ITT, a Grammar Nazi on common grammar mistakes

[teh_Canape]

every time I see someone type "should/must of done" I go into full on murderous rage mode

and I'm not even native english speaker

 

[Zom-B]

re: Ninja'd.

It's the past tense of ninja when used as a verb. To ninja someone would be to perform some sort of martial arts move upon them. However, I don't think anyone would know what to make of "ninjaed" so instead it became "ninja'd".

 

[Jamboxdotcom]

-snip-

Good list. However, as to apostrophes (or inverted commas for most non-Americans), i usually list contractions first, as they are the only time one would use apostrophes without exception. Then i would list possessives, with the caveat of pronouns.
Very good, though.

Spoiler: Image relevant to this discussion.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Homophones:

"Loose" and "lose". If your losing a game, it's one "o". If your shoelace is loose, it's two. You could use a stupid "if you lose, lose an 'o'" sort of thing, but I won't do that to you here.

"Than" and "then". "Than" is comparative, "then" is not.

"Too" and "to". "Too" is a synonym for "exceedingly" and "also". "To" is a preposition, as in "I went to the store". Also, I really shouldn't have to say this, but "two" is a number.

Are those examples really homophones?

'Loose' has a harder 's' sound than 'lose', 'than' and 'then' should never sound similar in speech for obvious reasons while 'too' has a generally higher intonation than 'to'. *shrug* The others, I concede, and I'm fairly certain there are a lot of others.

Anyway, the one that needles me is the perpetual mis-spelling of 'definitely' e.g. 'definately', 'defiantely' or worst of all 'defiantly', which is a word of its own with a completely different definition and taken out of context often makes little to no sense.

 

[Phlakes]

Homophones:

"Loose" and "lose". If your losing a game, it's one "o". If your shoelace is loose, it's two. You could use a stupid "if you lose, lose an 'o'" sort of thing, but I won't do that to you here.

"Than" and "then". "Than" is comparative, "then" is not.

"Too" and "to". "Too" is a synonym for "exceedingly" and "also". "To" is a preposition, as in "I went to the store". Also, I really shouldn't have to say this, but "two" is a number.

Are those examples really homophones?

'Loose' has a harder 's' sound than 'lose', 'than' and 'then' should never sound similar in speech for obvious reasons while 'too' has a generally higher intonation than 'to'. *shrug* The others, I concede, and I'm fairly certain there are a lot of others.

Eh, they're close enough. I guess it's better to have them in a semi-related section rather than drifting off out of context.

Anyway, the one that needles me is the perpetual mis-spelling of 'definitely' e.g. 'definately', 'defiantely' or worst of all 'defiantly', which is a word of its own with a completely different definition and taken out of context often makes little to no sense.

Alright, I'm definitely [sub](c wut i did thar?)[/sub] doing a Part 2. This is the most annoying mistake I've ever seen. I mean how do you even get to "defiantly"?... That's like trying to say "potatoes" but saying "pot roast".

 

[Kieros]

Grammar is not taught as much as it should be.
Anyways, the one grammatical mistake that annoys me is the misuse of affect and effect. Affect is an Action. Effect is to Elicit, or is the End result.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Alright, I'm definitely [sub](c wut i did thar?)[/sub] doing a Part 2. This is the most annoying mistake I've ever seen. I mean how do you even get to "defiantly"?... That's like trying to say "potatoes" but saying "pot roast".

Nnnnn, I actually think it's worse than that. Potatoes and pot roast have similar connotations, while 'definitely' is an indicator of possibility/probability, while 'defiantly' is a state of belligerence. A better analogy would've been trying to type 'potatoes' but it coming out as 'potash' (a potassium containing mineral/salt deposit i.e. nothing to do with potatoes). And no disrespect to the guy (who will remain nameless, because I quite like him) but how does 'bidet' get confused with 'bigot'?!

 

[Caliostro]

The Oatmeal [http://theoatmeal.com/tag/grammar] has got you covered on all your grammar raging needs.

I'd be happy if people stopped mixing contractions and possessives... But alas...

 

[omega 616]

While I see were you are coming from, think some of these are out dated and need to be revamped.

When it comes to grammar, I suck REALLY badly. I just never got taught it, simple as, I should teach myself or go to an adult college but it's embarrassing and hard work to learn.

I think the "were"s and "there"s should be merged into just one (making an exception for "wear"). You pronounce all of them exactly the same, even when your reading to yourself. Why do we need to make a fuss about which there I use? Does it make the sentence unreadable? No, of course not, it's nothing but semantics.

There is also this wonderful vid, I have listened to it many MANY times.


Things like this make me scared to talk, it's like no matter what I say it is wrong in some way.

 

[SckizoBoy]

ROFL, you people REALLY think English is hard? Just try some... fuck, ANY other language, every single one is harder with a billion more rules.

I call BS on this.

Fluent English is one of the hardest things to learn for all speakers of alphabetised languages. German, on the other hand, is one of the easiest. A small number of pronunciation rules, a shit load of grammatical rules, the vocab and you're away.

English has the following: vocabulary rules (plus exceptions); grammatical rules (plus exceptions); pronunciation rules (plus exceptions); spelling rules (plus exceptions); contextual use of synonyms (plus exceptions) etc. English is nothing but exceptions to the rules that compose it. Combined with a vocabulary of roughly three hundred thousand words and you have a language that is ultimately one of the most difficult to master and in some ways, especially for native speakers. While I personally write and speak English passably, I am by no means capable of explaining its myriad of intricacies and foibles (of which English has far more than any other language, alphabetised or otherwise).

 

[ElNeroDiablo]

"I am Ninja of Ninja! Shurikenger!" Ninpū Sentai Hurricaneger

The word/term "Ninja'd" (as Zom-B has said before) is used where what one is about to do (example: post) has already been done by someone earlier (maybe by even a few seconds) as if the one who posted first snuck in and out like the mythological and played-up Ninja of Japan, and the one using "Ninja'd" is acknowledging that fact they have (basically) been beaten to the punch by someone else.

It can also be used in the context of games, such as where someone else comes in and kills your target before you get to it (though that use is also termed as "Kill-Steal") for example.

 

[SckizoBoy]

As soomeone who speaks both English and German, and whose native language is very similar in structure to German, I call BS, sorry.

The difference is that in German, there's a shitload of arbitrary rules that have no real impact on the meaning.

For example, to say 'Dear Sir' in German, you say 'Sehr geehrter Herr'; 'Dear Madame' is 'Sehr geehrte Frau'. Notice the difference in geehrte/geehrter - a completely arbitrary, useless rule. The difference between he/she is quite clear from using Herr/Frau, yet you STILL have to use a different stemming for 'geehrt'. German and other languages are full of such bullshitty rules that add absolutely nothing to the information, but you still have to learn them.

Yes, English has a lot of rules too, but most of them clearly add some information. Such as the difference between past simple and past perfect - this is something my language lacks and it can often create confusion. And yes, there are also exceptions to rules, but I still find them more sensible then to use different stemmings for for every little difference.

I really can't fathom how many more rules I'd have to use in the above text if I'd want to write it in German. I literally get shivers from the thought.

That's fair enough that German has extraneous rules, but my point is the prevalence in English of exceptions that have to be learnt one by one. By comparison, all the Germanic and Romance languages have few (if any) such exceptions. And with a much narrower vocabulary, makes them easier to learn. With the rules set known (granted may take a while), everything else is fairly simple. Moreover, there is lingual evolution to consider, since English is used much more than most other languages (loan words etc.), it is prone to corruption/bastardisation more easily.

But it depends on how you pick up languages. For the most part, basic language is much more easily assimilated by learning vocabulary then rules due to the generally low number of words required to carry casual conversation. Though one thing comes to mind: spoken language vs. written language. English is one of the few languages in which there is little to no difference.

I guess you're right as far as learning a foreign language's basics is concerned to a casual level, but for absolute fluency, I still believe English to be far more difficult a language to master.

PS No need to apologise, I speak bullshit as fluently as the next man... or better, in a lot of cases.

 

[Dirzzit]

I hate people misusing double negatives as in, "I didn't do nothing" when they mean "I didn't do anything".

Don't pick on those people who say it like that, they didn't do nothing to you.

 

[z121231211]

It's always weird to catch myself missing homophones.

WTF?! Why is there an omega symbol in the captcha?

 

[SckizoBoy]

Well yeah, I guess the basic difference is that English is easy at the beginning and gets more difficult later, while (for example) with German, you hit a brick wall of grammar and stemming rules pretty soon.

Still, I remember picking up English way easier as a kid just by watching cartoons including all the tenses and most exceptions way before we've had those lessons in school. No such luck with German, I had to memorize all the rules, because they didn't come as naturally.

But it's also true that I could remember a lot of German vocabulary after I haven't been using it for a very long time - forgot most of the grammar (had to re-learn it later), but vocabulary came up quite easy.

So yeah, I guess it goes both way. I still find English more logical and better suited for practical application, but I also admit it can be pretty difficult to master. I for one prefer a language where a grammar rule also makes sense from a practical standpoint (like the difference between simple and perfect tenses), but that doesn't have to be everyone's feeling.

Mmm, that 'brick wall' is quite high as well, though I was OK with it when I learnt German. I suppose it just differs from person to person, because I picked up German much more easily than French and English (hell, I needed a private English tutor to become as I am now). In my case, though, learning alphabetised languages was a bit weird, since my mother tongue is Cantonese... one of the most bizarre languages as far as written/grammar conventions is concerned. Half of what you say literally cannot be written down and 'standard Cantonese' (i.e. written) just sounds plain weird (borderline foreign) when spoken.

But that's a whole other can of worms for later.