I reject the premise social stigma is a good thing. You'll need to force it.

You gave the advice. It doesn't seem to be good in context as you didn't criticized one of the OPs resumes. Advice based on a presumption is risky business.

I had the same answer myself prepared when I asked myself/the forum the question.
You think correct and erroneous whereas I think standard and non-standard or not-yet-standard-if-ever at most.

I think it does. There's no debate over the meaning of grammar. There is debate of where all the 'parts of the machine' ought to go, if anywhere specific at all, if I may use that analogy. (Hume may have had something to say.)

Or let me use building sandcastles as the analogy.
We can't state there is a correct way to build sandcastles; how the sand particles ought to be arranged. There are many shaped buckets for building castles. What we do with grammar in dialects of languages, is chose one particular bucket, eventually, which evolves over time, (see Old English) a particular way of handling subjects, predicates, and objects etc. and recommend everyone nearby conform to a standard. No wrong or right.

I identified grammar as an area of weakness, and OP admitted that grammar is an area of weakness. You can say it didn't seem to be good to you, and I won't argue with you because what you perceive is different from what I perceive. You can also call it risky, and I don't deny that there wasn't a risk that I was wrong. However, the reality is that it is a correct assessment.

More precisely, I observed several things about OP's presentation:

1) OP's use of "then" instead of "than" in phrases like "less than."
2) There is an inconsistent capitalization of "I" throughout the post.
3) OP's paragraph structure is inconsistent. Sometimes he's separating connected thoughts into distinct paragraphs and other times he runs them together.

I anticipate that most people caught the first. The other two, maybe not. I don't know how much other people catch these things when they read text on the internet.

Put together, there is sufficient data to suspect that this is not something like a "dialect" where one is making willful choices in order to conform to a particular language pattern. (For example, some posters actively choose not to capitalize. But that's an active choice and so the outcome is very consistent.) The inconsistencies point to a broader inconsistency in the use of language, which is an indicator of grammatical issues.

And it wasn't just a singular error like mistaking "than" for "then," or something like "it's" for "its." Those mistakes are basically "clumsy" errors. They're clearly wrong uses of the language, but they don't immediately indicate systemic language problems. In the context of internet posting, it's likely a typing error that was not caught because of the absence of proofreading.

But you don't seem to consider that such observations are of value. You would rather choose to focus on being upset that someone dared to raise grammar as a potential issue rather than acknowledging that it is. So be it.

I tend to think that increasing awareness is a good thing. I think it's interesting (and a bit random) that what I observed is part of a deeper plot trajectory in OP's life:

I have no idea what that longer story is with regards to his schooling, nor did I have any sense that there would be something there. Yet my simple observations about his use of grammar brought that to the surface (if only briefly).

(You can also see OP placing blame, recognizing that he was already aware of the problem, and acknowledging that he hasn't actively sought to improve it. These are all bad signs for anyone aspiring for the 1%.)

Some "real" advice to OP would be for him to actually start proofreading his posts and to aspire to use language that conforms to a more academic style. Why? If you're looking to move up, it's useful to have these skills.

You can claim that academic English is the language of oppressors, and I'm not even sure that you would be wrong (though I'm also far from convinced that you're right). And you can get all flustered about the moral implications of focusing on grammar and what it means in terms of socioeconomic justice, implicit biases with regards to race ("whitening" your resume), and all that.

But I just don't care about you getting upset and flustered. OP struggles with grammar, and he should fix it if he wants to position himself for financial stability. It's possible he can achieve that without it, but it will be much easier if he has it.

"Meaning" is a slightly ambiguous word. For example, there's plenty of debate as to whether "grammar" carries a descriptive or a prescriptive meaning.

Yes, there's a bit of debate here, too. But that's the far less interesting aspect of the debate.

There are wrong ways to build sandcastles. If the sandcastle collapses, you've done it wrong. It could be due to the wrong sand, the wrong moisture level, or even the wrong tools. But it's definitely wrong.

Wow, you've got a huge problem if you just can't leave people alone for their grammar and need to do all this to justify nosing in on it.

Do you really think an adult, who already knows their linguistic strengths and weakness, is not going to have their resume proofread before distribution?

You still have to account for all the other talents, skills, abilities, etc. that would be wasted even if there were grammar mistakes on a resume. So we are back to flushing people away based on superficiality.

It should be natural for OP to continually trying to develop his language, if wanting to be successful. Grammar is just a part of it, even if an important one.

If you don't try to develop your language you look lazy, and having being lazy in the past. The grammar nits will flourish, missing the points you are making etc. You can find tricks to make you look better if you have genuine issues, not identifying wrong-spellings etc.

OP, start using "I" instead of "i", will be a good habit. The subculture on the Internet can kiss my ass. I use "i" only if there's a reason (haven't found one yet ). Deliberate misspelling can be used scarcely for making an effect, but you should know where and when it's possible. And...using "than" and "then" in the right places should be high up there too. Give it a try, don't be afraid. **** your old school and bad memories.

Alternatively you could continue as you've done up to this point. Your choice, I'll respect it.

There aren't wrong ways to make the rules of grammar is the point.
Pidgin English as spoken in Hawaii may not follow our rules, but their rules are not incorrect or wrong, don't you see.

OMG

I literally read all of this thinking it's gonna be at least some posts worth while after page 1-2....
turns out biggest grammar EV discussion EVAR!!

back to BFI... cya

fwiw... In real life you CAN'T play unexploitable (not have possible ev leeks to minimize losses)...
that's what WOMEN DO...
and they suck...

so nitpicking grammar is nitpicking one of many leaks...

presentation, manners, intonation, body style, speech speed, positive/negative pattern...

I literally turn down not fit people...
cuz it says a lot about your dedication...
if you don't care about health how do you care about anything else...??????!!!!

tldr; Aaron W is fat so I turned him down at level 1 screening... (yes your chicken wings didn't help)

There is also no wrong way to understand a person, but one may have to try to do so.

I pay my monthly fee to the gym, does that count? "Guy is even trying". Have used it in the CV too. Not saying here I never actually show up in the gym, but...I may sound a notch more fit, even boosts my own confidence.

FIRED!!!!



just gotta say this is a nice post btw...

An interesting thing happens when one types " are grammar nazis really that smart" into google.

A few hits:

http://www.makealivingwriting.com/4-...rible-writers/

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-...a-grammar-Nazi

http://bryantmcgill.com/20131206180500.html

http://www.vcpost.com/articles/51177...-the-worst.htm

They were the one in a million guys.

They could afford it.

We The People down here can't.

I'm not sure that reasoning is going to hold up. Just to keep it simple and relevant to the OP....

Examples of people who are or were in the 'less than one percent' range speaks for itself.

We the people can't afford to waste talent.

Yes you get to have huge leeks if you concentrate only on one thing in life... (price of 0,1%)

Tesla made huge things...
just to get ripped of by Edison...

Do you really think that professionalism stops at the resume? You can't possibly be that naive. Well, I guess you could.

We flush people away for all sorts of reasons. It's just part of the process. 100 people apply for a job and only 3 people get it. Yes, there are maybe 2-3 of those that get canned due to their resume. That's just the start of the process. People who don't dress professionally don't do that well when they show up in person. A bad handshake, poor eye contact, weak interviewing skills (and yes, even race plays a role).

Are "language skills" a superficiality? Not if your job requires you to do a lot of communicating. So if you don't write or speak at an appropriate level of professionalism, guess what's going to happen?

But please, continue propagating the idea that these types of skills don't matter. It's not as if there's a moral harm in giving people BAD advice, even though GOOD advice is morally problematic.

Ahhhh, the desperation of someone scraping the bottom of the barrel to try to win a point.

Blog title: "Make a living writing... Practical help for hungry writers"

This is very different from "How to get a job." And the reasons provided are very specific to people aspiring to be writers. Surprised? I'm not. But I'm also not you.

Wow... THREE whole answers! And none of them actually support the argument that grammar doesn't matter!

Is Bryant McGill some sort of self-help guru? That's how this reads. And I don't even disagree with him. OP had space to express himself in the OP. It revealed plenty about him. I heard him, and then I gave him information that he could use to improve his situation.

Right. You're really worried that OP might be a Jane Austen or Ernest Hemmingway.

But I'm amused by the article because it doesn't even help your case. It's like you don't even know what you're fighting against. You just see "grammar criticism" and think "GRAMMAR NAZI -- YAARRRRGHHHH!" And if that's all the depth you have, you're pretty much in violation of your entire thesis of caring more about what's being communicated than being a nit.

Also, should I criticize you for your lack of cultural empathy for introducing the Nazi analogy? I feel like I should.

In addition to not being that strong with language, it appears you're also not good at math.

We the people can't afford to be stuck at a low level position because their professional communication skills are lacking.

You are seeming kind if irrational Aaron, maybe take a break. Or you can stop being a a grammar nit and then you won't have to deal with facing resistance.

Try conducting a business deal in Pidgin English anywhere that's not Hawaii. It won't work. Pidgin English is therefore wrong for that.

But it's not wrong in some sort of way that means that there are deficiencies of intellect or character. It's wrong because it's not matching the expectation of the receiving culture (business culture).

LOL -- This shows me that you've reached your intellectual limit. It's absolutely clear that language skills are important. Your continual attempt to devalue it with the weak arguments you've put forth are not carrying the day, and I think you realize it.

The tighter you hold to the "grammar nit" and "grammar Nazi" labels, the more you show the underlying weakness of your position. You simply can't make any positive points in the absence of those labels. So please, continue to put up your "resistance." I don't mind it at all. I'm actually quite enjoying this.

Maybe you should look into your spelling?

Aaron I have a lot of experience in this area and I can tell you only have experience being a grammar nit.

How many people have you subjected to that kind of behavior?

That wouldn't be wise, and that is a strawman, considering my point is thus:

There aren't wrong ways to make the rules of grammar is the point.
Pidgin English as spoken in Hawaii may not follow our rules, but their rules are not incorrect or wrong, don't you see.

Exactly. It would be non-standard to communicate with someone in another dialect than their norm, generally speaking, assuming they aren't bidialectal.