BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert

Subject: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Mr Red
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 03:47 AM

The New Yorker's Comma Queen on TED.com

a pedants' (sic) pedant.

Be afraid, be very afraid!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 04:08 AM

"Be afraid, be very afraid!"
Why - what's wrong with criticising bad grammar?
Phps u wd lk uz al 2 com lk ths?
Saves time!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 05:32 AM

I liked it.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 08:26 AM

Honestly! There is no excuse for whoever using bad grammar to communicate with! As for commas, they should be used, whenever there is a need. But like I say, irregardless of whose ever speaking, there is no reason for using bad grammar and the newest offenders are those who misuse the semi colon. We need less bad grammarians and more good ones! I can say this without fear of contradiction because I got my baccalaureate degree in English and that makes me a grammar pendant and cop. If you want to come across as a slob and grammar dummy then I could care less!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 08:34 AM

Fewer bad grammarians, surely?

As for "could care less" , I couldn't care less for that usage.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 08:34 AM

When you say you are 'a grammar pendant' [sic], Rap, you presumably mean your grammar is such as to make you deserve hanging!

I would remind all that, AINTOS,* I have been named online as one whose "pedantry is legendary", so claim yet again sole right to the title of Official Legendary Pedant.

≈M≈
MA OLP

*As I Never Tire Of Saying

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 08:44 AM

Hah!!

Rapparee
BA, MS, CDSA, Adv. Manage. Cert., 1/2 an MA, IS (Cambridge), ex-SGT and a bunch of other stuff too numerous to speak of.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 09:09 AM

Always worth repeating, the Rules Of Good English.

Avoid alliteration. Always.
Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do.
Employ the vernacular.
Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
Remember to never split an infinitive.
Contractions aren't necessary.
Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
One should never generalise.
Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
Be more or less specific.
Understatement is always best.
One-word sentences? Eliminate.
Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
The passive voice is to be avoided.
Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
Who needs rhetorical questions?
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
Don't never use a double negation.
Capitalize every sentence and remember always end it with point
Do not put statements in the negative form.
Verbs have to agree with their subjects.
Proofread carefully to see if you words out.
If you reread your work, you can find on rereading a great deal of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing.
A writer must not shift your point of view.
And don't start a sentence with a conjunction. (Remember, too, a preposition is a terrible word to end a sentence with.)
Don't overuse exclamation marks!!
Place pronouns as close as possible, especially in long sentences, as of 10 or more words, to their antecedents.
Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors.
Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky.
Everyone should be careful to use a singular pronoun with singular nouns in their writing.
Always pick on the correct idiom.
The adverb always follows the verb.
Avoid run-on sentences they look terrible.
Join clauses good, like a conjunction should.
About those sentence fragments.
Just between you and i, case is important.
Don't use, commas, which aren't necessary.
Its important to use your apostrophe's correctly.
Correct spelling is absoluteley essential.
Last but not least, avoid cliches like the plague.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 10:16 AM

LoL

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Senoufou
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 01:05 PM

Steve, that's brilliant!

A new chap opposite us parks his double-glazing van outside his house all evening, so I'm forced to look at a massive photograph of some windows, underneath which is written:

Conservatory's Orangery's and facea (sic) boards

It must be God's punishment for past sins, as it makes me grind my teeth.

(I've just had a terrible thought...could he be an ex-pupil of mine???!!)

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 02:04 PM

We have a local butcher with a sign outside his shop full of greengrocers' apostrophes. He's a brilliant butcher though. I love his lamb shoulder's, chicken's and Scotch egg's!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Senoufou
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 02:11 PM

As all languages evolve naturally over the years, do you suppose that redundant apostrophes will eventually become the normal way to write plurals?

(Or, as all language's evolve naturally over the year's, do you suppose that redundant apostrophe's will eventually become the normal way to write plural's?)

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 02:34 PM

I have always thought the apostrophe should be abolished: a redundant piece of punctuation IMO. I used to teach that, if unsure whether or not to use one, leave it out: fewer mistakes would be made by using too few than too many.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Helen
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 02:59 PM

Brilliant, Steve!

Apostrophitis, the modern disease.

Helen

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Helen
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 03:00 PM

Sorry, forgot to say, brilliant Rapparee!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 03:07 PM

No, we must keep the apostrophe and teach the usage of it properly. We've had too much degradation of language already.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 03:18 PM

"I love his lamb shoulder's, chicken's and Scotch egg's!"

Or should the last one be 'Scotch Egg's?

"No, we must keep the apostrophe and teach the usage of it properly. We've had too much degradation of language already."

I'm with you, Boo-Boo!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: michaelr
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 03:28 PM

Rapparee: "We need less bad grammarians..." Surely that should be "fewer".

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 03:32 PM

Not if it means "we need better grammarians..."

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Stower
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 06:03 PM

Rapparee, I agree: bad grammar needs to be corrected.

"But like I say, x irregardless x of ..." regardless
"those who misuse the x semi colon x." semicolon
"We need x less x bad grammarians and more good ones!" fewer
"I can say this without fear of contradiction because I x got x my baccalaureate" received - or - was awarded

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 06:19 PM

Looky, you guys, I got good grammar! I got lots of it! And I need to never split infinitives or anything cause I know what I want to speak and can communicate it very good! I can use simple compound sentences and know the declaratives and all that.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Kampervan
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 06:50 PM

A split infinitive doesn't really harm anyone's understanding or interpretation of what's being said, but apostrophes are frequently essential to enable the reader to know what the writer is trying to say.

On that basis I tend to be on the side that says let's try and teach the proper use of apostrophes but accept that from time to time errors will be made. That doesn't mean that we should stop trying.

It's becoming far too popular to say that if something is difficult it should be abandoned.

Grammar should exist where it is useful.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 07:58 PM

If you think that it's wrong to say "to boldly go" because it's a split infinitive, you're wrong on two counts. First, constructions of the kind "to...(verb)" have been "split" merrily since time immemorial. Just because some crusty old Victorian pedant (whoever it was) says it's wrong, it doesn't make it wrong. Second, and more devastating still, "to" is not part of the infinitive in any case. In "to boldly go," the word "go" is the whole of the infinitive, sometimes referred to as the bare infinitive. Just think: if I said to you "Would you have me tell you a lie?", the word "tell" is the infinitive. Poor old "to" not only doesn't get a look-in, but it would actually be absurd to insert it: "Would you have me to tell you a lie?" See?

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Apr 16 - 08:41 PM

And I wholeheartedly agree with Kampervan, though he doesn't need to defend split infinitives when they're not being split in the first place. Actually, you can make yourself sound absurd by going through convolutions to avoid the alleged splitting. Hands up anyone who thinks that "boldly to go" is better, and that's only a mild example. Try this famous one: "She decided to gradually get rid of her teddy bear collection." If you put "gradually" anywhere else in the sentence (there are at least four or five possibilities), you either change the whole meaning or force the reader to go through mental contortions to understand what you're on about. Good rules make English work more clearly. Bad rules just make people think they can never do the right thing. But just because a good rule might be hard to master, it doesn't turn into a bad rule; a challenge, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 05:52 AM

The only purpose of having rules of grammar, punctuation and spelling is to make the meaning clear and unambiguous. If I were discussing my recorded music collection, it would be acceptable to abreviate "compact disc" to "CD". When referring to several of them, I would write "CDs". If, however, I am entering text on a form or into a computer that demands block capitals, "CDs" would come out as "CDS" which could easily be misinterpreted. In this case, I would enter "CD'S" even though it is not possessive. I suppose it could be seen as a contraction, with the apostrophe replacing "-isc" but, for consistency, the contraction would have to be C'D'S which is silly. I think that the apostrophe aids clarity and I will continue to use it this way, whatever the pedant thinks.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Mr Red
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 06:16 AM

my point about the video is this is an American Publication and they have pretty pedantic rules about how to spell! Like naïve and coöperation.

Now forgive me but the pedants of this parish - have they ever faulted these two words?

Tell me who among us regards data as singular or plural? OK,OK, collective noun, but common usage only since computers and not before the 1970s to my knowledge. If you were a pedant that is.

And how long has opera been singular (cf opus). Language is not static, even the French can't control it!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 06:57 AM

I'm not going to search for a means of inserting diacritics in words that have become everyday English words. So, for me, it's cliche and naive.   

I would never write or type "CD'S". If I were absolutely forced to use block capitals for the construction, I'd refrain from using the abbreviation at all. I can't think that it's an issue that's going to crop up very often.

Speaking of form-filling, I never see the need to write anything on a form in capitals except for my name and address. I regard it as exceptionally rude to be asked to do otherwise. Similarly, I don't see why I have to go searching for a pen that writes in black ink. Of course, if there was a risk of losing money I might feel obliged to comply under protest. As for forms that make you write one letter per tiny little box, they are the most ridiculous pieces of bureaucratic nonsense in all creation. If an employee of mine devised such a form I'd sack him!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Kampervan
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 07:00 AM

I agree that language is evolving and long may it do so.

I think that the current use of 'for free' is terrible, it should either be 'free' or 'for nothing'.

I think that change is here to stay and I accept it but I will never use it. However, for future generations it will be the norm and English has moved a little further.

It is that constant change that has enabled English to remain such a beautiful, expressive and relevant language.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 07:13 AM

Interesting one, "for free." It can be used quite effectively to add emphasis, a bit stronger than "for nothing" but it can't replace "free" all the time. "Are you really telling me that I can get it for FREE?!" I think I'd be OK with that in speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Kampervan
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 07:46 AM

Point taken, but I would always use 'for nothing'.

I don't recall hearing 'for free' until relatively recently, last 10/15 years? 7
However, it's here and the users of English have spoken. So here, I guess, it will stay.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Rapparee
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 10:48 AM

The US has, overall, abandoned the use of the umlaut (or my surname would use it) as well as the conjoined ae and similar typography. Thus, it's "feces" and not "faeces."

It is essential to keep the apostrophe if for no other reason than to differentiate between plurality and possession. And the use of numbers 4 words is illiterate beyond my power to describe.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 11:03 AM

Saying that you can get a wheel-nut "free" (with or without the use of WD40) is different to saying that you can get a wheel-nut "for free" (or without paying).

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 11:19 AM

Right on, Nigel!

But how about "See if you can free up that wheel nut..." 🤔

I think we also need to keep apostrophes for elisions and for things like dropped aitches. Look at these:

I think I'm goin' to punch 'im on t'nose

I think im goin to punch im on tnose

(Or even ont nose)

D'you think we'd better 'ang on to 'em? (Or dyou think wed better ang on to em...?)

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 11:21 AM

Grr. Dropped a capital I there!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Kampervan
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 12:08 PM

Nigel, the difference would have been 'You can get a free wheel nut' as opposed to 'You can get a wheel nut free'.

The former meaning wheel nuts are being given away gratis, the second that you can loosen a very tight nut.

Neither require the use of 'for'

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Senoufou
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 12:37 PM

I don't mind changes in language at all, I find them fascinating. At Uni, they played us a recording of some bloke who could speak 16th Century English, and the accent was very Northern, and very difficult to understand. Then we studied Chaucer, which needed a lot of footnotes. Our modern English is very different from these, and new words come into fashion daily. 'Twas ever thus... which brings me to:-

Apostrophes.
Being at Edinburgh Uni, we studied Rabbie Burns. He surely used more apostrophes than anyone in human history. I was a young girl from London and couldn't understand one word in three. This is the last bit of 'To A Louse' (NOT Mouse, Louse!):-

"What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us,
An' ev'n devotion."

If the chap had used a keyboard, his apostrophe key would have seized up!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: saulgoldie
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 12:50 PM

I would not be me if I resisted jumping into this glorious fray. I should point out that there are various degrees of importance with grammar, expression, and speeling errors. Some are just little annoyances for us grammar police. But some, like the misuse of "can't" are far-reaching, indeed.

To say that one "can't" do something is to say that under no circumstances can one do X, period, full stop. HOWEVER, it has come to indicate not only the absolute ability to do X, but ALSO to mean things that one actually "CAN" do, but CHOOSES to not do. One CAN take a longer lunch break; it is POSSIBLE. But one may CHOOSE not to given the possible consequences. You may say "tomato" and I may say "either" but we CHOOSE either way.

Most of the time when I hear someone use the word "can't" it refers to a choice that someone would rather not make. Thus, by using the word, they absolve themselves of responsibility of choosing, even if it is a very unattractive choice with painful consequences.

If you think I am being excessively pedantic about this, look around you, in your personal life and in the bigger world, and just listen to how the word is used and what the difference would be if one more properly indicated permission--I "may not" do it--and choice rather than actual capability.

And yes, language is fluid and dynamic. But there are just some violations up with which I will not put. And speaking of rules...

Saul

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: saulgoldie
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 12:52 PM

The rules above, as well as the rest of them below should be attributed:

(Source: Maximum Awesome; Image: William Safire in 1968, courtesy of NYTimes.)

       Remember to never split an infinitive.
       A preposition is something never to end a sentence with.
       The passive voice should never be used.
       Avoid run-on sentences they are hard to read.
       Don't use no double negatives.
       Use the semicolon properly, always use it where it is appropriate; and never where it isn't.
       Reserve the apostrophe for it's proper use and omit it when its not needed.
       Do not put statements in the negative form.
       Verbs has to agree with their subjects.
       No sentence fragments.
       Proofread carefully to see if you words out.
       Avoid commas, that are not necessary.
       If you reread your work, you can find on rereading a great deal of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing.
       A writer must not shift your point of view.
       Eschew dialect, irregardless.
       And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
       Don't overuse exclamation marks!!!
       Place pronouns as close as possible, especially in long sentences, as of 10 or more words, to their antecedents.
       Hyphenate between sy-llables and avoid un-necessary hyphens.
       Write all adverbial forms correct.
       Don't use contractions in formal writing.
       Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
       It is incumbent on us to avoid archaisms.
       If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
       Steer clear of incorrect forms of verbs that have snuck in the language.
       Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors.
       Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky.
       Never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
       Everyone should be careful to use a singular pronoun with singular nouns in their writing.
       If I've told you once, I've told you a thousand times, resist hyperbole.
       Also, avoid awkward or affected alliteration.
       Don't string too many prepositional phrases together unless you are walking through the valley of the shadow of death.
       Always pick on the correct idiom.
       "Avoid overuse of 'quotation "marks."'"
       The adverb always follows the verb.
       Last but not least, avoid cliches like the plague; They're old hat; seek viable alternatives.
       Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do.
       Employ the vernacular.
       Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
       Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
       Contractions aren't necessary.
       Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
       One should never generalize.
       Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
       Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
       Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
       Be more or less specific.
       Understatement is always best.
       One-word sentences? Eliminate.
       Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
       Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
       Who needs rhetorical questions?
       Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
       capitalize every sentence and remember always end it with a point


Saul

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Kampervan
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 01:03 PM

Courtesy of 'Daily writing tips'.... now this IS pedantic

A foreign tourist was swimming in an English lake. Taken by cramps, he began to sink. He called out for help:
"Attention! Attention! I will drown and no one shall save me!"
Many people were within earshot, but, being well-brought up Englishmen and women, they honored his wishes and permitted him to drown.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Kampervan
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 01:06 PM

But I remember, to this day, my English master (1962 - Grammar School) using this as an example as to why it was important to understand the difference between 'shall' and 'will'.

'It could save you life' he said, and he meant it!

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Senoufou
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 01:13 PM

Kampervan, our English master (Grammar School 1959) used to write on the board:

What do you think? I'll shave you for nothing!   and

What? Do you think I'll shave you for nothing?

to demonstrate the importance of correct punctuation. It got a bit boring, as it was his only party piece, much repeated, to our stifled groans.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 01:15 PM

One thing you cant do is leave the apostrophe out of cant. I cant believe there are people who cant bring it upon themselves to acknowledge why this cant be done, namely that there is another word, cant, that is so different in meaning to cant that the two simply cant be confused, except of course by people who certainly cant be described as in any way literate, it cant be gainsaid. Now I was going over to one of those religion threads to read some cant, but I honestly cant be arsed.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Kampervan
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 03:00 PM

Precisely, Senoufou.

The rules are tricky and sometimes we get it wrong, but at least, if you've been taught the rules, you can try to make sure that people understand what you're trying to say.

Teachers shouldn't stop trying because the lesson is too difficult.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: michaelr
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 03:29 PM

Always use proper capitalization. It is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 03:38 PM

Time flies men cant they move too fast

Time flies like an arrow
Fruit flies like a banana

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Mr Red
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 04:39 PM

I think I'm goin' to punch 'im on t'nose

Ah! The glottal stop, how to write it?

On t'other?
or as said
Ont other?

My preference is the latter, but then I lean (?) tu ' phonetic! 'Appen so.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Senoufou
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 06:09 PM

I seem to remember that the glottal stop was represented by an upside-down question mark in Phonetic Script, but I may be wrong; it was a long time ago that I 'did' Phonetics as a module.

It's interesting, isn't it, to see various forms of punctuation used in an attempt to represent accents. One could easily just write, "Ow's Arry?" But the ubiquitous apostrophe makes it "'Ow's 'Arry?" Cockney, like Lowland Scots, is choc full of blessed apostrophes.

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 06:36 PM

Time flies like an arrow
Fruit flies like a banana
Tits like coconuts

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Rapparee
Date: 20 Apr 16 - 08:14 PM

You can't cant cant that way!

Using a cant hook can't get you canned, can it?

Subject: RE: BS: Grammar Police/Pedant alert
From: Stower
Date: 21 Apr 16 - 04:11 AM

I love it when poor punctuation changes the meaning of a sentence.

There's a world of difference between 'Let's eat, grandma!' and 'Let's eat grandma!'; and between 'knowing your shit' and 'knowing you're shit'.