Forum Moderators: phranque
ALLOWED
ALOUD
I'm running into this one all the time lately.
Is that really a rule?
What I learned in school was that the apostrophe is always a replacement for characters that have been dropped, usually when concatenating two words. In contrast to that, the possessive "s" is simply the genitive form of the pronoun/noun/name.
Two concatenated words:
Not with an "s", but the same principle:
One individual word:
For names that already end with an "s", adding another one in their genitive form would be awkward, so it gets replaced by an apostrophe instead (no concatenation in this case):
Once you have seen those mechanics at work, you don't need any other rules of thumb (unless I have missed some exceptions, of course ;)).
preventative instead of preventive
irregardless instead of regardless
There is no such word as "alright"
Shows up in my dictionary. So does irregardless :)
lawman
orientated instead of oriented.
Joes Bar
If the name of the bar is "Joes Bar," yes. It's Joe's bar, he can give it any name he likes. It is his decision; I won't argue.
<slap forehead>Which have both been mentioned previously in this thread...</slap forehead>
(hehe... this post may be deleted at the moderator's leisure)
[edited by: mivox at 12:00 am (utc) on June 14, 2002]
Oh, my yes. That one makes me cringe.
Another strange new word that drives me crazy, (but it's become so common in recent decades that we're stuck with it) is "servicing your customer". Really.
To "serve your customer" is a delightful, giving, and even selfless gesture. "Servicing your customer" sounds vaguely like some cheap act done in a back alley.
I guess we don't want to be "servants", we'd rather be "servicers".
Q: Why was your car uninsured?
A: My insurance collapsed.
Q: Have you had a previous hearing for a probation (or parole) violation?
A: Yes.
Q: What happened at the hearing?
A: The judge violated me.
FYI, insurance 'lapses' and probation is 'revoked'.
lawman
I'm dismayed by the general disintegration of our language, and the fact that so many seemingly intelligent people accept it so blithely.
I worked for a network systems consulting company for a few years. At one point the company created a new level above "Senior Consultant" to allow them to charge higher rates for people with a lot of experience. They proudly promoted several deserving people, and printed up new business cards identifying each of them as a "Principle Consultant".
Of course they meant "Principal Consultant." But after the founders pulled an Enron and left the company, leaving many of the long-time employees without retirement savings, I realized that they really did need Principle consultants.
- Allen
It's a slim volume, but chock full of great advice on how to write clearly. I'm sure there is no book anywhere, of any length, containing so much wisdom for writers.
I just wanted to point out that the second edition of The Elements of Syle was revised by E.B. White, who also contributed a final chapter on style. White also prepared the third edition, adding more useful rules.
For a great example of breathtaking prose that is also entertaining and funny, try White's short story "Dusk in Fierce Pajamas."
- Allen
[edited by: yaminom at 11:40 pm (utc) on June 14, 2002]
"Servicing your customer" sounds vaguely like some cheap act done in a back alley.
If you need the customers enough, this is a valid option:)
Yes, but if you do it cheaply, they will never respect you.
- Allen
From a rest stop sign on the Maryland turnpike: "Buses Welcomed". But no greeting party is sent out to meet them.
... "experience", "seamless", "intuitive", "cool" ...
I'm in a daze on most days....
What do I have to raze to get a raise?
There! I'd finally seen the scene of the fishers with their seine.
Leaning over the craps table, retrieving the last die, Bob commented to Bill regarding a mutual acquaintance's passing, "I didn't know you could die from dye. No one ever told me."
In negotiating the contract, the principals failed to agree on principles.
Bob stepped up to the lone teller and asked for a loan
Kneed in the groin, the lazy apprentice baker, was reminded of the need to knead.
The tightrope-walker performed and amazing feat with his feet; afterwards he was honored with an elaborate fete.
The crowd erupted with a peal of laughter when the clown slipped on the banana peel.
The tour boat sightseers heard wails of whales off the coast of Wales.
The budding Buddhist monk sat before a plain orange construction cone, high on the forbidden plain and began pondering his koan as his mind and spirit settled on an even plane.
The ale in the pail was very pale, drinking too fast I began to ail. Holding fast to my word, that drink was my last, tomorrow for certain I'd begin my new fast.
Original works of not much... ;)
- Papabaer
[edited by: papabaer at 7:39 am (utc) on June 15, 2002]
Some of his complaints:
1. "different than" - it should be "different from" in the US or "different to" in the UK
2. Writing "anyway" when you mean "any way". Or EVER writing "anyways".
3. "In regards to" should be "in regard to" or "regarding". If you use this one correctly, he sends you his regards.
I keep editing my book... I would take it to have it professionally edited, but with my luck, by the time it was correct, I would have to rewrite the darn thing for the new edition (addition?)! ...hold on a second, that reminds me... I need to go edit my life!
My head hurts reading this thread, somebody owes me an aspirin! Who do I talk to, who do I see about this?!!
The internet will be the downfall of the English language, you wait and see (just look what it's done to me!). Case in point: I believe the exclamation point has already been officially replaced by the happy face!
One thing is for sure. Not to gloat, but I aint bad at spelling, and I feel the more time I have spent online, the worse my spelling has become! :)
Not to mention when to use 'who' and 'whom'. :)
lawman
That reminds me of another good point, we don't normally write like we talk. This is also dependent on audience. Using the word "who" in place of "whom" when talking to the general public may be socially acceptable even when it is grammatically incorrect... it may simply sound more natural, as might be the case when talking to a group of blue-collar subordinates. However, in Lawman's "case", proper usage would be much more important, especially when utilized in a legal document where there is no room for ambiguity.
...and "whom" in a joke just sounds a little too stuffy... I mean, would Rodney Dangerfield use the word "whom"?!! On the other hand, I've been told I should keep my day job! Oh, I just remembered, he doesn't get any respect... maybe that is why.
...by the way, love the happy face! (I'm just kidding!)
Hello,
I was on your site recently and I noticed that you have many grammar errors, we thought the link below would be of benefit to you.
[papyr.com...]
Thank you for helping us fight online illiteracy.
Best regards,
Some buddy
I never could quite figure out if I should lay down or if I should lie down.
Actually, I know the difference: I lied!
But then, I never did lay claim to a perfect understanding of grammar... I am improving though, I'll lay odds that by next summer I'll fully comprehend the grammatical lay of the land!
"snuck" -- no, the past participle is "sneaked"
"If I would have known ..." -- no, "If I had known ..."
"If you should need help ..." -- no, "If you need help ..." or "Should you need help ..."
"Beatles" and "beetles"
Age test: What does "VC" call to mind: (1) venture capitalist, (2) Viet Cong, (3) Victoria Cross ?
Will this thread stretch out until the crack of doom?
"If I would have known ..." -- no, "If I had known ..."
Or, more in keeping with the original thread topic of homonyms: "If I would of known..." always irritates me.
On a related note, listening to TV newscasts leads me to believe that they may be worse than website copy writers, both in poor grammar and in sloppy usage. I just heard this one: "the man was said to resemble a photograph of Edmunds..."
Apparently the guy was really flat.
"Orientated" brings to mind some similar barbarisms:
courageousness (for courage)
tenaciousness (for tenacity)
humbleness (for humility)
And, my greatest pet peeve: "Utilize" is VERY overused. (No, it is not "overutilized")
For names that already end with an "s", adding another one in their genitive form would be awkward, so it gets replaced by an apostrophe instead (no concatenation in this case):
I've always followed the first rule in Strunk's Elements of Style:
Form the possessive singular of nouns with 's.
Follow this rule whatever the final consonant.
Thus write, "Charles's friend"
(Exceptions? Words that already have a two s's together, before you make possessives of them: Moses', Jesus',Isis', righteousness'[sake]... These do become awkward.)
Following this rule can also help people avoid some other mistakes. If you think you are supposed to drop "extra" s's, it's easy to mess up plural possessives of words that already end with "s". This is especially common in church bulletins, which are prone to inform people that "Bible study will meet at the Williams' house this week". (No, they are the "Williamses" and it is "the Williamses' house".)
You are correct. I worked at a tv station for a short while, and editing their news scripts for posting on their website was my most entertaining task of the day. Picture long spaces left to indicate a pause (instead of a period), lots of sentence fragments standing alone as paragraphs, and who cares about spelling anyhow, as long as it "reads" OK? "Difficult" words would always be spelled phoenetically, and so on and so forth. It was painful, in a way.
The whole thing was written for the teleprompter and the teleprompter alone, and probably would have given most English teachers an aneurism.
lawman
