Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! "Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode!

12-13-2008 , 12:22 AM
I love this thread. I have learned a few things, too.

One thing that I recently learned about comma usage was that you don't have to put a comma after "occasionally" or similar phrases starting a sentence. I thought it was required, but apparently it's only necessary if you want to draw attention to it.

(Old me would put a comma after "apparently" there).

Mason Hellmuth corrected me about just assume vs. just as soon a year or two ago. I was flattered that someone took the time to PM me about it.


edit: correct me if I'm wrong about that. I think I looked it up on Purdue's OWL thing. All my print books were buried from moving.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 12:47 AM
it's obviously not grammatically correct and you guys are being nits, ldo it's a regional dialect thing. memento is the huge nit in the first place for thinking that people who talk like this are rubes.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 01:00 AM
to get this back on track - i guess this really isn't about vocabulary as such but resiliency was not a word until you morons made it once, and it makes you sound dumb to say it. this goes for you, sports broadcasters, coaches, and players.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 01:04 AM
Yeah, sportscasters are the worst. I hate when some one/team gets "out-physicaled."
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 01:28 AM
Workahol, chocohol and shopahol are not words.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 01:35 AM
I hate when people use "myself" instead of "me." She did not go to the party with John and myself, she went with John and me. Also, sentences that end in a preposition are something up with which I can not put.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 01:54 AM
^^^

Wouldn't it be John and I?
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 01:59 AM
She went to the party with I.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 02:09 AM
So you can only say John and I at the beggining of a sentence? In spots where you could substitute just the word I and still be correct?

I always say, "me and John" irregardless of the the fact that I know its incorrect.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 02:14 AM
Quote:
In spots where you could substitute just the word I and still be correct?
Yes.
The determining factor is subject vs object, I believe.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 02:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brocktoon
I always say, "me and John" irregardless of the the fact that I know its incorrect.
This thread is a mind****
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 02:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brocktoon
So you can only say John and I at the beggining of a sentence? In spots where you could substitute just the word I and still be correct?

I always say, "me and John" irregardless of the the fact that I know its incorrect.
They had a rule of thumb earlier in this thread. Take out the other person, and ask yourself whether "I" and "me" makes sense and go with that one.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 02:28 AM
Cool, I just learned something new.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 02:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vhawk01
I'm grunching but is it pushing the nit envelope a little too far when I cringe the instant I see someone use i.e. or e.g., since the success rate on that has to be approaching random chance?
I agree w/ your substantive point that the vast majority of writers don't understand the distinction (I didn't fully grasp it until recently). But your error bolded above is one of my biggest grammar pet peeves:

Since connotes time: "I haven't seen Col. McAssface since noon."

Because connotes causation: "Col. McAssface didn't return from lunch because his testicle ruptured."

I'm a lawyer at a very reputable law firm, and am floored by the frequency at which very senior and very smart lawyers constantly abuse since.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 06:42 AM
probably should be denotes and not connotes imo.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 06:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyEyez
Yes.
The determining factor is subject vs object, I believe.
we've done this before and as such don't want to get into it again, but the determining factor about when you should call it wrong is how much of a bag you are.
"Grammar" and "Punctuation" nit's unite! You're "head" will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TurdFerguson
I agree w/ your substantive point that the vast majority of writers don't understand the distinction (I didn't fully grasp it until recently). But your error bolded above is one of my biggest grammar pet peeves:

Since connotes time: "I haven't seen Col. McAssface since noon."

Because connotes causation: "Col. McAssface didn't return from lunch because his testicle ruptured."

I'm a lawyer at a very reputable law firm, and am floored by the frequency at which very senior and very smart lawyers constantly abuse since.


Main Entry:
2since
Function:
conjunction
Date:
15th century

1: at a time in the past after or later than <has held two jobs since he graduated> : from the time in the past when <ever since I was a child>2obsolete : when3: in view of the fact that : because <since it was raining she took an umbrella>
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 09:22 AM
One day a week in my sophomore English class was "Grammar Day." The only quarter I explicitly remember was when we learned who/whom usage. There would be a quiz once a month where you had to choose who or whom in 50 or so sentences. I would always be done within 10 minutes whereas the rest of the class would struggle to finish to do so in 42 minutes. I hate people who use whom incorrectly.

Also, the NJ stuff memento mentioned took me many reads to spot what was wrong.

The one thing I didn't see mentioned in this thread was the distinction between bi and semi.



edit: Mistaking between and among is a killer!
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 09:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LooseCaller
econopile mentioned something about this earlier, i saw his post quoted. it could have been only partially quoted so maybe im repeating this.

the sentence "Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo" is grammatically correct if you take into account the three different meanings of the word

Buffalo meaning the city of Buffalo
buffalo meaning the animal
buffalo as a verb meaning to bully

it reads as "Buffalo from buffalo bully buffalo from Buffalo who Buffalo buffalo bully."
Shouldn't the second buffalo in the bolded part be capitalized?


Also, taking issue with the way people speak is a lot different to the way they would write. Plenty of weird colloquialisms here in the UK. Here in Bristol, many locals add a superflous 'mind' to the end of a sentence (which I'm guessing is an abbreviation of 'mind you'), or 'to' at the end of asking where something is.

e.g.

"he's a brillaint player mind"
"I need to go and buy some milk, where's my wallet to?"


I barely bat an eyelid when I hear these spoken, but seeing it written down is just ******ed.
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triumph36
it's obviously not grammatically correct and you guys are being nits, ldo it's a regional dialect thing. memento is the huge nit in the first place for thinking that people who talk like this are rubes.
I don't think they sound like rubes. I'm from Jersey. I just can't get past that it always sounds like this to me: "MOOOOOM (yelling upstairs), CAN I GO OVER BRIAN'S HOUSE FOR DINNER, PLEEEEEASE!?"

The shortened 't' for 'to' is totally standard ("go t' Brian's house"). But removing the 'to' altogether is very Jersey.
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 09:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baintz
Shouldn't the second buffalo in the bolded part be capitalized?


Also, taking issue with the way people speak is a lot different to the way they would write. Plenty of weird colloquialisms here in the UK. Here in Bristol, many locals add a superflous 'mind' to the end of a sentence (which I'm guessing is an abbreviation of 'mind you'), or 'to' at the end of asking where something is.

e.g.

"he's a brillaint player mind"
"I need to go and buy some milk, where's my wallet to?"


I barely bat an eyelid when I hear these spoken, but seeing it written down is just ******ed.
Did you see my previous UK-related post ITT? Is it standard throughout England to say "I should do" to mean "I should do that?" Or is that a regional thing? I know a few people from Kingston who all speak that way.

EX:

"I should call my doctor about this growth."
"Yeah, you should do."
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 10:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by otnemem
I don't think they sound like rubes. I'm from Jersey. I just can't get past that it always sounds like this to me: "MOOOOOM (yelling upstairs), CAN I GO OVER BRIAN'S HOUSE FOR DINNER, PLEEEEEASE!?"

The shortened 't' for 'to' is totally standard ("go t' Brian's house"). But removing the 'to' altogether is very Jersey.
it's funny, i would never say 'we went over his apartment', but i might say 'we went over his place/house'. i can't tell if that's if my brain realizes the 'to' is more necessary for 'apartment', or because no one had apartments where i grew up, my likes-the-frosting-wearing-a-suit-10-sizes-too-big self actually speaks like an adult there.
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 10:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by otnemem
Did you see my previous UK-related post ITT? Is it standard throughout England to say "I should do" to mean "I should do that?" Or is that a regional thing? I know a few people from Kingston who all speak that way.

EX:

"I should call my doctor about this growth."
"Yeah, you should do."
Don't know about it being standard, but it wouldn't attract my attention as being out of the ordinary. "Yeah, you should" and "Yeah, you should do" are probably used interchangeably.

One of the things that fascinates me about this country is the rich diversity in dialects and accents for such a small nation. If I drive north I can be in Birmingham in 90 minutes, where people sound completely different. Or 90 minutes to the east and I'm nearly in London, where they all sound completely different again.
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 11:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackInDaCrak
I actually got into a huge disagreement re: this with some senior partners at a law firm where I worked. They took the "two spaces" side of the argument and wouldn't acknowledge that the standard has changed in the last 20 years.
So they were much like half the posters in this thread?
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote
12-13-2008 , 01:07 PM
ok i am a dutch man and english is not my first language. (that buffalo buffalo buffalo thing exploded my mind)

but what somewhat bothers (which i havent seen in this thread yet) me is when someone says "whole entire". for instance "this whole entire shirt is made of cotton".... isnt that completely redundant? i heard it in a rap song once and laughed at it but yesterday i heard some interviewee on a national geographic show say it TWICE in short time.

Last edited by didonk; 12-13-2008 at 01:22 PM.
&quot;Grammar&quot; and &quot;Punctuation&quot; nit's unite! You're &quot;head&quot; will literally explode! Quote

      
m