English and Grammar Rules

[bousozoku]

It's definitely "too much clothing", but "too much clothes" sounds funny. In other words, I don't know

Edit: After reading the dictionary definitions and applying logical extension, it's "too many clothes"

It's much with a single item, many with two or more items.

 

[Qoxiivi]

There are a few things that I think it's very important to realise about being excessively pedantic with regards to grammar and adhering to established conventions.

1. The English language is a bit of a mess anyway. A wonderful, complicated and fascinating mess, but a mess nonetheless. It has got to where it is today by the bending and breaking of rules and the cobbling together or words. Whereas some would consider a contraction such as 'gonna' too informal to be acceptable, it does, at least, have a purpose - beyond saving a few precious characters in a text message. It sounds different. It has a different ring about it. This claim cannot be satisfied by contractions such as ‘wuld’ (instead of ‘would’) or ‘u’ (instead of ‘you’). These, to my knowledge, have been created solely to save space in a texted message and, in my opinion, can hardly be excused in a written, or typed format. They do, again in my opinion, look vulgar, and although they may save the odd microsecond here and there, a lot of time could also be saved by saying nothing at all.

2. Style. How many people have been pulled up by Microsoft Word’s grammar checker on a stylistic ‘error’? Sometimes, you want to say things a little differently. Everyone has a different style of writing and much can be achieved (comedy and poetry are good examples of this) by the deliberate bending and breaking of conventional rules - which, after all, are there for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

3. Good grammar is important, but so are good manners. Aggressively pulling someone up for not following (and likely, not being aware of) relatively obscure artifacts of the English language reflects more unfavourably on the corrector than on the person being corrected.

Overall, grammar is very important; it’s the guardian of emotion and inflection within the written word. I believe that unchecked erosion of these rules would run parallel with (and be symptomatic of) an erosion of civil society. I’m as annoyed (and frankly, worried) by all the CD’s and book’s your likely too find out their, but politeness costs nothing – and is a more likely vehicle to your viewpoint being listened to than supercilious hostility.

Besides, bad grammar and writing is what keeps me in the job

 

[Deepdale]

... Good grammar is important, but so are good manners. Aggressively pulling someone up for not following (and likely, not being aware of) relatively obscure artifacts of the English language reflects more unfavourably on the corrector than on the person being corrected.

Amen to your entire post.

 

[EGT]

My spelling and grammar is just terrible. I think I've learned more about grammar and punctuation here than I ever did at school!

I read this paragraph just to reassure myself.

"Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll
raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe."



Oh you Cambridge students are working hard!

 

[EGT]

politeness costs nothing

Ahhh, superb.

I must say this about three times a week. It works too!

 

[dops7107]

"Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll
raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe."

Wow - that was remarkably easy to read (if a little jarring on the eye). Thos Cambridge folks eh... shame no one really pays much attention to their dictionary (preferring the Oxford one, of course )

 

[floyde]

"Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll
raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe."

Omg, taht was so mcuh fun, I'm giong to tpye lkie taht form now on. Cmabigdre poelpe rcok!!

 

[bousozoku]

...
Overall, grammar is very important; it’s the guardian of emotion and inflection within the written word. I believe that unchecked erosion of these rules would run parallel with (and be symptomatic of) an erosion of civil society. I’m as annoyed (and frankly, worried) by all the CD’s and book’s your likely too find out their, but politeness costs nothing – and is a more likely vehicle to your viewpoint being listened to than supercilious hostility.

Besides, bad grammar and writing is what keeps me in the job

It would seem that your job is secure with all of the errors you've created in this brief post. I could help you correct them.

Of course, politeness is wonderful, as long as it's genuine. Fake politeness is unfortunate and useless.

 

[Qoxiivi]

It would seem that your job is secure with all of the errors you've created in this brief post. I could help you correct them.

Of course, politeness is wonderful, as long as it's genuine. Fake politeness is unfortunate and useless.

Their is error's? Your kiding. Not me surley

 

[zimv20]

i'd go with "too much clothing."

 

[xsedrinam]

i'd go with "too much clothing."

So, with that ruling applied to the use of more than one "ha" ("ha ha"), "Minnehaha" should be "Muchhaha"?

 

[aquajet]

Nice try Wanna and gonna may be widely used but they are hardly proper. Besides, using them just makes people sound uneducated.

Well, they are legitimate words found in the Oxford dictionary. They're certainly inappropriate to use in written English, but I think they're perfectly acceptable in everyday vernacular.

 

[mrfrosty]

Am I bad grammer getting you down ?

 

[emaja]

Yes, it's a real word. It's an informal contraction of 'going to'

"Gonna" is the written version of the slurring of the pronunciation of "going to." Almost everyone says it, but that does not mean it is acceptable in the formal written word.

If you are writing a novel and want to capture the way people really speak or a dialect, then it is certainly acceptable to use gonna, but in my opinion we should use the proper spelling of the words we mean when we write them down. How much harder is it to type "going to" than "gonna?"

I can't stand to read posts that are filled with the same shorthand and abbreviations that people use when texting each other. I try to be as careful as I can and of course I make mistakes, but they are unintentional and we shouldn't crucify each other over them.

It's not a lot to ask to make your best effort and try to learn from your mistakes.