quick grammar lesson for watmm

[Braintree]

This is totally going to work, Fred.

[Guest Glass Plate]

Fred's Lessons's have taught me ALOT about grammar.

[sidewinder]

My latest fave: people who think "never mind" is one word. Thanks, Kurt Cobain.

 

Thank goodness Firefox underlines spelling mistakes now. I've caught myself typing it as one word several times, and it's undoubtedly because of Nirvana's album.

 

And despite the help of modern browsers and their spell checkers, some people can't be helped.

[Guest inteeliguntdesign]

 

lol

[BCM]

over there

 

their bicycles

 

they're going to die!!

[Guest Benedict Cumberbatch]

i think it would help to explain when to use an apostrophe too.

 

it is something to do with ownership right?

 

bill's bike

 

and then there is the apostrophe at the end of the word. how does that work? is it when the word is plural?

 

gah i slept through english. sorry fred, please help i

[Guest abusivegeorge]

your all wrong lol

 

you're

 

Why is this on page 3 and I'm the first to correct this?

[Guest beatfanatic]

your all wrong lol

 

you're

 

Why is this on page 3 and I'm the first to correct this?

 

because he obviously did that on purpose...

[Siegecow]

If you only know one language - only one way of communicating your thoughts to the rest of the world - and you can't even get that right, it's pretty pathetic.

 

People who mock grammar pedants are basically saying that accurate communication is not important. There might be one or two global trends happening that might just make communication more important than ever, but I guess you're cool with being an untermensch in that world. Good luck with that.

 

My latest fave: people who think "never mind" is one word. Thanks, Kurt Cobain.

 

there are times that clear communication is necessary, and there are times when it doesnt matter for shit, like for instance, on an IDM forum. Most of the time, if you cant understand the jist of what someone is saying while still realizing that the grammar is incorrect, you're probably an idiot yourself. And Heaven forbid your pompous eyes should fall upon a misplaced letter, imperfect phrasing or missing punctuation. Truly there is no greater insult to the senses.

[Guest abusivegeorge]

your all wrong lol

 

you're

 

Why is this on page 3 and I'm the first to correct this?

 

Because he obviously did that on purpose...

 

In before page 4.

 

If you only know one language - only one way of communicating your thoughts to the rest of the world - and you can't even get that right, it's pretty pathetic.

 

People who mock grammar pedants are basically saying that accurate communication is not important. There might be one or two global trends happening that might just make communication more important than ever, but I guess you're cool with being an untermensch in that world. Good luck with that.

 

My latest fave: people who think "never mind" is one word. Thanks, Kurt Cobain.

 

there are times that clear communication is necessary, and there are times when it doesnt matter for shit, like for instance, on an IDM forum. Most of the time, if you cant understand the jist of what someone is saying while still realizing that the grammar is incorrect, you're probably an idiot yourself. And Heaven forbid your pompous eyes should fall upon a misplaced letter, imperfect phrasing or missing punctuation. Truly there is no greater insult to the senses.

 

I completely agree.

[dr lopez]

Language is constantly morphing into something new. Thats why it's such a great tool, nothing is ever set in stone. Sure there are rules that everyone should follow, but if you get your message across and people understand what you're saying then you're set! We should feel lucky to live in an age where language and written words are changing so rapidly. In only five years, maybe ten tops, we've been introduced to lol, ftw, and wtf. Now we all know exactly what those new words mean. Just because there is no official "rule" of grammar on how to use them doesn't mean we shouldn't. Internet word creations like wut and wat have different nuanced connotations than just "what". It's fascinating that but just dropping a single letter "h" from a word, you can alter it's meaning.

 

With all that said, it REALLY gets my dander up when people use liable to mean likely.

 

"I'm liable to make a retarded grammar mistake."

[Guest Super lurker ultra V12]

its'

[Fred McGriff]

Language is constantly morphing into something new. Thats why it's such a great tool, nothing is ever set in stone. Sure there are rules that everyone should follow, but if you get your message across and people understand what you're saying then you're set! We should feel lucky to live in an age where language and written words are changing so rapidly. In only five years, maybe ten tops, we've been introduced to lol, ftw, and wtf. Now we all know exactly what those new words mean. Just because there is no official "rule" of grammar on how to use them doesn't mean we shouldn't. Internet word creations like wut and wat have different nuanced connotations than just "what". It's fascinating that but just dropping a single letter "h" from a word, you can alter it's meaning.

 

With all that said, it REALLY gets my dander up when people use liable to mean likely.

 

"I'm liable to make a retarded grammar mistake."

 

while i tend to agree and practice the living breathing language myself, the problem with the added apostrophe is that it serves no purpose, it's an extra keystroke and therefore a waste of space. it's just plain ignorant. lols and wtfs and no punctuation in sentences and no capitalization and all that shit doesn't quite make someone look as much like a knuckle dragger as someone who got two ticket's to the ICP show this weekend. if it's making me stumble, and it stops the flow of my read, then i would argue that it is indeed NOT quite getting the message across and at no point are you set for doing so.

 

p.s. using liable to mean likely isn't really all that incorrect

 

p.p.s. its.

[pylonbitch]

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all.

 

Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli.

 

Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.

 

 

mark twain

 

 

reminds me a bit of dlet.

[sidewinder]

and then there is the apostrophe at the end of the word. how does that work? is it when the word is plural?

Plural and possessive, yes. Though I think adding 's to a plural word is acceptable too.

 

jones' bike

jones's bike

 

while i tend to agree and practice the living breathing language myself, the problem with the added apostrophe is that it serves no purpose, it's an extra keystroke and therefore a waste of space. it's just plain ignorant. lols and wtfs and no punctuation in sentences and no capitalization and all that shit doesn't quite make someone look as much like a knuckle dragger as someone who got two ticket's to the ICP show this weekend. if it's making me stumble, and it stops the flow of my read, then i would argue that it is indeed NOT quite getting the message across and at no point are you set for doing so.

I agree on both points.

 

I got tripped up earlier on another forum reading someone's sentence where he used "there" 4 times in place of "their". Am I the idiot for tripping up? When I read there I think there --> and it doesn't work in the context of the sentence if the idiot was trying to talk about something that belonged to someone.

[Guest Barricade]

ok so that settles it than

[Braintree]

With all that said, it REALLY gets my dander up when people use liable to mean likely.

 

"I'm liable to make a retarded grammar mistake."

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liable

 

li·a·ble (lī'ə-bəl)

adj.

 

1.Legally obligated; responsible: liable for military service. See Synonyms at responsible.

2.At risk of or subject to experiencing or suffering something unpleasant. Used with to: liable to criminal charges; liable to diabetes.

3.Likely. Often used with reference to an unfavorable outcome: In a depression banks are liable to fail.

 

and then there is the apostrophe at the end of the word. how does that work? is it when the word is plural?

Plural and possessive, yes. Though I think adding 's to a plural word is acceptable too.

 

jones' bike

jones's bike

 

I don't think the additional apostrophe S is technically correct. I see it on signs all the time, but that doesn't mean it's actually correct. It's just redundant with an extra S.

[jeremymacgregor87]

i think it would help to explain when to use an apostrophe too.

 

it is something to do with ownership right?

 

bill's bike

 

and then there is the apostrophe at the end of the word. how does that work? is it when the word is plural?

 

gah i slept through english. sorry fred, please help i

 

Apostrophe is used for:

 

1) Possession - eg. The penis that Bill owns = Bill's penis (correct) (also for any other pronoun - eg. everyone's penis

* also used at the end of a singular possessive that already finishes with an "s" - eg. the penis's huge adventure

unless there were multiple penises having adventures, then it would be: the penises' huge adventure

* also used at the end of a word that ends in two "s" sounds - eg. Jesus' huge penis (note no following "s")

2) Contraction - eg. It is huge = it's huge

 

 

 

 

 

carry on

[Guest Rightsidedrive]

we;; most of us are teh proletariatat, dammit

we go to PUVLIIC schools dammit.

[Fred McGriff]

sober up dude

[lumpenprol]

i pretty much never make the apostrophe error, but here's a weird one - apparently if you're dealing with an acronym, you can use an apostrophe for clarity? eg., ICBM's? Grammar nazi McGriff, what say you?

[Guest Calx Sherbet]

i honestly thought never mind was one word!

[Guest theSun]

wat is the in lo. ll threaed it is this?

[dr lopez]

With all that said, it REALLY gets my dander up when people use liable to mean likely.

 

"I'm liable to make a retarded grammar mistake."

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liable

 

li·a·ble (lī'ə-bəl)

adj.

 

1.Legally obligated; responsible: liable for military service. See Synonyms at responsible.

2.At risk of or subject to experiencing or suffering something unpleasant. Used with to: liable to criminal charges; liable to diabetes.

3.Likely. Often used with reference to an unfavorable outcome: In a depression banks are liable to fail.

 

 

I suppose liable is misused so often now that it has become correct and synonymous with likely, however there are many awkward instances where likely is undoubtedly the better word choice.

 

It has to do with whether the word that follows liable is a noun or a verb. Traditionally "Likely to" better indicates a probability of an certain action, while "liable to" indicates a vulnerability or an exposure to a risk. Essentially, if you want to always be correct, don't use "liable" if the next word is an infinitive verb.

 

Wrong Example: That book is liable to become a best seller because it is well written.

 

-- This sentence is indicating that there is a probability rather than a risk of the book becoming a best-seller due to it being well written, therefore likely is the better choice.

 

Correct Example: They thereby become liable to a jail sentence of up to two years if they ever travel to Zimbabwe.

 

-- Since the jail sentence (noun) is the direct outcome rather than "to be jailed" or "to be sent to prison" (all infinitive verb phrases) liable fits. Also to be jailed is generally considered a negative outcome.

 

Correct Example: Under that Act, violators are liable to fines of $500 for the first offence and $1,000 fine and jail terms of up to six months for subsequent offenses.

 

-- Same deal.

 

However, it is possible to use liable before an infinitive but it's tricky to pull off (which means no one does it) as the verb needs to imply adverse danger or harm to the subject.

 

Correct Example: The beautiful green boat is liable to sink.

 

-- Even though that is officially "correct", as it implies the danger of sinking directly to the boat, it is still awkward and likely would be a better choice. The example from dictionary.com is correct, they just label liable as the same word as likely, but they both have their different uses.

 

[Guest Calx Sherbet]

i hate words