Total Posts:80|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Grammar

PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 12:19:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
What are some grammatical errors that you avoid naturally? And what areas or aspects of grammar really get you almost every time?

I'll start.

One thing I've always been good at is differentiating between common homophones such as there, their, and they're.

Something that really distresses me, though, is that I don't naturally speak in the perfect tense. For example, I might say "I should have wrote more in the essay" instead of "I should have written more in the essay."

I talk urban.

Anyway, what are your grammatical sins and virtues?
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 12:22:47 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 12:19:35 AM, PoeJoe wrote:
What are some grammatical errors that you avoid naturally? And what areas or aspects of grammar really get you almost every time?

I'll start.

One thing I've always been good at is differentiating between common homophones such as there, their, and they're.

Something that really distresses me, though, is that I don't naturally speak in the perfect tense. For example, I might say "I should have wrote more in the essay" instead of "I should have written more in the essay."

I talk urban.

Anyway, what are your grammatical sins and virtues?

Hmm...for me I think one would be my overuse of commas, lol.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2010 1:11:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Dangling prepositions; I am frequently guilty of this.

Something that irritates me is a sentence that starts with a conjunction, specifically "so". This seems to be a fad, and fairly high placed executives in my company start meetings with "so".

Then versus Than- do people understand the difference?
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2010 1:22:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/16/2010 1:11:28 PM, innomen wrote:
Something that irritates me is a sentence that starts with a conjunction, specifically "so". This seems to be a fad, and fairly high placed executives in my company start meetings with "so".

Starting sentences with conjunctions isn't grammatically incorrect.

If it was incorrect, then the last clause of this sentence would be dependent, but this last clause is obviously independent.
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2010 1:30:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/16/2010 1:25:21 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I have finally mastered the use of semicolons; they link two related clauses in two separate sentences. :D

Good for you. Just remember that both sides of the semicolon, when used in this way, must contain not just any clause but an independent clause; in other words, both sides of a semicolon should contain a sentence that can grammatically stand on its own. (:
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/16/2010 1:33:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/16/2010 1:30:07 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 5/16/2010 1:25:21 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I have finally mastered the use of semicolons; they link two related clauses in two separate sentences. :D

Good for you. Just remember that both sides of the semicolon, when used in this way, must contain not just any clause but an independent clause; in other words, both sides of a semicolon should contain a sentence that can grammatically stand on its own. (:

Yeppers.
Cogito-ergo-sum
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2010 9:07:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/16/2010 1:11:28 PM, innomen wrote:
Dangling prepositions; I am frequently guilty of this.

Something that irritates me is a sentence that starts with a conjunction, specifically "so". This seems to be a fad, and fairly high placed executives in my company start meetings with "so".

Then versus Than- do people understand the difference?

I think it stems from people assuming the likeness between the two words makes them interchangeable.
LeafRod
Posts: 1,548
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:31:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
My grammar is pretty much godly. Regardless, though, I think I'm fundamentally sound enough to where I can pass off other possible mistakes (if I'm making any... I'm not really sure) as stylistic devices.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:34:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:31:42 PM, LeafRod wrote:
My grammar is pretty much godly. Regardless, though, I think I'm fundamentally sound enough to where I can pass off other possible mistakes (if I'm making any... I'm not really sure) as stylistic devices.

You don't need the comma after "Regardless."
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:36:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:34:53 PM, Nags wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:31:42 PM, LeafRod wrote:
My grammar is pretty much godly. Regardless, though, I think I'm fundamentally sound enough to where I can pass off other possible mistakes (if I'm making any... I'm not really sure) as stylistic devices.

You don't need the comma after "Regardless."

You would "come off" as more grammar-wary if you restrain from utilizing contractions.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:37:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:36:42 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:34:53 PM, Nags wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:31:42 PM, LeafRod wrote:
My grammar is pretty much godly. Regardless, though, I think I'm fundamentally sound enough to where I can pass off other possible mistakes (if I'm making any... I'm not really sure) as stylistic devices.

You don't need the comma after "Regardless."

You would "come off" as more grammar-wary if you restrain from utilizing contractions.

This was meant for LeafRod. I just noticed that Nags used a contraction as well.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:43:58 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:37:21 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:36:42 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:34:53 PM, Nags wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:31:42 PM, LeafRod wrote:
My grammar is pretty much godly. Regardless, though, I think I'm fundamentally sound enough to where I can pass off other possible mistakes (if I'm making any... I'm not really sure) as stylistic devices.

You don't need the comma after "Regardless."

You would "come off" as more grammar-wary if you restrain from utilizing contractions.

This was meant for LeafRod. I just noticed that Nags used a contraction as well.

Contractions are grammatically valid.

So, what's your point?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:45:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't like grammar mumbo-jumbo...

"contractions"
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:48:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:43:58 PM, Nags wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:37:21 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:36:42 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:34:53 PM, Nags wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:31:42 PM, LeafRod wrote:
My grammar is pretty much godly. Regardless, though, I think I'm fundamentally sound enough to where I can pass off other possible mistakes (if I'm making any... I'm not really sure) as stylistic devices.

You don't need the comma after "Regardless."

You would "come off" as more grammar-wary if you restrain from utilizing contractions.

This was meant for LeafRod. I just noticed that Nags used a contraction as well.

Contractions are grammatically valid.

So, what's your point?

I am just saying that writing generally looks more formal and intellectually stimulating when the use of contractions is either heavily restricted or completely eliminated.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:50:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:45:33 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
I don't like grammar mumbo-jumbo...

"contractions"

I never paid much attention to the meanings of such words...

though now I feel dumb b/c this one's a rather simple one... still though.. who cares what it's called?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:51:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:48:54 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I am just saying that writing generally looks more formal and intellectually stimulating when the use of contractions is either heavily restricted or completely eliminated.

lol... snob.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:51:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:48:54 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I am just saying that writing generally looks more formal and intellectually stimulating when the use of contractions is either heavily restricted or completely eliminated.

What does this have to do with valid grammar?
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:54:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:51:26 PM, Nags wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:48:54 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I am just saying that writing generally looks more formal and intellectually stimulating when the use of contractions is either heavily restricted or completely eliminated.

What does this have to do with valid grammar?

I was not necessarily referencing "valid" grammar.

For example, your correction to LeafRod's "comma situation" was not necessary. Actually, let me look over his sentence again before I comment further.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:56:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:54:32 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I was not necessarily referencing "valid" grammar.

That's what the thread is about.

For example, your correction to LeafRod's "comma situation" was not necessary. Actually, let me look over his sentence again before I comment further.

...
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:58:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
LeafRod could have made his post more concise.

He could have typed:

My grammar is seemingly impeccable; I can even pass off various "slip-ups" as stylistic devices.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 10:59:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
only idiots obsess about grammar...

it's like that saying... Those who can't do... teach.

Those who can't think... do grammar.

(lol c'mon... comment on "do grammar"... I dare ya!)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 11:01:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:58:31 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
LeafRod could have made his post more concise.

He could have typed:

My grammar is seemingly impeccable; I can even pass off various "slip-ups" as stylistic devices.

That's not the same concept that LR wrote about. Besides, poor writing style (subjective) is not necessarily invalid grammar.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 11:03:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 10:59:23 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

only idiots obsess about grammar...

Are you calling many English professors, high school teachers, several novelists, and other groups of people idiotic?

it's like that saying... Those who can't do... teach.

Doesn't make too much sense in the current application.

Those who can't think... do grammar.

You have to think while considering the rules of grammar.

(lol c'mon... comment on "do grammar"... I dare ya!)

No thank you. Your post has various spelling / grammar errors.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 11:04:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 11:01:40 PM, Nags wrote:
At 7/3/2010 10:58:31 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
LeafRod could have made his post more concise.

He could have typed:

My grammar is seemingly impeccable; I can even pass off various "slip-ups" as stylistic devices.

That's not the same concept that LR wrote about.

Understood. However, I made the post more concise. That is all I wanted to do.

Besides, poor writing style (subjective) is not necessarily invalid grammar.

Understood.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 11:04:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 11:03:55 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
No thank you. Your post has various spelling / grammar errors.

lol... thank you your eminence :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 11:06:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 11:03:55 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
You have to think while considering the rules of grammar.

I'm not one for rules.

Rules are only good for people who need'em. (slow people)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 11:07:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 11:06:29 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 7/3/2010 11:03:55 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
You have to think while considering the rules of grammar.

I'm not one for rules.

I acknowledge your sentiments.

Rules are only good for people who need'em. (slow people)

Major mistake in this sentence.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2010 11:11:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/3/2010 11:07:45 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
Major mistake in this sentence.

lol... you can't leave it at that oh ostentatious one...

Enlighten Me!
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."