Grammar and the Peeves that Pet It

houdini1

Well, I, for one, find this whole topic unnecessary and completely redundant.

How about VIN number?

tmart

Yep, should be a VI number, not a number number.

qbrozen

we just had a discussion here at work regarding Seasons ('s?) Greetings.
We ultimately decided that, since hallmark probably invented it, we would default to them and use the apostrophe. I still don't like it, but what can ya do? I mean, I'm giving you the greeting, not the season. Of course, at the same time, it is just 1 season.

This, however, led to our discovery that, while it is called Presidents' Day because it applies to more than one president, Father's Day is singular possessive. So I suppose only 1 father gets to celebrate each year. I've celebrated 2 in a row, so I guess I need to hold off for the next billion years or so, huh?

jimbres

I'd suggest ATM machine.

pat

Yes, that's a very common one!

stever

I don't buy into the "it's wrong to end a sentence with a preposition" rule (link).

However, I seem to be composing posts that end in "to" but more and more I spell it "too" (part of the aging process?).

Naturally the spell checker doesn't catch that and it's too much hassle to find a grammar plugin or compose in Word and paste the post in the forum.

So maybe the cure is to try to avoid prepositional endings entirely? Or eat more sushi?

madmanmoo

As far as I know, it is not correct English to end a sentence in a proposition. Do I follow that rule all the time? No.

It does bug me that I can't rearrange my sentences to stop doing that though.

-Moo

mac24

I don't know if it's also part of the aging process, but I find I'm becoming less bothered by transgression of the 'rules' governing grammar, and more bothered by obvious spelling errors.

Not typos, though a quick visual scan should catch those, but the use of correctly spelled words that have a meaning different to that which was obviously intended.

Just a glance tells me what's wrong (and my education wasn't all it could have been), so why don't the growing number of seemingly educated people who write this stuff realize it too?

Here's an example from another forum, written by the CEO of a specialist automotive company.

"Is there a potential problem with using PowerStearing fluid as opposed to ATF? It would not be a good day if somehow the breaks got fowled up while its cold out and snowy "

(The prior discussion included hydroboost, which explains the reference to 'breaks'.)

madmanmoo

Are you serious? That was written by the CEO of a company? And an automotive company as well?

That flabbergasts me.

-moo

stever

I dunno - I see it spelled "breaks" so often here I'm liable to start spelling it that way to. Er, too. :shades:

What irritates me is that I'll screw up something that should be obvious, but don't catch it until a day later when it's too late to edit. I didn't fry that many synapses in my youth but the disconnect between what I type and what I thought I typed keeps growing. And that's another reason to fob off the grammar rules.

madmanmoo

In this age of text messaging, spelling is sure to take a beating. Everything is towards immediate gratification and speed.

I DID fry a ton of synapses, but I'm still able to piece together a decent sentence. New words are constantly being added to the dictionary. In turn, I think that grammar rules should be adapting as well. (I think this is part of what you're saying.) I'm not saying throw everything out the window just because people are lazy, but the rules shouldn't be too stringent.

-moo

stever

American English does seem to adapt well and steals good words (and sentence structures?) from other languages.

The context matters too - you'd want to be more formal and "correct" in a job cover letter, for example. Or you may tailor your words to the specific language and usage of your field.

Chat typos shouldn't matter - this is just conversation, and I'll toss out y'alls and ain't with the best of them.

But ... this stuff will be floating around the ether forever or until Google's servers crumble in the dust, which could make for some embarrassing moments when your future father in law (the humanities professor) does his background net check on you.

madmanmoo

That last bit you typed, isn't that a little scary?

I googled a handle I used for online poker to see what would pop up. I saw a ton of hands that I was involved in on different poker webpages. It's amazing to see what kind of information you can pull up from years ago.

I completely agree about context. I actually have to tailor my "text speech" when texting customers because I have no idea if they know what a certain line of abbreviated speech will be.

"Ty 4 the business. ttyl."

They may or may not know what I'm saying, but now I capitalize, spell out words and use correct punctuation with customers.

-moo

Kirstie_H

It's not the errors that bother me so much. I mean, we're all prone to typos and instances of misuse for a variety of reasons - not paying attention, it's sometimes easier to read when the grammar/sytax aren't entirely correct, forgetting which synonym has which meaning... What bothers me is the staggaring number of people who aren't even aware that they make consistent errors, and if they are, they don't think it's important. You correct and get, "tee hee, whatever" as a response.

I don't have a problem so much with the actual (mis)usage, but the fact that there are a ton of people who aren't the least bit au fait with the English language.

madmanmoo

"Au fait"?

I took French, but that was a long time ago. What's that mean?

I don't think most people care about correct grammar. It's just a necessary evil to them.

I took a class in college called "Linguistics". I was an English/Lit major and even I thought my professor went a little overboard sometimes. She was a fanatic for where all the word origins were from and the evolution of language. It definitely has some interesting elements, but man did it get old some days.

-moo

Kirstie_H

"au fait" means conversant with, or knowledgeable about. I like to use the expression "au fait with the English language" just to be humorous (possibly only to myself) by using a French expression when speaking of the English language.

Yeah, there's a point where it goes too far and there's correctness for correctness' sake only. However, there are plenty of people who can't put together a coherent resume or cover letter, and what's worse, don't see why this might knock them out of a job competition.

xwesx

Perhaps not by coincidence, prepositional endings first began to consistently annoy me when I worked at a university "Career Services" office. We published a Career Services Guide annually, with extensive information about researching career goals, job hunting, resumes, interviewing, and employment law. However, there was a stark dichotomy in the publication between the writing style used to present this information and that in the sample resumes.

One year, I was tasked with editing the guide. My main focus was to "formalize" the language throughout the publication so as to make it more professional and, hopefully, to help the reader think in such a way as to make writing cover letters and resumes a less frustrating task. I ended up out of favor with the original editor of the publication, but, in the end, the document was formalized and far better for it. Our department received ongoing accolades from both our customers and campus over that and subsequent years' revisions.

Not surprisingly, my three-year-old son has a better mastery of the language than many adults I know. It really annoys my wife at times which, of course, is only an added bonus!

stever

Well, yeah, if you go around saying you were tasked with some chore, you're going to fall out of favor with a bunch of us.

mmm, cafe au fait....

xwesx

I am so rarely in favor with anyone that I scarcely notice the difference. If you doubt me then ask my wife; I guarantee she will agree!

mac24

What bothers me is the staggering number of people who aren't even aware that they make consistent errors, and if they are, they don't think it's important.

Precisely the aspect of this discussion that bothers me too. It's not something that's just started to appear either. I used to see the memos disseminated by upper and middle management of a large power company. Although heavily peppered with the necessary 'paradigm shifts' and suchlike, they also almost always included a wide selection of the spelling and grammar issues discussed here.

Lesser mortals would occasionally pin corrected and graded copies on noticeboards, but management concern was only ever to try and catch the culprit.
Interestingly, these issues only became apparent (several years ago) when a policy change dictated that they issue their own memos, rather than use a secretary or clerk.

Although the above bothers me, the fact that I let it bother me bothers me too.
Maybe I just care too much! :shades:

tmart

Au contraire, Steve. I'm with Xwesx. Good grammar is never bad.

stever

But you can't let good grammar interfere with good communication. Well you can, but it's almost as bad as letting bad grammar cloud your intent.

Why not simply say "I was asked to rewrite the style book" instead of "I was tasked to rewrite...."?

Is there some nuance with the "tasked" wording I'm missing? Perhaps the intended audience demanded such obfuscation. It just sounds like jargon to me.

Hey Wes, solstice is this Saturday. :shades:

mac24

Good grammar is never bad.

I agree, though I do think that bad grammar is the lesser of the evils being discussed. Although annoying, it rarely distorts the meaning of the author in the same way that incorrect punctuation or spelling can.

xwesx

Ah! I was not asked to do it. The task, that is, the editing of the guide, was assigned to me. I was tasked with it.

I have to chuckle now that you clarified. I often ruffle the feathers of my coworkers when sending out departmental messages over email simply due to my writing style. They apparently feel as though I am "talking down" to them simply because I tend not to write as casually as I might speak the same thoughts. Somehow they equate that as being demeaning to them, even though I am the first to laugh, joke, and enjoy interactions with them and everyone else. *shrugs*

xwesx

Hey Wes, solstice is this Saturday.

Yes! The last weeks of winter's dreary, dim days are upon us! I watched the sunrise yesterday for over an hour (off and on), from about 1100 to noon! I went outside again around 1530 and it was dark. :mad:

However, the ongoing warmer-than-usual temperatures are fabulous! It was -10F this morning, which was the coldest day of the year thus far. I have to wonder if we will see any -50F days this winter. They are certainly becoming rarer as the years continue to pass.

cdnpinhead

". . .capitalize, spell out words and use correct punctuation. . ."

Well, that sounds like a good thing to me.

What's the downside?

Is it the additional time that it costs to do something (forgive the perjorative/judgemental word) correctly?

cdnpinhead

". . .due to my writing style. . ."

Clarity doesn't equal casual where I come from (pardon that preposition, if you would). Carefully-chosen short words trump pomposity every time, whether it's in formal spoken prose (business meeting) or the written equivalent.

But that's just me.

madmanmoo

Exactly, it's the additional time. The method behind texting came from having to use the keypad to input everything. Obviously, now we have entire QWERT keyboards on cellphones so it makes it easier to type out everything correctly. On many cellphones though, we have to use the number pad. It is time consuming and I have to make a conscious effort to text "correctly" when communicating with a client. For many years I had just been texting to friends/family and never thought twice about butchering the language.

Obviously, paying attention to grammar isn't a bad thing. It was just a major adjustment. I also wanted to point it out because of the way linguistics is evolving.

-moo

madmanmoo

That's something I find amusing as well. I used to find a lot of times people would look blankly at me or wonder why I was "talking down" to them with my vocabulary use. Consequently, I "dumbed down" my words so that I could blend in a bit better. It works the other way as well. When I see someone using an extended vocabulary, mine starts to come forth again as well.

I guess that's the salesman in me. :P

-moo

xwesx

It is always prudent to carefully chose one's words, but as for them being "short," why should it matter? It should be a short journey to arrive at the point, regardless of the words used to get there. Pomposity is a matter of tone, so to derive that from text simply based on the words used is to bask in one's own simple vocabulary. I know far too many people who cannot communicate an understandable thought regardless of what words they use because they lack the ability to connect them together in an unambiguous way. I tend to be this way when I speak, but I have more time to think about an idea and organize the thoughts when I write it down. Other people are exactly opposite - great speakers but terrible writers.

I have never been one to spare others' feelings. Unless it comes from a direct assault, defensive reactions are usually a result of personal shortcomings. I know that as well as anyone.

cdnpinhead

As always, YMMV.

Having endured many years dealing with bureaucrats, both in a corporate context and (worse yet) government, I tend to associate people who choose a four-syllable word when one-syllable would work better with what's sometimes called "bafflegab." Almost forty years ago a mentor pointed out that "to be understood is to be found out" in many of these situations.

Brevity is the soul of wit -- that sort of thing.

sky23213

I've mentioned before how strict my English education was. Prepositions were significantly honored with a lot of time and tests. The importance was often emphasized with "Never use a preposition to end a sentence with!"

stever

Sir Winston took care of that debate nicely:

“This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.”

Although he may not have said it at all, and variations of the actual text are many.

Churchill on Prepositions

(and I'm sure calling him Sir Winston must surely ruffle some British feathers somewhere eh?).

oregonboy

My problem with "tasked" is that it is trendy. The meaning of a common noun used in a less common verb form is perfectly clear, but it causes one to pause to evaluate it.

One would never say "I was chored with taking out the trash".

Turning nouns into verbs is a common practice in our language; "I shingled the roof" sounds perfectly fine. "I broomed the sidewalk" sounds a bit funny. "I waste-basketed your memo" just doesn't work. :P (Oddly enough "s-canned" is commonly used in that context.) :surprise:

james

madmanmoo

I question your truthiness.

-moo

Kirstie_H

Brevity is cool - there are folks at my office who feel the need to be overly wordy when sending e-mails, which means they don't get read (the e-mails, not the folks). For example, I recently received an e-mail phrased so cumbersomely:

John would like to schedule a meeting to identify directions in research for a new proposal and is hoping to get the input of those listed on this e-mail. I am now querying your availability to attend such a meeting, potentially on January 7, but if that doesn't work for everyone we can look at alternate dates. I have already spoken with the funding agency and they can meet on that date; however, since it is no longer daylight savings time they would like for it to occur prior to 4pm CST. John believes that we should be able to wrap up the meeting within one hour...

Seriously. It goes on and on like this, and I stopped reading halfway through. What's wrong with:

Please let respond with your availability for a one-hour research team meeting on January 7 between 8am and 4pm.

Cumbersome writing is, indeed, the enemy of clear communication.

Kirstie_H

And common message board abbreviations a la LOL, YMMV, IIRC, don't bother me in the least. They're called acronyms, and they're fine & dandy.

What drives me nuts is text message speak that is used not only for text messaging, but for every freakin' form of communication! It's the deliberate misspelling, such as ne waze (as if "anyways" is more correct) and ru ok 4 2day?
I get that when texting on a traditional phone, it makes sense. But c'mon... you want to post that on a message board where you're looking for help, or in an e-mail to me? Take the extra two seconds, pretend that you respect my time, and use real words, please.

Signed,
fuddy-duddy

tmart

What does "Please let respond..." mean? Why not just "Please respond..."? Was "let" a typo? :confuse:

Kirstie_H

Yup. But I still maintain that it's more clear than the extended version

pat

Can't nobody get away wit' nuttin'!! :P

user777

Cumbersome writing is, indeed, the enemy of clear communication.

True.

Meetings scheduled by management are the enemy of engineering productivity. :shades:

Kirstie_H

pat

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! That's perfect, haven't seen that before!

lostwrench

Did you notice the grammatically poor campaign signs displayed behind a certain presidential candidate when he speaks?

Kirstie_H

No, haven't watched much, but please - do share!!

lostwrench

Today I saw them again. When he is speaking, they are held behind and in front of him. You will not miss them.

tmart

Who is he? :confuse:

Kirstie_H

I probably will, since I rarely watch TV

Well, your description ('he") narrows it down to all but one candidate.

sterlingdog

So, what is wrong with, "I had rather drive it today."?

cdnpinhead

"So, what is wrong with, "I had rather drive it today."? "

Well, for starters, some of us would have been more comfortable with "I would rather have driven. . ." Perfect tense and all that.

Then there's the bit about the quotation mark(s) inside the punctuation. I think they do it that way in the UK, but (last I heard), it's considered proper to put to quotes outside on this side of the big water.

I'm more than confident that you can (and will) put me straight.