Language arts (Spun-off)

[Nick Theodorakis]

This thread has been brought to you by The Partnership of English Majors.

Nick

[A.DIM]

Woe be gone!

[Nick Theodorakis]

BAUT forum: Where all the posts are above average.

Nick

[R.A.F.]

Completely off topic...Paul, I just noticed that you have Shawn the Sheep as your avatar picture...

I love that show.


edited to add an on topic comment...I think that most people here add their own distingtive expertise to the board. (Well, excepting Jay, who knows quite a bit about everything all by himself. ) Together we become more than our individual "parts".

[Moose]

[cough, spurt, errr] The majority does have ...

Sorry, kleindoofy. It depends entirely on the context. The majority rules as a group, but the majority have degrees as individuals. Gillian has it right.

[Fazor]

Gillian has it right.

Those are about the least shocking words I have ever read.

[kleindoofy]

Sorry, kleindoofy. It depends entirely on the context. ...

Shucks.

I got caught in my bilingual double-think translation matrix once again.

In my other language it's formally wrong, but many use it anyway.

But fear not, I'll get her yet!

[Perikles]

talk louder

Which reminds me, with no personal dig intended, does this count as an adverb where you are? It doesn't sound right to me for UK English. Gillianren?

[Paul Beardsley]

Technically it should be "talk more loudly" but I doubt many people would quibble about it.

[Perikles]

Technically it should be "talk more loudly" but I doubt many people would quibble about it.

There's the rub - is this correctness of grammar or just a quibble? Comparative adverbs can be tricky.

[Fazor]

Or it could be just a lazy shortening of the phrase 'talk more loudly [than you were to begin with]!' See, not only am I right, I'm loudly right!

Eta: Dang. I typed that all in caps but the board fixed it. Great feature that I didn't know we had, since I don't oft type in all caps.

[Gillianren]

There's the rub - is this correctness of grammar or just a quibble? Comparative adverbs can be tricky.

Why do these things always come up while I'm asleep, or spending my evening with my boyfriend instead of you guys?

"More loudly" is probably more correct. (I say this after much thought.) On the other hand, I think "louder" is also correct. I think it's correct because of lingual drift, and I think "more loudly" is probably on its way out. In this, I am on the side of lingual drift.

[korjik]

Apparently we have to be English experts, or the thread will get derailed

[Celestial Mechanic]

Apparently we have to be English experts, or the thread will get derailed.

[Paul Beardsley]

Apparently we have to be English experts, or the thread will get derailed

engli'sh compitant's wood bee nice...

[Arneb]

That would be "nigh's", not nice, please.

[pzkpfw]

Who aksed you?

[captain swoop]

Grammer flaames annoy me no end. I think that a lot of the time they are no better than thread hijack jhust like this one. How many poosts about an obscure bit of grammer that no one gives a flying one about?

[Nick Theodorakis]

Irregardless, I could care less. Hopefully, you won't be literally climbing the walls over there misteaks and will lay down for a rest before its to much of a problem.

Errors deliberately introduced to annoy Gillian.

Nick

[HenrikOlsen]

How many poosts about an obscure bit of grammer that no one gives a flying one about?

So far I haven't actually seen one on this board.

You might be more right if you replaced "no one" with "very few".

[Paul Beardsley]

It's about communication.

[Gillianren]

I like to think that there's a difference between a correction and a flame. (And this applies in more than just English, to haul things back to the original topic!) It is possible to correct someone in a way that is very rude indeed. When I see that happen, I duly use the little red triangle. However, I do believe that a correction in any subject can also be a gentle admonishment. "Here, you got this wrong. This is the right way." I expect corrections when I'm wrong in history, science, or any other field. I've even stood corrections in grammar, though more often than not, the person correcting me is wrong and I am right. (And, when people are right, can I just say that it doesn't take eight people telling me so for me to notice?) That's true of several people around here in their relative fields. I've often admired the dignity with which some people offer corrections--and with which others receive them.

[Perikles]

Grammer flaames annoy me no end. I think that a lot of the time they are no better than thread hijack jhust like this one. How many poosts about an obscure bit of grammer that no one gives a flying one about?

My post about comparative adverbs was in fact a genuine question, hardly in the category of flamer. I for one do not think that the correctness of a part of speech can be construed as "an obscure bit of grammer that no one gives a flying one about". This question was about differences between types of English, specifically the American use (or not) of adverbs, which I find quite interesting. It takes all sorts.

[astromark]

It takes all sorts yep...sigh...
I have noticed that some over zealous indervidualls would have us sitting in the corner for not doing all the maths right or spelling foolishly and genraly being 'challenging' with our use of the language tools we use. I would be beter understood if I could be understood... yes I agree with myself about that. Pitty, I enjoy a good discussion.
I am often wrong. Being corected is just fine. If it helps in the understanding we win.

[JohnL]

Personally, I find that being over-pedantic doesn't help to make a forum accessible, especially when we're dealing with people for who English is not their first language. An example of being over-pedantic might be, say, having a long string of posts debating the finer points of grammar.

And this is in a thread asking about the forum's accessibility... I love the smell of irony in the early afternoon...

(How long before someone tells me I should have used "whom"?)

[Paul Beardsley]

(How long before someone tells me I should have used "whom"?)

I noticed it, but decided not to comment because it wasn't blocking understanding.

This "pedantic flamer" thing seems to be a recurring accusation without basis, and I am getting sick of it.

In point of fact, there is one regular poster I can think of whose grammar is so poor that I genuinely struggle to make head or tails what he is saying - often reading the post two or three times to get what I think is the gist. I have never commented because I cannot think of a way of doing so constructively.

[JohnL]

This "pedantic flamer" thing seems to be a recurring accusation without basis, and I am getting sick of it.

Well, look at the last page and a half in this thread. Sorry, but there's the basis right there. You can tell me that BAUT is not the only forum on the web with the problem (because it most certainly is not the only one) but don't try to tell me that it doesn't have the problem.

In point of fact, there is one regular poster I can think of whose grammar is so poor that I genuinely struggle to make head or tails what he is saying - often reading the post two or three times to get what I think is the gist. I have never commented because I cannot think of a way of doing so constructively.

Then you, sir, are a rarity, and I applaud your patience. If only everyone took the same view.

[Moose]

Well, look at the last page and a half in this thread.

If you're calling the last page and a half "pedantic flaming", I suggest you're making a serious mischaracterization of the discussion that took place. Nobody was flaming anybody.

And the use of correct grammar is no more pedantic than the use of correct math. Both are about accurate and clear communication. If your grammar is junk, you will not be able to communicate clearly and accurately whether or not your math is any good.

Granted, you may have had little interest in such discussions, but hey, there are at least four entire BAUT forums filled with topics that won't interest me at all. And I have to moderate there all the same. I cope.

[R.A.F.]

...don't try to tell me that it doesn't have the problem.

It doesn't have the problem...

If this bothers you so, then may I suggest using the red triangle found in the upper right corner to report the "offending" post.

[JohnL]

Meh, perhaps I was unclear - it's a web forum. All web forums have an element of grammar pedantic-ness (correct that if you want...), whatever the reason.

It doesn't make my blood boil or anything, it just seems ironic to me that a thread that is about the accessibility of the forum is more than half full of people picking apart each others' grammar and spelling. And on top of that, someone is telling me that it doesn't happen on this forum at all while I am observing it in the very same thread!

Flaming, maybe not, but over-pedantic, yes. Evidence worthy of consideration? Certainly. Red-triangle-worthy...? Maybe - probably not in this case. If I used the red triangle, what would the moderators do?

Ridiculously ironic bordering on the comedic? Abso-flippin'-lutely.

Edit: @RAF: Apologies I missed the smiley - I realise now that you weren't being entirely serious :S . And @Moose: The correctness of someone's grammar is only relevant as far as it hampers communication, and it's even debateable (and debated) half the time. Math isn't.