Subject: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 09 - 10:14 PM Yes, I'm feeling grumpy tonight...maybe because of health care debate... But, c'mon folks! TRY to learn the difference between these terms and use them correctly.. 95% of TV personalities very clearly say 'insure' when they mean 'ensure'. And maybe 74.058% of those who type 'except' meant 'accept'. Spelling? I'd better not start. At least some of that can be attributed to dyslexia or poor coordination....but c'mon...it's "Christian" not "Christain" and "lesbian" not "lesbain"...etc... Ok...I'll go to bed now...others may add favorite examples...or throw virtual tomatoes at me. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: katlaughing Date: 17 Dec 09 - 10:24 PM I thought it was "termaters?" |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Joe Offer Date: 17 Dec 09 - 10:41 PM Well, Bill, between you and I.... |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: katlaughing Date: 17 Dec 09 - 11:12 PM me, me, me, me, meow!**bg** |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: artbrooks Date: 17 Dec 09 - 11:42 PM A copy of "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" (or is it "Eats Shoots, and Leaves"?) belongs on every desk. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: catspaw49 Date: 17 Dec 09 - 11:56 PM I think your wrong in you're thinking Bill........Maybe if you could be more pacific on the points and not go off like nukular bomb. Pasw |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Janie Date: 18 Dec 09 - 12:05 AM Bunch a grumpy ol' menz....up past yer bedtimes:^) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Tangledwood Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:04 AM Spelling? I'd better not start. At least some of that can be attributed to dyslexia or poor coordination....but c'mon... c'mon - that would be "come on" would it? others may add favorite examples I might need some time to decide upon my favourite. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Georgiansilver Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:53 AM My smelling has always been first rate!! |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Dave the Gnome Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:21 AM Shame this site does not have a spilling chucker. :D (eG) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MartinRyan Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:58 AM There's a famous old pub near where I live which once belonged to a man called Paddy Burke. So it was known as "Paddy Burke's", not surprisingly. The eponymous gentleman is no longer with us but the name persists. Recently, a new sign appeared at the entrance to the pub car park: Parking is for Paddy Burkes's customers only!" What's more - I think they're right! Regards |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 Dec 09 - 08:31 AM I am always surprised that so many Mudcatters cannot get the difference between "its" [= belonging to it] & "it's" [aphetic or abbreviated form of 'it is']. Try to remember - "It's time that the Mudcat got its act together with regard to this." |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Jim Dixon Date: 18 Dec 09 - 08:40 AM I'm in no position to cast stones. I just got caught out on forgo/forego. I think I read it in the forward of a book. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:03 PM "Shame this site does not have a spilling chucker." My latest browsers, Firefox 3 and "Opera Unite" both have that feature...'sites' seldom have such features....do you know one which does?. Opera just underlined 'chucker' in red and allowed 'spilling'. (I'm feeling better this morning....and I intentionally used c'mon last night) ☺ But you knew that.... But, while I am noting personal style preferences, I really cringe at THOSE WHO TYPE ALL IN CAPS. Fortunately, this is not common here. and i cringe almost as much at those who do not think that any capitals are required much less punctuation and spaces and line breaks between thoughts so as to render their posts almost incomprehensible unless i read very slowly and start over a couple times.i sure wish it were not so hard. (Yes, I do realize that 'some' have actual difficulty in focusing and composing written posts due to specific learning disabilities. I am not trying to embarrass those folks; I am only pleading with the careless ones to make a bit more effort.) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: katlaughing Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:11 PM are you saying there can never be another ee cummings, bill:-) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:15 PM ... or another archy and mehitabel ... |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:26 PM nawwww... literary devices, (like MY overuse of ellipsis), are another category. (But you knew that, also) ee cummings did use capitals for certain effects, and I suspect Don Marquis did when he was not bringing us images of that indefatigable little cockroach! |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: TheSnail Date: 18 Dec 09 - 01:31 PM ....and as for people who write "of" when they mean "have".... |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:04 PM I think it was Artbrooks who said: A copy of "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" (or is it "Eats Shoots, and Leaves"?) belongs on every desk. Actually, it should be "Eats shoots and leaves", without a comma after either "eats" or "shoots". You wouldn't put a comma into "Eats meat and potatoes," would you? (At least I hope not.) Of course the tagline in the joke would need a comma after both "eats" and "shoots". But we're getting dangerously into analyzing a joke, which is always a mistake. Dave Oesterreich |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: artbrooks Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:12 PM Actually, Dave, the title of the book is "Eats, Shoots & Leaves"...I'm looking at the copy of it that lives on my desk. The author's point is that this short sentence can have multiple meanings, depending on the presence, absence and placement of commas. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: TheSnail Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:43 PM Why does an Australian girl call her boyfriend wombat? Because, when he comes round to her place, he Eats, Roots, Shoots and Leaves. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:59 PM Some clever little jokes come off better orally, where punctuation is not so crucial and a slight inflexion can create the intended point. Oh - and while I'm here, I STILL hear and read about some sad event "wrecking havoc" on some unfortunate place. That, at least, is a semi-understandable error. Nevertheless, it grates on my tender ears. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: katlaughing Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:59 PM It is also which camp you are in as to whether to include a comma after "and/&" or not. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Amos Date: 18 Dec 09 - 03:06 PM I don't think being ignorant of the verb wreak --as in "What hath God wrought?"--is all that forgiveable myself. As for its bversus it's, come on yourself, Bill. THis is an electronic ASCII_based forum where fast answers are rattled off on antediluvian keyboards, and it is surely understandable that apostrophes get messed, misplaced, or forgotten in the haste of things in our electronic age., RUOKwidDat? A |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: artbrooks Date: 18 Dec 09 - 03:34 PM Amos, it's a pronominal possessive...his/hers/its dog vs. the verbal contraction he's/she's/it's falling. Fat finger syndrome is no excuse for iggorence (sic). :) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: GUEST,weerover Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:18 PM Actually, the principal definition of "ensure" is to make sure, and "insure" can also have this meaning. wr |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Amos Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:26 PM I KNOW the difference, Art. It's not so much fat fingeredness as galloping cogno-rrhea... A |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:30 PM Jaysus, Bill, it's a pretty screwed up person who can find only one way to spell a werd. I love the whose/who's mess up, too. Whose is the possessive and who's is the contraction meaning who is. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: artbrooks Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:35 PM And here I thought that ensure was a liquid diet supplement.... |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: GUEST,999 Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:39 PM You're right/rite/wright/write. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: CLETUS HARDDINGER Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:53 PM I tel ya tru thet I aint got no spel chexin thing but I jes put her in rite tha furs time soaz it aint to hard an mayk shur tha wurdz got tha sound thay shood hav. Iffen yall doan git it or ya got sum sorta weerd problem then yall can jes go on an fuck yer oan selfs. CLETUS |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:00 PM "...who can find only one way to spell a werd." Like Chaucer? Or Beowulf? "...go on an fuck yer oan selfs." tried it 50 years ago... hurt my back. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: CLETUS HARDDINGER Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:02 PM But jes think Bill thet iffen ya coulda gotter dun whut a wunnerful life ittid be. CLETUS |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 18 Dec 09 - 10:39 PM As with e e cummings & 'archy & mehitabel' in captialisation [or lack of], as admitted above - one must allow for certain eccenticities & idiosyncracies in spelling. E.g., when I write 'enuff' or 'becoz', as I often do on these threads, it's just a wee gimmick of my own — influenced, I think maybe, by teenage textspeke, in which - tho a preternaturally old·old·old bugger - I must admit to finding a certain charm. I reely-reely doo no how to spell 'because' & 'enough' - onnist! |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 18 Dec 09 - 10:50 PM I done figgered youze did... I 'think' the only non-standard (American) spelling I indulge in regularly is 'thru'. I wish it would become standard. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: JennieG Date: 18 Dec 09 - 11:46 PM Do you know the one that really sets my teeth on edge and makes me cringe...... saying "slither", when what is meant is something small....like a "sliver". Snakes slither. A splinter of wood is a sliver. And youse all thort that us Ozzies coodn't spel or use good grammer! Cheers Jennie |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: IvanB Date: 19 Dec 09 - 01:23 AM Well, I personally hope y'all will keep me appraised of the outcome of this thread. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 19 Dec 09 - 01:50 AM BillD - agree thoroughly re 'thru'; also 'tho'... |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: TIA Date: 19 Dec 09 - 08:21 AM Confusion of affect and effect makes me crazy. And, I cringe when the weather person calls for "a mix of snow and rain". No, I don't cringe - I shout "MIXTURE!" at the radio, and the kids roll their eyes at me. Another one that gets me riled is whether versus wether. Oh crap, now they are tumbling out... aerial vs. areal nauseous vs. nauseated stationary vs. stationery aaaggggghhhhh! Must stop now. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 19 Dec 09 - 09:22 AM I agree with most of what you write, Tia; but 'mix' as a noun, synonym of 'mixture', is well and long established, and recognised by good dictionaries [I have just checked my latest-edition Chambers to be sure I was not pontificating in a vacuum]. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 09 - 01:03 PM In our current conditions, I also decry, although it isn't a matter of grammar, calling ANY snowfall above ½ inch a "snowstorm". Right now we ARE getting a snowstorm....'tho' ☺ not a blizzard. (I was in ONE blizzard once: it was different than just 'lots of snow') (Is mentioning heavy snow a thread drift? Scholars bicker) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 19 Dec 09 - 01:27 PM Bill D - forgive me; but one which gets to my guts is 'different than', which you have just used. Things differ FROM one another, so 'different from' is the correct usage; 'different to' has a long history as an alternative - I believe that in old usage things could also differ TO one another. But 'different than' a no-no I fear... (Tho I have noticed that it seems to be catching on in US usage, which of course differs in many ways FROM ours over here, so just maybe...?) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 09 - 01:39 PM ah...right! mea culpa! I plead guilty to succumbing to common usage. It was easier when I was still in school and among those who tried. I'm afraid that this new-fangled internet thing will dilute and distort the language even more. U see wht I mean? (I find that I much prefer our (mostly) shorter spelling conventions, but I do like * (replying to someone who both knows and cares makes me careful.) |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 19 Dec 09 - 01:54 PM Shorter *spelling* conventions indeed — color, aluminum: but you will call a "lift" an "elevator" and a "car" an "automobile" ··· Shorter-shmorter. as one of Arthur Kober's or Leonard Q Ross's Bronx Jews might have put it... |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 09 - 02:03 PM *tsk* "automobile" is for special occasions and names of organizations! We drive **cars**...(except that I also drive a very large 'van'...which I was JUST informed by an English Mudcatter at our folk Getaway was really a 'caravan'..meaning "any boxy vehicle large enough to sleep in" according to her.) "Lift" is easier, but *shrug* Two countries divided by a common language. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: artbrooks Date: 19 Dec 09 - 02:32 PM A caravan is several vehicles going somewhere together. A lift is what you put in shoes to lie about your height. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Bill D Date: 19 Dec 09 - 02:51 PM Yup, Art! Hooray for our side! |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Genie Date: 19 Dec 09 - 02:56 PM Well, Jim, Missspeling words like "sacrilege" and mixing up "forego" and "forgo" or "foreword" and "forward" is more understandable to me, and more forgivable, than using words like "it's" and "its" or "their" and "they're" or "who" and "whom" or other personal pronouns ("I" vs. "me") BACKWARDS. If you ALWAYS used the same form - "it's," "me," "he," "who," etc. - you'd be right part of the time, maybe even half the time. But way too many people end up writing things like "Its time for every dog to be in its own yard," or "Him and me threw a party for she and I's anniversary," or "Who should I invite to dinner and whom should carve the turkey?" I say if you can't remember when to use the apostrophes or don't understand the difference between pronoun cases, just pick one and stick with it. |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: Genie Date: 19 Dec 09 - 03:18 PM A lot (not "alot") of the time online (or should it be "on line?") typos occur or words are slangily shortened ("u r" for "you are") in "teen text" language or in other internet posting. That's understandable. I just hope the trend doesn't lead to new generations not being able to understand "adult-generated" text passages in things like books and newspapers. But a lot the word mix-ups described here are genuine misunderstandings of what some words mean or how to spell some common words. One of the ones that irks me is the confusion of "jibe" and "jive." It's correct to say "My recollection of the event jibes with yours." Not correct to say "The two accounts of the story jive with each other" (unless maybe they inspired some hot jazz or dancing!). Also, someone mentioned the ellipse (or it it "ellipsis?"). I say go ahead and use as many as you like, but use them properly. They indicate that words have been omitted from a quotation or - I believe this is also acceptable - a considerble pause in the sentence. They are not supposed to be substitutes for commas, semicolons, periods, or dashes. The problem with so many people misusing the "..." is that now, when you quote part of an article or utterance and you indicate missing parts by "...," I'll bet half the readers don't understand that words have been omitted." In cyberspace, people have begun using " And, since that's become common only fairly recently, will people soon forget how to interpret "..." when they read a an article written before 2000? |
Subject: RE: BS: except/accept- insure/ensure,,,etc. From: MGM·Lion Date: 19 Dec 09 - 03:21 PM art & Bill - don't pretend to be more naive than you are - many words have more than one connotation so don't pretend you didn't know, or you shall both have to stay in & write lines after school! I have always believed we should do better if the apostrophe were to be abolished completely — one thing I have always agreed with Shaw about. |