[Golfingnut]

I feel an accurate post serves us better than a hate post written using accurate grammar.

[CFrance]

Originally Posted by islandgal

It has been a long time since I received my degree in English Lit.
I still silently cringe when I hear a sentence that ends with AT or something similar, but I would never ever say
anything about it to the speaker or a friend nearby.
Bad manners to say anything or form an opinion just for something that is not going to change your world.
Life is too short. Relax................

I agree with your point. I do try to keep up with the evolution of our language through reading articles, though, although my favorite journalist on the subject, William Safire, died several years ago.

But one recent article talked about common usage effecting change in the language, and ending a sentence with a preposition is one of those areas. So it has become acceptable to say, "Who did you give it to?" as opposed to, "To whom did you give it?"

Our son has another way around the problem. Instead of "Who did you give it to?" he says "Who did you give it to, jerk?"

[Billyg]

True Dat!!!

[OldDave]

There is an interesting struggle between accepted rules of language, and the fact that every language, except maybe german, is ever changing. (Thanks Martin Luther.)

Whom essentially doesn't exist any longer. Even used correctly it sounds odd.

There are words people use "incorrectly" most of the time. Unique is frequently modified with very, totally, etc. By definition unique cannot be modified, it means one of a kind. However, nearly no one uses it that way, so unique is on the way to meaning different or unusual. I don't know if it's good or bad, but if nearly everyone uses it that way, it comes to mean that, regardless if Edwin Newman is turning over in his grave. (I started to say irregardless to get a rise out of people)

I agree with the idea that you probably shouldn't correct people, unless there is a true reason to do so. But it drives me crazy, too.

The worst consistent misusage these days is "literally" Nearly every time you hear someone use it they mean "figuratively". I actually heard a news anchor on TV say, "today the stock market literally went through the roof." That would have been something to see.

Even though it drives me crazy we're probably on the way to the meaning of that word changing. And that will literally drive me crazy.

[CFrance]

[QUOTE=OldDave;630151]There is an interesting struggle between accepted rules of language, and the fact that every language, except maybe german, is ever changing. (Thanks Martin Luther.)

Whom essentially doesn't exist any longer. Even used correctly it sounds odd.

There are words people use "incorrectly" most of the time. Unique is frequently modified with very, totally, etc. By definition unique cannot be modified, it means one of a kind. However, nearly no one uses it that way, so unique is on the way to meaning different or unusual. I don't know if it's good or bad, but if nearly everyone uses it that way, it comes to mean that, regardless if Edwin Newman is turning over in his grave. (I started to say irregardless to get a rise out of people)

I agree with the idea that you probably shouldn't correct people, unless there is a true reason to do so. But it drives me crazy, too.

The worst consistent misusage these days is "literally" Nearly every time you hear someone use it they mean "figuratively". I actually heard a news anchor on TV say, "today the stock market literally went through the roof." That would have been something to see.

Even though it drives me crazy we're probably on the way to the meaning of that word changing. And that will literally drive me crazy.[/QUOTE

Love the book Eats, Shoots and Leaves. The author threatens to walk around with a magic marker correcting grammar and spelling mistakes on signs.

I had a minor in English and was an editor in my last job, but I still catch myself using "their" when I mean "there," and "to" for "too." It's embarrassing to read back through what I've written and find these errors, or worse yet let one slip through.

But now that I'm no longer having to correct others' mistakes for a living, I care more about there content than there grammar. (Ha-ha, had to do it!)

[zonerboy]

Guess I'm prejudiced, or maybe just a snob, but I tend to be dismissive of the opinions of people who use poor grammar or spelling. I figure if they don't even know 5th grade grammar and spelling, they probably don't know much else of any importance.
Every time I hear some one say "Where is it at?", I can't help thinking that person must be some type of hill-billy.
Sorry.
Flame me out, all you defensive people.

[JoeC1947]

Originally Posted by zonerboy

Guess I'm prejudiced, or maybe just a snob, but I tend to be dismissive of the opinions of people who use poor grammar or spelling. I figure if they don't even know 5th grade grammar and spelling, they probably don't know much else of any importance.
Every time I hear some one say "Where is it at?", I can't help thinking that person must be some type of hill-billy.
Sorry.
Flame me out, all you defensive people.

No flame out here. Your first sentence says it all. It's good that you realize it though, it's the first step to recovery.

[Madelaine Amee]

Originally Posted by OldDave

There is an interesting struggle between accepted rules of language, and the fact that every language, except maybe german, is ever changing. (Thanks Martin Luther.)

Whom essentially doesn't exist any longer. Even used correctly it sounds odd.

There are words people use "incorrectly" most of the time. Unique is frequently modified with very, totally, etc. By definition unique cannot be modified, it means one of a kind. However, nearly no one uses it that way, so unique is on the way to meaning different or unusual. I don't know if it's good or bad, but if nearly everyone uses it that way, it comes to mean that, regardless if Edwin Newman is turning over in his grave. (I started to say irregardless to get a rise out of people)

I agree with the idea that you probably shouldn't correct people, unless there is a true reason to do so. But it drives me crazy, too.

The worst consistent misusage these days is "literally" Nearly every time you hear someone use it they mean "figuratively". I actually heard a news anchor on TV say, "today the stock market literally went through the roof." That would have been something to see.

Even though it drives me crazy we're probably on the way to the meaning of that word changing. And that will literally drive me crazy.

I have been waiting, figuratively, for your post on this subject.

Now my gripe is when you hear people on the TV say " .... small little ..... What happened to just being able to say that something was small, who decided to add the little to the end?

[downeaster]

Originally Posted by zonerboy

Guess I'm prejudiced, or maybe just a snob, but I tend to be dismissive of the opinions of people who use poor grammar or spelling. I figure if they don't even know 5th grade grammar and spelling, they probably don't know much else of any importance.
Every time I hear some one say "Where is it at?", I can't help thinking that person must be some type of hill-billy.
Sorry.
Flame me out, all you defensive people.

One member hates me because of my lack of education and now here is a case of one who dismisses my input for the same reason.

Sgt. Alvin York was a "hillbilly" who won The Congressional of Honor.

Thomas Edison had very little formal education and his contributions were numerous.

That is just two people out of many who were not dismissed.

BTW, now you know I am one of those to be dismissed you skip my posts.

[quirky3]

I get a grammar-nerdy chuckle out of one example from Strunk & White's "Elements of Style":

Nauseous. Nauseated. The first means “sickening to comtemplate”; the second means “sick at the stomach.” Do not, therefore, say “I feel nauseous,” unless you are sure you have that effect on others.

[graciegirl]

I think that there is all kinds of "smart". Some people are really good with words, others with figures, and some are good with building things with their hands. Some people have common sense although they don't have awareness of opera and ballet and classical music and the great paintings and may not know another language. Some people have instinctive good taste and an inborn sense of what is beautiful and others know how to fix engines and washers and televisions. Some people are very smart even though they aren't very educated.

Some people who aren't very good at any of the above can read peoples hearts and smiles and are sometimes referred to as cognitivly challenged.

I think people mostly do the best they can with what they were given.

Except there are some who have been given great gifts and are lazy and I don't respect them at all.

I think that I have far more unanswered questions, each year I grow older and am not at all sure just what "smart" is.

[mulligan]

Gracie, my point in the initial post was not to bash anybody in particular, but only to point out that there are those among us who see grammatical errors jumping off the page. I could not agree more with your post, and I guess I have to apologize for stirring up some "stuff". That being said, I used to really enjoy the wrangling with the English majors.

[downeaster]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I think that there is all kinds of "smart". Some people are really good with words, others with figures, and some are good with building things with their hands. Some people have common sense although they don't have awareness of opera and ballet and classical music and the great paintings and may not know another language. Some people have instinctive good taste and an inborn sense of what is beautiful and others know how to fix engines and washers and televisions. Some people are very smart even though they aren't very educated.

Some people who aren't very good at any of the above can read peoples hearts and smiles and are sometimes referred to as cognitivly challenged.

I think people mostly do the best they can with what they were given.

Except there are some who have been given great gifts and are lazy and I don't respect them at all.

I think that I have far more unanswered questions, each year I grow older and am not at all sure just what "smart" is.

Well said, Gracie.

[2BNTV]

We all come from diifferent backgrounds and we are usually a product of what we read and who we hang around with.

I believe there are two kinds of intelligence. "Intellectual" and "Emotional".

Intellectual can be obtained through schooling.

Emotional intelligence is a measure of how well you’re able to control your emotions. It’s entirely different than your intellectual intelligence. Emotional intelligence is extremely important. It’s so important that studies have shown it to be much more important than intellectual intelligence to your long-term success.

There are many people who have intellectual intelligence but not as many who are emotionally intelligent.

[DougB]

Howard Gardner has actually identified 9 intelligences:
1). Logical/mathematical
2). Spatial
3). Interpersonal
4). Naturalistic
5). Intrapersonal
6). Linguistic
7). Bodily- kinesthetic
8) Existential
9). Musical