Lose and Loose

[stevie_b]

Misuse of English and sloppy English is getting common in the media: as well as the above examples, I regularly spot grammatical errors and spelling mistakes in newspapers these days, whereas mistakes used to be rare IIRC.

 

Too many journalists' English has fallen below a minimum acceptable standard.

[Digsy]

Misuse of English and sloppy English is getting common in the media: as well as the above examples, I regularly spot grammatical errors and spelling mistakes in newspapers these days, whereas mistakes used to be rare IIRC.

 

Too many journalists' English falls below a minimum acceptable standard.

 

I guess language is evolving all the time. Shame it seems to be evolving to make people sound like chavs.

I wonder if there was this debate during the change from olde-worlde "Shakespeareian" English to how we speak now?

We even laugh at the way people spoke in the public information films circa 1940. Perhaps future generations will laugh at us the same way.

In a few centuries people will just grunt at each other and chat in real time via devices embedded in their brains. The delux versions will control our face muscles to match whatever smiley we just sent.

[TLicense]

Misuse of English and sloppy English is getting common in the media: as well as the above examples, I regularly spot grammatical errors and spelling mistakes in newspapers these days, whereas mistakes used to be rare IIRC.

 

Too many journalists' English has fallen below a minimum acceptable standard.

 

I was just contemplating whether your post should read:

 

"sloppy English is becoming common in the media"

Or maybe even

"sloppy English is getting to be common in the media"

 

or if your post is fine and I should find something better to do with my day. Can't decide.

 

My pet hate is "Me and John went dogging"

It's "John and I went dogging" for Christs' sake!

[Animal]

I was just contemplating whether your post should read:

 

"sloppy English is becoming common in the media"

Or maybe even

"sloppy English is getting to be common in the media"

 

or if your post is fine and I should find something better to do with my day. Can't decide.

 

My pet hate is "Me and John went dogging"

It's "John and I went dogging" for Christs' sake!

 

How many christs? I thought there could be only one.

[Attero]

Everyone is fail.

[TonyP]

What's this? Pendants' corner?

[Tannhauser]

I guess language is evolving all the time. Shame it seems to be evolving to make people sound like chavs.

I wonder if there was this debate during the change from olde-worlde "Shakespeareian" English to how we speak now?

We even laugh at the way people spoke in the public information films circa 1940. Perhaps future generations will laugh at us the same way.

In a few centuries people will just grunt at each other and chat in real time via devices embedded in their brains. The delux versions will control our face muscles to match whatever smiley we just sent.

 

I agree that it's inevitable that english will change over time, and that some people will become irritated by the changes. Unfortunately, in my view, most of the changes are negative. It strikes me that in the way people talk to each other and in printed material:

 

(a) use of idiom is becoming less frequent and less varied

(b) sentences are becoming shorter and simpler

© a smaller vocabulary is being used

(d) grammatical rules are misunderstood or ignored.

 

All of that stuff bothers me, because english is this incredible language, full of picturesque, quirky words and phrases; capable of breathtaking subtlety, nuance, precision and emotive power. Simplify it too much and it is robbed of those qualities. Sometimes 'less is more'; yes, but sometimes less is just less.

 

The changes were brought home to me last week. Someone gave me an extract to read about sentence construction. It was challenging: without being at all superior or patronising, there are quite a few people on here that would struggle with it. Then she told me that she had photocopied it from her textbook at school - she had had to cope with it whenshe was 14 years old. This makes me think not so much that textbook-writing has moved forwards, rather that we've gone backwards.

[TLicense]

How many christs? I thought there could be only one.

 

Ahem....

 

http://www.yourdictionary.com/esl/apostrophe-rules.html

 

Apostrophe Rules for Possessives

A lot of people get confused about when they need to use an apostrophe and when they don’t. Here are a few apostrophe rules to help you decide.

 

Use an apostrophe + S (‘s) to show that one person/thing owns or is a member of something.

• Amy’s ballet class, Lisa’s car, Robert’s car, Ross’s room, Ross’s sports teams
  

Yes, even if the name ends in “s,” it is still correct to add an “‘s” to create the possessive form. It is also acceptable to add only an apostrophe to the end of singular nouns that end in “s” to make them possessive. In this case, that means “Ross’” would have the same meaning as “Ross’s.”

 

[Animal]

 

I know that. Christ, though, ends in a 't', therefore, you writing 'Christs' sake' implies multiple Nazarenes.

 

[RedM]

I'm pretty sure I started a thread about this 'back in the day' so I'm claiming repost.

[Tannhauser]

'back in the day'

 

Arrrrghhh, it burnnnssesss usss!

[Aweegin]

I are furious!

 

 

That's not wrong..It's Norfolk talk

[jagman]

Win - Lose

fail - succeed

 

win/fail ???

[Martin J]

This makes me think not so much that textbook-writing has moved forwards, rather that we've gone backwards.

 

That, plus the barrage of Internet/text speak. Or should that be 'txtspk'.

 

Whatever... we're doomed!!

[Swampy442]

Winningest is a word? Whats next, straightaway?? Also, tire instead of tyre, and "giving it a bit of gas" instead of "accelerating" is gripping my sh*t

[Pixelfill]

I know that. Christ, though, ends in a 't', therefore, you writing 'Christs' sake' implies multiple Nazarenes.

 

 

 

Mike

[stevie_b]

I was just contemplating whether your post should read:

 

"sloppy English is becoming common in the media"

Or maybe even

"sloppy English is getting to be common in the media"

 

or if your post is fine and I should find something better to do with my day. Can't decide.

 

My pet hate is "Me and John went dogging"

It's "John and I went dogging" for Christs' sake!

 

Aargh! I've been corrected in a grammar thread, and rightly so. I shall endeavour not to commit any further faux pas in this thread. I think 20 lashes is sufficient punishment for my misdemeanours.

[Guru]

This may amuse/help you Thorin

 

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling

[Charlotte]

If I describe multiple pairs of shoes is it shoesies?

[caseys]

It's a shame we can't have a grammar plug-in implemented on the board.

 

Or perhaps we should send out copies of "Eats, Shoots & Leaves" and "Der Dativ ist dem Genitiv sein Tod" to all club members.

[stevie_b]

Another thing that annoys me is the habit of referring to someone by the first letter of their first name (or first syllable) and first syllable of their surname, e.g. K-Win for Kate Winslet. The terms "K-Fed" and "SuBo" have been used heavily by the popular press to such an extent that many people know who is being referred to, but in many cases it's not obvious.

 

Are people's lives so busy that they don't have time to type someone's name in full? I know it's done for effect, but it's incredibly annoying. IPMUBOOAIMTTVHTR. PDDI.

 

(Translation: If people make up bespoke or obscure acronyms it makes the text very hard to read. Please don't do it.)

[Konrad]

If I describe multiple pairs of shoes is it shoesies?

 

Nope, but your best shoes are shoesiest shoes.

[j_jza80]

Ginormous.

 

A combination of giant and enormous. It became so widespread that in 2007 it was officially acknowledged as a proper word.

 

How big does something have to be, to be ginormous?

 

Take it back!

[Digsy]

Another thing that annoys me is the habit of referring to someone by the first letter of their first name (or first syllable) and first syllable of their surname, e.g. K-Win for Kate Winslet. The terms "K-Fed" and "SuBo" have been used heavily by the popular press to such an extent that many people know who is being referred to, but in many cases it's not obvious.

 

Are people's lives so busy that they don't have time to type someone's name in full? I know it's done for effect, but it's incredibly annoying. IPMUBOOAIMTTVHTR. PDDI.

 

(Translation: If people make up bespoke or obscure acronyms it makes the text very hard to read. Please don't do it.)

 

At least you'll never catch Pete Docherty doing that.

[Scott]

This one seems to cover 90% of the population and annoys the crap out of me...

 

"Can I get a loan of...." = May I borrow...

"Have you got a loan of..." = Have you borrowed....

 

"Have you got a loan of 10p" is not a way of asking to borrow 10p, it is a way of asking the person if they have borrowed 10p from someone else.

 

"Can I get a loan of 10p" is the correct way of asking to borrow 10p.

 

I fail to see why so many people look at me funny when I say "No, I have my own money. Why do you ask?".

 

Very glad someone brought up "Bought" and "Brought", that really does my head in.

 

Back in the day we didn't have these sorts of problems.