The problem with effect and affect is that there are 7 definitions between them.

I hate those two words.

Why didn't you quote this from when it was originally posted itt?

That would require more effort.

Oh, that reminds me:




Mouseover text

True of almost all the complaints itt.

People who use...

"loose" instead of "lose"
"could of" instead of "could have"
"should have went" instead of "should have gone"
"your" instead of "you're"
"whose" instead of "who's"
etc.
etc.
etc.

So if you hate these (and I do), why do you want to give "literally" a pass? They are all just indicators of someone who is careless, lazy and/or stupid. Accepting these just leads us down the slope to more carelessness, laziness and stupidity.

(And another indicator of stupidity, which has nothing at all to do with the topic of this thread, is the "power wristband" that I see people wearing. You know the one I mean. It's supposed to give you better balance or some such hogwash. When I see one of those at the poker table, I know that the guy wearing it probably boasts a double-digit IQ.)

This is acceptable imo.
It's quite unusual for Scots to use the correct participle there, unless they are anglicised ******s.

I'd think less of a comrade if they used 'gone'.

Acceptable to you and that's fine. But it's as incorrect as anything else pointed out itt. You may be used to it, but it's an aural speed bump to me. I notice it every time and it makes me cringe inwardly.

/

In the interests of nittery...

Not that I think 'went' is a participle. Just badly written.

I promise, you will never see me arguing for the acceptance of any of those as substitutions for the correct terms. I was just answering TTI's comic with another that seemed pertinent to this thread.

Though, I do think the "literally" battle has been lost already.

Literally does not belong with those other grammatical errors. People do not say, "I literally peed my pants," expecting you to believe them. It's hyperbole.

From Richard Vaughan's self-written 'Teaching Advanced Students' manual.

I never liked the smarmy wee prick; always glad to nit up his ****.

.

HERE COMES AN S!

I heard General Meowmeow's reinforcements are on the way.

So I teach ESL in Georgia. Nobody in my villiage speaks the language except for the teacher I work with so she's my only confidant I have here. Naturaly, she picks up on things that I say much more than I've noticed myself.

For instance, She pointed out that I use the short form of "there are" which I've never thought of it having. But resaying it in different phrases I've found myself saying "ther're" or "therrrrre" as in "Ther're three cars." and that I use the correct form when emphasizing the phrase, like "No, there are THREE cars."

Does anybody else do this and does it have any history of mention?

PS: Sorry for the mispells, my phone doesnt have spell check.

There're is a word. Nothing wrong with it at all.

Duco, are you a native speaker?

Just curious.

There's no written short form of 'there are'; it's just elision in the spoken form, and perfectly natural.

Yeah, born/raised in Grand Rapids, MI. My job leans more towards conversation and comprehention than grammar.

That's why I come here. I learn a lot from you guys.

BTW we are teaching Brit English here and I'm sorry but... FU Britts!

Soccer/Football Pitch: As far as I know most playing areas are covered in grass and where does grass grow? In FIELDS! Sure, some school grounds do have muli-purpose areas where the playing area is tarred. Calling that a pitch is ok. But frikin greenery being called "a pitch" just blows my mind.

Have Got: I really was going to go off on this but I realized that I use the contraction of this all the time. It still seems wonky to me and I still dont like it.

Full Up: What the hell is this? Why do you add a preposition here? Can the "full" go anywhere? Is there a "full down" or a "full around"? Why not just say "I'm full."?

"Uh-loo-mi-num" not "Al-li-min-i-mum"

/rant

lol

You are a funny guy, and I for one am looking forward to many more of your posts itt.

Please continue to express your wonderful insights into the nuances of English.

He had me at hello.

Haveg't?
Hav'got?
Ha'got?

I'm stumped.