Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by DougM, Jul 21, 2019.
In fifteen years even English teachers will be like wuz up u dwn 4 spelz tst?
It matters to me
When I write I can't stand leaving typo's and will edit to fix any mistakes.
Yet I also like to use colloquialisms in language.
Colloquialisms are often grammatically incorrect, yet communicationally superior or at least more targeted in meaning.
For example one can make a statement here that might offend the individual it's aimed at, but using some linguistic tarpaper shackisms makes it less likely to offend.
This is dog 101.
Are we not dogs?
And of course the word "communicationally" is neither a word nor a colloquialism, but here I like it.
Really, notes and words are tools of the musician.
Artistic license might oughtta be assumed, assuming guitar forum members are actual musicians.
The whole point of grammar is to be understood by someone else reading what you've written. A conversational style of writing still needs to be clear about what you are trying to convey. That's the sole purpose of grammar....not to separate people into 'classes'. So, being conversational is fine but if you're not being understood, and that's what I find happening A LOT, then there's a problem....and falling back on the tired old 'grammar Nazis' accusation just doesn't fly IMO.....(although there is at least one person here who seems unable to distinguish between a 'typo' and bad grammar.....that guy's a Naz! for sure).
I can often re-read something and still don't have a clue what the person is trying to convey. If that's the case then being 'conversational' is useless....
So here's my Golden Rule....if a person doesn't care enough about what they're writing to go to the small trouble of making it readable and understandable (ie: take a moment and look at what you've written and correct and edit if need be) then obviously what they're saying is not that important to them so why would I go to the trouble of trying to decipher it.
You're probably right, String!
Unless you're old enough to think that "Gunsmoke and chill" is a decent pick-up line...
As a native Finn I try to speak/write as perfect English (I prefer British version) as I can. But obviously I make mistakes and it bugs me so much that I’d like to bang my head to the wall. Being a perfectionist it isn’t all sunshine and happyhappyjoyjoy. I just hope that the good people around here can understand what I’m trying to say. Over and out.
Cormac McCarthy is considered by many in the literary world as being a "top shelf" writer.
Yet he uses very little punctuation and a lot of run on sentences.
IMO, he breaks the rules of grammar.
I like his stories but his mis-use of grammar irritates me.
He has said that he writes so as to need as little punctuation as possible. Sentences should be uncomplicated and no longer than absolutely necessary. I think it's a good rule to follow, whatever one thinks of how he applies it in his own writing.
I like that I get paid more because I can process the written word and drawings into instructions than cannot be incorrectly carried out
“I was a Flower of the mountain yes when I put the rose in my hair like the Andalusian girls used or shall I wear a red yes and how he kissed me under the Moorish wall and I thought well as well him as another and then I asked him with my eyes to ask again yes and then he asked me would I yes to say yes my mountain flower and first I put my arms around him yes and drew him down to me so he could feel my breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes I said yes I will Yes.”
James Joyce, Ulysses.
Grammar nazis will curl up and die just seeing it on a shelf.
I have been teaching college English for twenty years. In that time I have learnt that:
The preacher is not the morals police. I am not the grammar police.
There is no correlation between good grammar and good morals. Orwell thought bad writing a sign of bad character, but he was talking about writing that obfuscates a wicked truth.
Not proofreading is in a different category: that's sloppy.
Split infinitives and sentences that end with a proposition never made a sentence unclear. Fixing them is not worth the trouble and can injure the rhythm.
Everybody wants students to have already learnt grammar. Nobody actually wants to teach grammar.
If students read a lot of well-written books, their grammar will get better. If they don't, it won't.
Despite having three degrees in English, I am not a great speller. You can count on me to misspell exhilirating every time, even though I studied Latin and should know better. There, I did it again and I wasn't even trying.
Language is robust. Most sentences can bear a heavy weight of illogic and still be understood.
It only matters as long as people feel the need to communicate with each other.
Its a big 'my truth' problem:- "hey, I can say what ever words I want to mean whatever I want and you have to know what I mean".
That's one reason why 'my truth' doesn't actually work.
I do worry that whatever I write today, will mean something else (or nothing) to readers coming along in 10 years. What if painstakingly, beautifully written books "expire" in as little as 5 years? Could communications processes accelerate to the point everyone is illiterate - because the word meant one thing on Tuesday morning and something entirely different by lunchtime?
Bad grammar is like bad geometry.
Just auto check on there phones