51–60 of 215 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are equating that after years of education, with the subject of English (albeit American English) being a core class for EVERY YEAR of attendance, and with spell checkers on most forum communities, that if someone still goes out of their way to transpose "lose" with "loose", then, yes, they are probably an idiot.
*then
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's really about being smart. Having a basic grasp of language so you can adequately articulate yourself in a conversation is critical to discussion. If you can't, then you probably shouldn't be taking part in the discussion anyway. Too many people will spill there emotions into a discussion with sub standard spelling and grammar which makes it very difficult for others to understand them, which leads…
The grammar issues presented on this page are picayune distinctions with very little potential for major misunderstandings. Getting them correct is more of a social signal than anything else, like eating salad with the correct fork in some places and not eating food with your left hand in others. I have real trouble imagining that a good point made with substitution erros is somehow less critical to the discussion th…
More importantly, I think it's fair to ask that people learn basic grammar, and if we don't take it upon ourselves to insist on seeing correct grammar, then that will never happen. That's why I think being a so-called grammar nazi is important. Now, being a dick about it is a different matter, but somehow people think you're a dick regardless if you try to correct their spelling/grammar, so there's only so much that can be done there.
That said, there are definitely some levels of pedantry that can be varied. For example, I tend not to be too put off by it's/its. There/their/they're, however, is annoying for me, because the words themselves have such monumentally different meanings. Same deal with fair/fare. Then/than is annoying to me because I actually pronounce them (subtly) differently, so as I'm internally reading the words, it throws me even more.
Overall, I'm really agreeing with you -- I don't think there is serious potential for misunderstandings. And indeed, a good point made with grammatical mistakes is more important than a correctly-made bad one. But a good point made in `proper' English is, I think, better than a good point made in `bad' English.
Am I to understand from the title that we are equating “poor spelling/grammar in English” with “idiot”? Or is there some more subtle mechanism at work, such as equating “can’t be bothered to stare at hard-to-read-text just to post lulz, wat?” with “idiot”?
I hate to do this, but it's "grammar". Not that I'm calling you an idiot, you have a very fair point.
He's missing this one Fill in the gap: a) it's b) its "The hacker got access to the server and killed ... processes" lolz
^You make nouns possessive by adding a saxon genitive to signify the distinct possessive-izing "s" sound. The word "it" is also made possessive with this same sound when spoken, but for the sake of a contraction (read: abomination ;)), we have decided to arbitrarily remove the saxon genitive and replace it with a simple "s". The excuse for this inconsistency is "well it is a pronoun, not a noun, so this is not an inconsistency" does not take into account that English is a language primarily spoken. Written English, where reasonably possible, should approximate the spoken constructs.
Demonstration:
He stepped on the cat*'*s tail.
He stepped on its tail.
At the very least, people who use saxon genitives with the word "it" do not deserve the ridicule people like to heap on them. "it's"/"its" is not a "there"/"their"/"they're" scenario.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are equating that after years of education, with the subject of English (albeit American English) being a core class for EVERY YEAR of attendance, and with spell checkers on most forum communities, that if someone still goes out of their way to transpose "lose" with "loose", then, yes, they are probably an idiot.
> they are probably an idiot. Did you mean "He is probably an idiot." or "They are probably idiots."?
Here’s my test for whether you’re qualified to post to Hacker News. Pair the following five comments with their corresponding definitions: 1. “Raganwald is a blowhard whose pathetic attempts to score karma reveal him as an insecure dweeb who can’t get over being kicked around in grammar school. He and his mumblings should be should be flushed down the toilet bowl like the turds that they are.” 2. “What, raganwald is…
this would also seem to discriminate against people who aren't native english speakers (or w/e other language).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
*then
I know this is not appropriate, but it made me laugh so hard. I'm trying to write as correct as I can, but the GP just proved that these mistakes happen to everyone, even the people that think that it might make sense. What about non-native speakers? Their point might be valuable, the participation in a discussion really help- and meaningful, but still - these now/know, there/their, you're/your mistakes are common. A…
Here’s my test for whether you’re qualified to post to Hacker News. Pair the following five comments with their corresponding definitions: 1. “Raganwald is a blowhard whose pathetic attempts to score karma reveal him as an insecure dweeb who can’t get over being kicked around in grammar school. He and his mumblings should be should be flushed down the toilet bowl like the turds that they are.” 2. “What, raganwald is…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque