be mowed." The use expanded to "The grass is tall. So, it will be mowed."

Now, so is commonly used at the beginning of a sentence to mean "as a result" as it was traditionally used, but also with the same meaning as "uh," as an initial attention-getter. For example, "So, do you want to go get some lunch?"

It is also used sometimes in a discussion to "hold the floor," or keep one's side of the conversation going by making some noise between sentences. This is particularly common in public interviews.

So is sometimes used in the beginning of a sentence to connect the sentence with the previous sentence or paragraph, as a discourse marker. It may imply that the content of the sentence is there because of the previous idea, or it may just be there to keep up the rhythmic flow of the text.

So, I find it annoying, too.

 
It's partly a regional usage: Seamus Heaney in the foreword to his translation of Beowulf says


Conventional renderings of hwæt, the first word of the poem, tend towards the archaic literary, with ‘lo’, ‘hark’, ‘behold’, ‘attend’ and – more colloquially – ‘listen’ being some of the solutions offered previously. But in Hiberno-English Scullion-speak, the particle ‘so’ came naturally to the rescue, because in that idiom ‘so’ operates as an expression that obliterates all previous discourse and narrative, and at the same time functions as an exclamation calling for immediate attention. So, ‘so’ it was:

So. The Spear-Danes in days gone by and the kings who ruled them had courage and greatness. We have heard of those princes’ heroic campaigns.

(full text here; http://www.wwnorton.com/college/english/nael/beowulf/introbeowulf.htm)
 
Both responses from - http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/43273/sentences-beginning-with-so
 

« Last Edit: April 06, 2016, 11:58:37 AM by jooles »

TheBuddha

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #559 on: April 06, 2016, 01:48:19 PM »
with the same meaning as "uh," as an initial attention-getter. For example, "So, do you want to go get some lunch?"

This is why it's so annoying to me. Like you say, it's an icebreaker, an attention-getter. We've all used it like that. Imagine an awkward situation where nobody is talking and you say "Sooo... how 'bout those Raiders?" or whatever. But that's precisely why it makes no sense as the beginning of an answer to a direct question. In that case you don't need an icebreaker or an attention-getter, you were just asked a direct question. The question itself is your opening. That's why it feels grating and inappropriate.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2016, 01:58:45 PM by TheBuddha »

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7374
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #560 on: April 06, 2016, 02:44:54 PM »
People who say things like "All sheep are not white" when what they really mean is "not all sheep are white.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #561 on: April 06, 2016, 02:49:25 PM »
with the same meaning as "uh," as an initial attention-getter. For example, "So, do you want to go get some lunch?"

This is why it's so annoying to me. Like you say, it's an icebreaker, an attention-getter. We've all used it like that. Imagine an awkward situation where nobody is talking and you say "Sooo... how 'bout those Raiders?" or whatever. But that's precisely why it makes no sense as the beginning of an answer to a direct question. In that case you don't need an icebreaker or an attention-getter, you were just asked a direct question. The question itself is your opening. That's why it feels grating and inappropriate.

When someone asks you something -- say, "tell me about x", do you not have any sort of introductory verbal tic that starts you out as you launch into the story? "Well,..", "Um,...", "Okay, here's what happened...", "So..."

Nothing at all? Ever? You simply launch into the story? If so, I think you are quite unusual. The only people I hear in my life who do not usually do this are on the autism spectrum. Have been wondering why that is, but anyway...

I listen to a ton of public radio, and I notice that whenever a guest is asked to tell a story or respond to a question with an opinion, they almost always (as in probably 99% of the time) start with one of these leader words.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #562 on: April 06, 2016, 02:52:17 PM »
People who say things like "All sheep are not white" when what they really mean is "not all sheep are white.

Yes!

Also, misplacement of the word "just" to mean "only".  As in, saying: "It's just not for breakfast anymore" when they mean "It's not just for breakfast anymore." I am hearing this more and more lately, and it's making me juts.

TheBuddha

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #563 on: April 06, 2016, 04:42:23 PM »
with the same meaning as "uh," as an initial attention-getter. For example, "So, do you want to go get some lunch?"

This is why it's so annoying to me. Like you say, it's an icebreaker, an attention-getter. We've all used it like that. Imagine an awkward situation where nobody is talking and you say "Sooo... how 'bout those Raiders?" or whatever. But that's precisely why it makes no sense as the beginning of an answer to a direct question. In that case you don't need an icebreaker or an attention-getter, you were just asked a direct question. The question itself is your opening. That's why it feels grating and inappropriate.

When someone asks you something -- say, "tell me about x", do you not have any sort of introductory verbal tic that starts you out as you launch into the story? "Well,..", "Um,...", "Okay, here's what happened...", "So..."

Nothing at all? Ever? You simply launch into the story? If so, I think you are quite unusual. The only people I hear in my life who do not usually do this are on the autism spectrum. Have been wondering why that is, but anyway...

I listen to a ton of public radio, and I notice that whenever a guest is asked to tell a story or respond to a question with an opinion, they almost always (as in probably 99% of the time) start with one of these leader words.

Sure I do, but I don't use "So," for the reasons given above. (I'll leave it at that, although I'm tempted to rant here.)

As an attention-getting word, I really like the old-fashioned "Say". My grandma used to use it and I always liked it.



TheBuddha

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #564 on: April 06, 2016, 04:44:38 PM »
Also, misplacement of the word "just" to mean "only".  As in, saying: "It's just not for breakfast anymore" when they mean "It's not just for breakfast anymore." I am hearing this more and more lately, and it's making me juts.

Thank you for this one, I notice it too. People just don't realize the placement affects the meaning.

People don't just realize the placement affects the meaning.
People don't realize the placement just affects the meaning.
People don't realize the placement affects just the meaning.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7374
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #565 on: April 06, 2016, 04:45:17 PM »
People who say things like "All sheep are not white" when what they really mean is "not all sheep are white.

Yes!

Also, misplacement of the word "just" to mean "only".  As in, saying: "It's just not for breakfast anymore" when they mean "It's not just for breakfast anymore." I am hearing this more and more lately, and it's making me juts.

Funny.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7374
  • Senior Mustachian
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #566 on: April 06, 2016, 04:45:47 PM »
Also, misplacement of the word "just" to mean "only".  As in, saying: "It's just not for breakfast anymore" when they mean "It's not just for breakfast anymore." I am hearing this more and more lately, and it's making me juts.

Thank you for this one, I notice it too. People just don't realize the placement affects the meaning.

People don't just realize the placement affects the meaning.
People don't realize the placement just affects the meaning.
People don't realize the placement affects just the meaning.
Just people don't realize the placement affects the meaning.

grantmeaname

  • CM*MW 2023 Attendees
  • Walrus Stache
  • *
  • Posts: 5960
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Middle West
  • Cast me away from yesterday's things
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #567 on: April 10, 2016, 02:43:17 AM »
...
I'm confused - your username is TheBuddha, but your avatar is Bobby Hill.

Gerard

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1570
  • Location: eastern canada
    • Optimacheap
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #568 on: April 10, 2016, 06:55:39 AM »
As somebody who posts in this thread, I think I can get away with this link as self-deprecation:

http://www.sciencealert.com/people-who-constantly-pick-up-grammar-mistakes-are-kinda-jerks-scientists-find

TheBuddha

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #569 on: April 11, 2016, 01:11:12 AM »
...
I'm confused - your username is TheBuddha, but your avatar is Bobby Hill.

Congratulations, you have achieved satori.

shelivesthedream

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6745
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #570 on: March 17, 2017, 04:04:31 PM »
Sorry to necropost, everyone who is following this thread, but I have seen this so many times in the last few days and I just can't take it any more:

IT'S AFFECT, YOU DUMBASS, NOT EFFECT. FOR FUCK'S OWN SAKE.

(Phew. Better now.)

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 22318
  • Age: 66
  • Location: NorCal
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #571 on: March 17, 2017, 08:31:12 PM »
Necropost. I love it!

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3961
  • Location: France
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #572 on: March 18, 2017, 07:40:52 AM »
Sorry to necropost, everyone who is following this thread, but I have seen this so many times in the last few days and I just can't take it any more:

IT'S AFFECT, YOU DUMBASS, NOT EFFECT. FOR FUCK'S OWN SAKE.

(Phew. Better now.)

I can see that it's having quite an affect on you.

BlueHouse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4136
  • Location: WDC
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #573 on: March 18, 2017, 08:08:21 AM »
Thank you for reviving this thread.  I have missed it!.

Also, when referring to money, it's PRINCIPAL, not PRINCIPLE

just remember Money is your friend (PAL)

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3961
  • Location: France
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #574 on: March 18, 2017, 08:10:30 AM »
Thank you for reviving this thread. I have missed it!

Also, when referring to money, it's PRINCIPAL, not PRINCIPLE.

Just remember, money is your friend (PAL).

I seem to be in a corrective/smirking mood, so I fixed your submission for you! I need to get out more.

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 22318
  • Age: 66
  • Location: NorCal
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #575 on: March 18, 2017, 10:02:57 AM »
Thank you for reviving this thread. I have missed it!

Also, when referring to money, it's PRINCIPAL, not PRINCIPLE.

Just remember, money is your friend (PAL).

I seem to be in a corrective/smirking mood, so I fixed your submission for you! I need to get out more.
In school we learned, "The person in charge of our school is the principal, and he is your pal". It still works if you drag it into modern times, complete with gender neutrality.

Jet711

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Age: 1746
  • Location: Canada
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #576 on: March 18, 2017, 10:18:02 AM »
I once went to an elementary school (regional boundaries forced me to change schools), in which the girls there completely overused "like".

Example: "So you know how, uh, like, apple, like, released the new iphone 6? It has, like, so many features! I, like, love it!

^ That drove me nuts. Half the time they used "like" two or three times in a row. That is why I never use "like" when I type.

Also, another bad habit is how kids these days will begin their sentences, and say a section of the sentence, arrive at a comma, and say "um", say another couple words, and then you guessed it - "um".

WHAT IS WRONG WITH KIDS THESE DAYS?!?!

Goldielocks

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7062
  • Location: BC
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #577 on: March 18, 2017, 10:58:31 AM »
I once went to an elementary school (regional boundaries forced me to change schools), in which the girls there completely overused "like".

Example: "So you know how, uh, like, apple, like, released the new iphone 6? It has, like, so many features! I, like, love it!

^ That drove me nuts. Half the time they used "like" two or three times in a row. That is why I never use "like" when I type.

Also, another bad habit is how kids these days will begin their sentences, and say a section of the sentence, arrive at a comma, and say "um", say another couple words, and then you guessed it - "um".

WHAT IS WRONG WITH KIDS THESE DAYS?!?!

Not enough Grammar Nazi's.

Riff

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 116
  • Location: West Michigan
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #578 on: March 18, 2017, 01:58:50 PM »
WHAT IS WRONG WITH KIDS THESE DAYS?!?!
What drives me a bit nuts these days is the constant "up speak?"  Y'know, how after like, every few words? They're like, asking a question? As if they need constant approval?

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3961
  • Location: France
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #579 on: March 18, 2017, 03:00:27 PM »
WHAT IS WRONG WITH KIDS THESE DAYS?!?!
What drives me a bit nuts these days is the constant "up speak?"  Y'know, how after like, every few words? They're like, asking a question? As if they need constant approval?

Rising inflection. It's from Australia.

Oh, you North Americans - did you never watch Neighbours or Home and Away when you were young? My mum and grandma were addicts.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20742
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #580 on: March 19, 2017, 07:24:28 AM »
Oooh, I like this necro-revival.

Canadians are often guilty of rising inflection.  It goes well with eh.

Things I have seen on the forums:

reign in when they mean rein in, re curbing spending.  I guess they need a curb bit on their wallets?

Walla or Wallah - it is voila, from voi la, look at that.  If you are going to borrow from a foreign language, please keep the spelling.

I can live with typos, I know phones and tablets do a lot of auto-correct that can be a pain for the typist.  But the choice of words?  Are we Alice and the March Hare?  Hum, it is March. . . . .

MandalayVA

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1569
  • Location: Orlando FL
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #581 on: March 19, 2017, 08:01:46 AM »
I once went to an elementary school (regional boundaries forced me to change schools), in which the girls there completely overused "like".

Example: "So you know how, uh, like, apple, like, released the new iphone 6? It has, like, so many features! I, like, love it!

^ That drove me nuts. Half the time they used "like" two or three times in a row. That is why I never use "like" when I type.

Also, another bad habit is how kids these days will begin their sentences, and say a section of the sentence, arrive at a comma, and say "um", say another couple words, and then you guessed it - "um".

WHAT IS WRONG WITH KIDS THESE DAYS?!?!

Not enough Grammar Nazi's Nazis.

Don't forget the Grammar Nazis' henchmen, the Punctuation Police.  ;)

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20742
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #582 on: March 19, 2017, 08:08:31 AM »
Don't forget the Grammar Nazis' henchmen, the Punctuation Police.  ;)

Somewhere on the Forums is a story about a union grievance that started because of the confusion caused by a missing comma (the Oxford comma).  Punctuation matters, as the victim of the homicidal panda can testify.  I loves me my commas.*

*Yes I know that is a grammatically incorrect sentence, it is vernacular.  It is hard to hug a comma, but I will try, here goes:

{{{{{,}}}}}

BlueHouse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4136
  • Location: WDC
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #583 on: March 19, 2017, 12:40:07 PM »
Lose Loose.  enough said.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #584 on: March 19, 2017, 12:54:38 PM »
Uninterested and disinterested.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20742
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #585 on: March 19, 2017, 01:52:20 PM »
Shelivesthedream

Look at all the posts!  Obviously we have missed this thread.  May it live long and prosper.

pbkmaine

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8927
  • Age: 67
  • Location: The Villages, Florida
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #586 on: March 19, 2017, 03:36:18 PM »
Your cursing is excellent, Craig.

shelivesthedream

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6745
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #587 on: March 19, 2017, 04:34:32 PM »
Shelivesthedream

Look at all the posts!  Obviously we have missed this thread.  May it live long and prosper.

Always good to know one is not alone. :)


daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3961
  • Location: France
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #588 on: March 19, 2017, 06:21:45 PM »
English is my second language, therefore I'm apologizing in advance for any forthcoming grammar errors, if any.

One thing that irritates me to no end is the use of the word because, to cancel out the need for an explanation or details.

Don't be a fucking jerk and speak/type/text the correct information you dick.

Also, please correct my grammar anytime you see an error on my part. I will be forever grateful for your help.

I think you would say "grammatical errors" or "errors in grammar", but not "grammar errors".

I would put a comma between "correct information" and "you dick".

Your English is considerably better than my... every other language.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #589 on: March 19, 2017, 08:09:33 PM »
About 75% of this thread is contained in this song:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O14k6sT8Fp8

It's not his best work, but it is the one most relevant to the discussion at hand.

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 22318
  • Age: 66
  • Location: NorCal
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #590 on: March 20, 2017, 10:54:56 AM »
One good turn deserves another:

https://youtu.be/8Gv0H-vPoDc

jordanread

  • Guest
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #591 on: March 20, 2017, 11:12:23 AM »
One good turn deserves another:

https://youtu.be/8Gv0H-vPoDc

I had never seen the video for that song. I like it.

teen persuasion

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1226
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #592 on: March 21, 2017, 08:56:36 PM »
Don't forget the Grammar Nazis' henchmen, the Punctuation Police.  ;)

Somewhere on the Forums is a story about a union grievance that started because of the confusion caused by a missing comma (the Oxford comma).  Punctuation matters, as the victim of the homicidal panda can testify.  I loves me my commas.*

*Yes I know that is a grammatically incorrect sentence, it is vernacular.  It is hard to hug a comma, but I will try, here goes:

{{{{{,}}}}}

Is this the story?  DH passed the link on to me.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/03/16/lack-oxford-comma-costs-maine-company-millions-overtime-dispute/BIxK837fA2C06qavQMDs5J/story.html

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20742
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #593 on: March 22, 2017, 08:25:07 AM »
Don't forget the Grammar Nazis' henchmen, the Punctuation Police.  ;)

Somewhere on the Forums is a story about a union grievance that started because of the confusion caused by a missing comma (the Oxford comma).  Punctuation matters, as the victim of the homicidal panda can testify.  I loves me my commas.*

*Yes I know that is a grammatically incorrect sentence, it is vernacular.  It is hard to hug a comma, but I will try, here goes:

{{{{{,}}}}}

Is this the story?  DH passed the link on to me.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/03/16/lack-oxford-comma-costs-maine-company-millions-overtime-dispute/BIxK837fA2C06qavQMDs5J/story.html

Yes. 

calimom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
  • Location: Northern California
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #594 on: March 22, 2017, 11:13:55 PM »
Not enough Grammar Nazi's Nazis.

Don't forget the Grammar Nazis' henchmen, the Punctuation Police.  ;)

GuessTypo?

Or just the local branch of the 'Postrophe Patrol?

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3188
    • My Blog
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #595 on: March 24, 2017, 09:02:15 PM »
Might've been mentioned before, but: inoperative vs inoperable.

Inoperative means not working. Inoperable means can't be successfully surgically operated on.

grantmeaname

  • CM*MW 2023 Attendees
  • Walrus Stache
  • *
  • Posts: 5960
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Middle West
  • Cast me away from yesterday's things
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #596 on: March 25, 2017, 02:39:38 AM »
Might've been mentioned before, but: inoperative vs inoperable.

Inoperative means not working. Inoperable means can't be successfully surgically operated on.


johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3188
    • My Blog
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #597 on: March 25, 2017, 10:13:01 AM »
Might've been mentioned before, but: inoperative vs inoperable.

Inoperative means not working. Inoperable means can't be successfully surgically operated on.



And yet, http://wikidiff.com/inoperable/inoperative

BlueHouse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4136
  • Location: WDC
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #598 on: March 25, 2017, 10:20:40 AM »
Might've been mentioned before, but: inoperative vs inoperable.

Inoperative means not working. Inoperable means can't be successfully surgically operated on.



And yet, http://wikidiff.com/inoperable/inoperative

Is there some group dedicated to bringing the correct meanings of words back?  Internet dictionaries are responsible for the degradation of the English language and some of the differences in words bring such a subtlety that their use can make reading literature or poetry or music so much more enjoyable. 

I really want to make the meaning of "literal" mean "literal" and not the literal opposite of literal! 

grantmeaname

  • CM*MW 2023 Attendees
  • Walrus Stache
  • *
  • Posts: 5960
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Middle West
  • Cast me away from yesterday's things
Re: Grammar nazi
« Reply #599 on: March 26, 2017, 03:28:33 AM »
Might've been mentioned before, but: inoperative vs inoperable.

Inoperative means not working. Inoperable means can't be successfully surgically operated on.



And yet, http://wikidiff.com/inoperable/inoperative
Did you not read your own link? It provides the same two definitions to inoperable that google does.