 sj |
||
|
||
BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!!
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Chip2447 Date: 10 Nov 01 - 04:37 AM HMMMMMM, I'm wondering, is the term anal retentive supposed to be hyphenated? Chip2447 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST,PeteBoom (Back at work after setting up 4 a Date: 09 Nov 01 - 10:04 PM I hate it when people take things like comments here personally - IRREGARDLESS of who starts it.... gads I bust myself up.... TWICE in the same thread I said the same word... hee hee hee hee hee roflmao.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: John MacKenzie Date: 09 Nov 01 - 03:44 PM Guest, as I said previously none of the posts I have read are critical on a personal level, however I will make an exception to this rule for your benefit. I think you are a pompous prig!!!!!!!!!! Jock |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: catspaw49 Date: 09 Nov 01 - 03:00 PM Gee Leila, I bet Cletus' posts drive you nuts huh? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST,Leila Date: 09 Nov 01 - 02:29 PM Things that drive me 'round the bend: Your when they mean you're You're when they mean your Too when they mean to To when they mean too LibARY!! There's an 'R' in there people!! "Let me axe you sumthin". - No! Don't AXE me! "I don't got no libAry books, I jus' wanna use these 'puters." "Where's Joe at?" "Whatcha gonna dethaw for supper?" Oh, there are so many. English is a very strange language, mostly because it is a language made by cramming in bits and pieces from several different languages over at least three different language families. It is also not a very static language, new words from other languages are constantly being added. That being said, some butcher the language more than others. Cheers, Leila |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Bat Goddess Date: 09 Nov 01 - 02:05 PM Genie -- you can't proofread your own work, no matter how good you are. The brain sees what you want to see, not what is actually there. This has been proven "scientifically" any number of times and is well known in the graphic arts industy. And if you are checking the specifications, you will more than likely interpret them the same way you originally did. And those of us who started out as trade typographers also know that you go for speed, not accuracy. Typos are caught by the proofreader and corrected in the second galley run. It's too slow to go back and correct them in the first run. Bat Goddess |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST Date: 09 Nov 01 - 08:53 AM Murray, And netiquette doesn't take into account "here" or "there" arguments. It simply says, examine your reasons for wanting to point out other peoples' mistakes and weaknesses publicly. Netiquette says, do it privately via email, or if that is not possible, don't do it at all. Apparently, many of you are also oblivious as to how it makes *you* look for pointing out peoples' mistakes/weaknesses, and/or stridently defending the people who do. But like I said, some will insist on sticking to the low road as a means of saving face, rather than changing course by doing the gracious thing, and apologizing for having caused offense to anyone with their insensitive remarks. But hey--I'm tired of playing netiquette cop here. Insult whomever you please, and slap the people down who call you on it. Like I said, I'm sure you will be in the majority here, as you would be anywhere on the Internet. Everyone knows that might makes you right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Murray MacLeod Date: 09 Nov 01 - 08:43 AM GUEST, it never happens here, really it doesn't. There are two or three members here who have obvious learning difficulties, and no one has ever written in and said "Jeez, aren't you thick? ". But IMHO it is a different matter to point out gently to somebody who, for example, habitually writes "loose" instead of "lose" that he or she is committing an error. Just my opinion, you are entitled to disagree. Murray |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Jon Freeman Date: 09 Nov 01 - 08:12 AM Wolfgang, I would recognise that but let's not forget there are always new people passing through who are not aware of such things. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST Date: 09 Nov 01 - 08:10 AM No Murray, in Internet social settings, telling someone they have bad spelling/grammar is the equivalent of saying "look at how stupid so-and-so is everybody!" That is why every set of netiquette rules I've ever read tells us not to do that. Because it is rude, not to mention cruel, to humiliate and publicly shame people. It matters not if a majority of Mudcat regulars decide it is just fine to do that here, so long as it is done by one of their beloved members. It still puts the lot of you in with the worst sorts of people on the Internet in terms of your manners. But not to worry--rude people are definitely the on-line majority nowadays, so you'll have plenty of company. This has nothing to do with pedantry BTW, it has to do with manners and simple decency to one's fellow posters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Wolfgang Date: 09 Nov 01 - 08:08 AM And how are people who are not among "the bizarre group of old folkies who know each other" to be expected to know that? For instance, by Little Hawk's last sentence about 'Cletus' which makes clear that it is an insider joke. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST Date: 09 Nov 01 - 08:01 AM And how are people who are not among "the bizarre group of old folkies who know each other" to be expected to know that? This is a public Internet discussion forum. The rules of netiquette apply here. We have the rules of etiquette for JUST THIS VERY REASON. But if some of you wish to continue insisting there is nothing wrong with starting threads for the sole purpose of arrogantly insulting other posters' bad grammar and spelling, because it is "just a joke" or is done "among friends" I'm sure you will continue to do it. Some people will always insist on sticking to the low road. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Murray MacLeod Date: 09 Nov 01 - 07:57 AM As I see it, whether you correct someone's spelling misconceptions (NB"misconceptions" , anybody can make "mistakes" ) or not, is pretty much the same moral dilemma as whether you tell a total stranger that he is wandering around with his fly open ................... Murray |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Jon Freeman Date: 09 Nov 01 - 07:44 AM Guest, the origintor of the thread wrote:
"Henry, this thread is not about intolerance, it is about humour among a rather bizarre group of old folkies who mostly know each other well enough not to make the mistake of taking any of it that seriously." I assume that means that the original intention was to draw "witicisms" from said group rather than to enter any serious conversation on the subject or make serious compliants. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST Date: 09 Nov 01 - 07:28 AM OK--so everybody admits to making mistakes. Everyone agrees there are plenty of mistakes in their own posts. That even when they are good spellers and grammarians, AND proofread, they miss a few of the commonly made errors. Like who's for whose. Passed for past. So, my still angry retort is, why start a thread pointing out those errors, arrogantly assuming that people aren't willing to correct mistakes, improve their language skills, etc when the plain fact of the matter is that to do so in social settings (like this forum) IS REALLY GODDAMN RUDE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST,Boab Date: 09 Nov 01 - 03:49 AM A spell checker?---An AMERICAN spell checker?????? Red ink all over the place! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Genie Date: 09 Nov 01 - 01:24 AM BTW, Bill D. ( and others), It's not just dyslexia that leads to errors. I, for example, am very good at spelling, but when I am not paying attention, I often make errors (like the "past," "passed" thing), because I tend to be an auditory processor. If and when I proofread, I usually catch the mistake -- but not always. I once put together an Irish-American sing-along book for my retirement home clients and included the song "Cockles and Muscles!" It is not that I did not know the difference, but I probably proofread it by hearing the words as I read them, more than by seeing how they were spelled. I did not see that error until a couple of years later, when one of the residents pointed it out to me -- at which point it was perfectly obvious to me, and I felt very silly! I relate this tale partly to emphasize that wishing our country's language skills were not deteriorating does not imply snobbery. We all make mistakes unless we proofread and sometimes even when we do. It is the unwillingness to improve that troubles me. Also, the unwillingness to proofread even when doing something like posting a song on the net. Genie
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Genie Date: 09 Nov 01 - 01:05 AM Thanks for noticing (and concurring, and expounding), Bill D. Genie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Bill D Date: 08 Nov 01 - 08:23 PM pooh! you just envy my songwriting skills, Bob..*grin* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Amos Date: 08 Nov 01 - 03:19 PM Petless is just another word for nothing left to loose, Bob. Gyro |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST,Songster Bob Date: 08 Nov 01 - 03:15 PM Your all a bunch of loosers! Bob Clayton |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Nov 01 - 02:40 PM He's on second. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: X Date: 08 Nov 01 - 02:11 PM All I want's to know is "who's on first?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: X Date: 08 Nov 01 - 02:08 PM All I want's to know is "who's on first?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Bill D Date: 08 Nov 01 - 02:01 PM "Love, oh love, oh care-less love, I care less for you that you for me. I was born before the baby boom, So less caring's just a part of me" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Nov 01 - 01:55 PM Yeah, like, how much less could you care, Jeri? A lot less or just a little less? I tend to focus less on things I care more about than more on things I care less about, unless the lesser things are more or less of a problem than more of one...more or less. Some people couldn't care less...mostly people born over 35 years ago. Since then there has been a vast proliferation of people who could care less (so they say), but are unable to explain why. These people have more in common with those who couldn't care less than they are usually willing to admit. - LH
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Jeri Date: 08 Nov 01 - 01:40 PM I could care less about how people write as long as I can understand what their saying. I make enough misteaks myself, and some folks don't write so good. I've done the "who's/whose" thing by accident - I get irritated with myself because I know better. Honestly though, if we pick out every boo-boo, that's all we'll ever talk about. If we pick on really bad spellers or grammaticators, they'll give up and we could miss some great contributions. (Please note that there are mistakes in most of the posts talking about other people's mistakes. Ironic, ain't it?) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Wolfgang Date: 08 Nov 01 - 01:15 PM You've mate my date, Leffkind, that's the song exactly with the line I remember. I've searched for years, but I didn't have the write title. Thanks aloft. Wolfgag |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST,Leftykin Date: 08 Nov 01 - 12:32 PM SOLDIER MADE
When I was a fare made at the age of sweet sixteen
With my nice cape and fethers if you only could have seed
Oh many is the prank I plaiyed upon the feeld
With my regimental at the front all times I might have been
Many a knight in the guard room I have laid
They might never have been knowne until this very hour
My orfficer sent for me to see if that was troo
But fore your valyiant conduit at the seiege of Valley Green Is that the one? - Leftkin
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Nov 01 - 12:04 PM Oh....my...God... ROTFLMAO!!! - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Wolfgang Date: 08 Nov 01 - 11:53 AM Leftykin, you seem to know a lot of fine songs. Thanks. Maybe you can help me with this: It's about a female drummer and it has the line Many a knight in the guard room I have laid. I seem to be unable to locate it. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST,Leftykin Date: 08 Nov 01 - 11:24 AM Wilde Mountin' Time
O the summertime is come
And we'll awl go tewgether
I will bild my luv a bauer
And we'll awl go tewgether
If my troo love she wont go
And we'll awl go tewgether NOw how come I cant fynd this faymous song in the dijital tradition? It's an outrage! Yew peeple call yerselfs a folk and blues forrum. Ha! - Leftykin
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Nov 01 - 11:04 AM CarolC - Coitus interruptus??? Man, talk about thread hijacking! Kat - It is a basic and very important teaching in Taoism that a man is best off not to frequently "spill his seed" after his teens and early twenties, but to conserve it by restricting not sex, but having orgasms during sex. I believe the same notion is found in a great many other Asian traditions as well. So...they teach methods of self-control during sex, so as to prevent ejaculation and conserve the creative energies. Females, on the other hand, are encouraged to have all the orgasms they please, since they do not lose much (if any) energy in the process. For a more complete explanation, consult the excellent book "The Tao of Health, Sex, and Longevity". I believe these teachings are largely correct in their assertions regarding both maintaining health and creative powers, but it's a complex subject, so I suggest to anyone who's interested that they read the book, as I don't feel up to typing out another 500 lines explaining it all. The interesting thing about the oriental traditions of China and Japan is that they viewed sex primarily as a health issue rather than a moral one. Very sensible of them, I think. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: catspaw49 Date: 08 Nov 01 - 10:59 AM Those biscuits I ate made from Sweet Wildwood Flour, Hit my stomach like lead, I felt grumpy and dour. Seven days have gone by and it's relief I seek 'Cause I'm all bloated up, I ain't shit in a week. ....chiched guitar riff continues...... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Amos Date: 08 Nov 01 - 10:46 AM Have you tried biscuits made with that Sweet Wildwood Flour? Guaranteed, they'll stay with you, for over an hour! They're sturdy, they're solid, like rocks in a creek But not recommended if your digestion is weak! (Fade to incredibly cliched guitar riff...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Bill D Date: 08 Nov 01 - 10:37 AM to be fair to Tyke, who wrote 'get passed' ..(not guest)...he/she explained that a spell checker WAS used in the post, which explains why 'passed' was not caught. It is quite true that some people have dyslexia and other learning difficulties which make it frustrating and tedious to cope with grammar & spelling...but at least those spell checkers ARE available. What I do not understand is why some refuse to use one, or to use the SHIFT key, instead of typing like ee cummings. (I also do wonder, Tyke...seriously, no ridicule implied...how one comes to type 'passed' when 'past' is meant. This is something other than simple misspelling. I am curious as to what those words mean when you are reading. Do you see them differently? If you read a sentence like "She past away the time knitting", do you see a problem? Or, "He reflected on his passed?".....to me, those jump off the page and SCREAM at me, but it seems not to trigger anything for some....I wish I understood better.) Since I am NOT a good typist...(yeah...two fingers), I often hit 'submit message', and just as it is about to go, I see some error too late to correct it..(often a 't' instead of a 'y', my most common error)...but if I have typed a longer post, I use a spell-checker which avoids the worst of these mistakes. (and yes, there IS one which works pretty well right in this box, with no need to type it in a word processor first!) *sigh*...there is a fine line between ridicule and well meaning, but humorous commentary, but if everyone would read and RE read Genie's post a few times...and take it to heart, we might all see some of the issues better! Fine points, Genie! "Wildwood Flour" *giggle* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Fortunato Date: 08 Nov 01 - 10:04 AM Billy, Biillllllllllllllly Grammer, you come away from that goddamn parsing or diagraming or whatever the hell it is. Come in here and practice your guitar, boy. Howinell do you 'spect to be a musician if all you do is grammar, Grammer? Hee, hee. Fortunato |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: catspaw49 Date: 08 Nov 01 - 09:40 AM Yeah, ain't it like way cool when someone goes like, "This is something Ican't get enough of," and that kind of stuff? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: lady penelope Date: 08 Nov 01 - 09:31 AM Wow, coo, well I never, never has my flabber been so gasted. This is how grammer should be taught, it's way more fun!! :-) ****G**** TTFN M'Lady P. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST Date: 08 Nov 01 - 07:46 AM Probably because the subject got interesting... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: GUEST,Boab Date: 08 Nov 01 - 04:19 AM Aargh!---The apostrophe polis is back! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Genie Date: 08 Nov 01 - 04:09 AM Please, folks, don't take anything I'm saying as deathly somber or as intended to put others down. Tyke, ("Oh and please don't change any of the spellings or grammar in any songs that I may or may not post! ...Oh and if you hear me singing a song please don't tell me that I'm singing the wrong tune or the wrong words...") Wow! Where to begin? First, how dare you tell me not to correct spelling a song that you did NOT post? : ) Next, there are some errors that are clearly errors, not alternative versions of a song. "Whose Sorry Now?" would be an example. If you're the songwriter, I'll defer to your decision about lyrics, even if there are obvious spelling errors. But if it is a published song, deviations from the published form are fair game for correction, especially when they are obviously typos and misspellings. (If you post "Wildwood Flour," and you have not changed anything except that one word, I would assume it's a mistake. If the lyrics you post are a parody, that's different.) It's Max's choice, of course, whether to make the corrections for the DT. But a lot of the time, lyrics posted here look like they were written by e e cummings -- no caps, no punctuation at all, etc. If it was Bob Dylan who wrote them, not e e cummings, why the heck should they not be properly spelled and punctuated? As someone -- Amos, I think -- posted, there is a difference between colloquialisms or poetic license and just plain spelling and punctuation errors. As for changing the lyrics to a song (the folk process?), if it is a non-trad song, I prefer that the alteration of the lyrics be acknowledged. I have done this myself, e.g., when I change a song from a male to a female perspective. Folks, which insult is worse: "nitpicking linguistic pedant" or "hypersensitive, overly defensive illiterate uninterested in self-improvement?" I'm not fond of either tendency, but we pedants would probably lighten up if the 'linguistically challenged' didn't take it as a personal attack every time someone pointed out an error, even in a formal publication. Little Hawk, You go, dude! Right on, Giok (Jock)! And, what Lady Penelope said, too! (Loved the Robin Hood sentence! How about, "She was on her bicycle, peddling her ass off?" ) To Spaw, Guest, and some of you others who say it is only communication that counts, not spelling, grammar, and punctuation, I say, along with Wolfgang, you are partly right. Communication is the goal. Spelling, grammar, etc., are only the tools. Trouble is, the meaning can easily get lost in the spelling and grammar errors. E.g, Guest, when you wrote "get passed" instead of "get past," above, I had to re-read the sentence two or three times to figure out what you meant. Once I realized the word was "past," it did not matter that it was misspelled, but I did not recognize the word at first. Wolfgang, your views posted in the "Proofresding" thread are right to the point! Sometimes a spelling error does cause lots of problems! Genie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: katlaughing Date: 08 Nov 01 - 02:44 AM Wasn't there some kind of belef in ancient Japan that a man spilling his seed was weakened and so they practised sex up to that point and then stopped just short, if you will, of spilling it anywhere?
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: CarolC Date: 08 Nov 01 - 01:41 AM Well now Murray, I think you'd have to ask a man about that 'cause I, personally, have no idea. I haven't got that kind of plumbing.
What I meant by 'quite good' was that some men can be good partners despite the interuptus part, and (this is the really important bit) can be relied upon to do what is needed at the appropriate moment. I suspect LH probably won't mind about the thread creep ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: catspaw49 Date: 08 Nov 01 - 01:38 AM It's after 1:30 and this thread demands a response but, uh........I really oughta' indulge in Cattus Interruptus............There's this image of a guy wailin' away to "Pop Goes the Weasel" in my mind and on POP he pulls out but the sound is one of those vacuum kinda' things........There's a real good Cletus story here...........Nah,it's 1:38 Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Murray MacLeod Date: 08 Nov 01 - 01:19 AM I take your point about the allergies, Carol. But really, are the skills and self-control required for a mutually satisfying CI relationship any different than for a non-interrupted one? Apart from the obvious exercise of will-power at the crucial moment, that is. You don't have to answer that btw ! The thread creep has been massive, as you say. Maybe I should just have taken up Spaw's invitation and left it at that ............... Murray |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: CarolC Date: 07 Nov 01 - 10:46 PM I'll tell you, Murray. It's actually a less unpleasant form of birth control for people who are sensitive to hormones and chemicals such as those that are found in all of the other methods of birth control. For such people, sex can be quite uncomfortable, if not painful. Or in the case of the pill, life can become pretty unbearable. If someone practices 'coitus interruptus' well, it means that sex can be good for both partners without the fear of pregnancy. But the man has to be very good at it, meaning he must have a lot of self control. I don't have any direct personal experience with what happens when that method fails. My son was very much a planned pregnancy. But as I said, I know of at least one person who is a direct result of a failure in that form of birth control. So it's clearly not appropriate for everyone. Personally, I'm a big fan of vasectomies. Hey, LH! How's that for a major thread hijack? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Bill D Date: 07 Nov 01 - 10:37 PM hmmm...ok, I see...but "in unto' is sure awkward language for just knocking on the door. " But why one would want to become "good" at it in the first place, defies all understanding. " before 1962-3, out of condoms, sudden panic.....*grin*...(I remember sitting in my university's student union, talking about the 'new' birth control pills, and remarking that they were going to revolutionize society as regards morality and sexual practices....) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: Murray MacLeod Date: 07 Nov 01 - 09:53 PM Bill, in the King James Version, the verse reads ....."when he went in unto his brother's wife"...... Slightly less graphic than your remembered version !! "Went in unto" conjures up visions of knocking on the door and saying "Honey are you in?" "Went into his brother's wife" well, leaves nothing to the imagination, I agree. But that is not what it says in Genesis. Carol, I am intrigued and puzzled by the concept of someone becoming "quite good" at coitus interruptus. I can only assume you are talking from personal experience and knowledge, so I would not dream of contradicting you. But why one would want to become "good" at it in the first place, defies all understanding. Murray |
|
Subject: RE: BS: STOP writing 'Who's'! Enough!!! From: CarolC Date: 07 Nov 01 - 09:27 PM I mean, has anyone on this planet ever practised coitus interruptus? Again, IMHO, the term is a figment of some sociologist's imagination.
--Murray MacLeod Some people do it, and some are quite good at it. On the other hand (did I say hand?), I know of at least one person who owes his existance in the world to that particular method of birth control. |