For the record, "color," "honor," and "humor" are all Latin words, and the Romans spelled them without the u.
Yes, but the French spelled them with a 'u' and thus, when the words were introduced into English by the Norman invaders, we kept the 'u.' We kept the 'u' up into Modern English in Britain, which I dare say might know more about the language considering that's where it was invented (mostly.) This argument happens daily elsewhere, though, so I shall cease my rant here.
I think it's funny when people think "ludicrous" is spelled like the name of the rapper (Ludacris), especially when they're trying to sound intelligent in the middle of a message board argument.
Edit: On the subject of grammar, should the "What's up, [username]!" thing at the top of the page have a question mark on it? I can't decide.
I have noticed that in graphic novels I really don't mind if the punctuation goes "against grammar", because I see it more as a representation of the sounds. So "What." instead of "What?" for instance gets me to know what tone was used (which can't be expressed by narration in a graphic novel).
Similarly, misspellings due, for instance, to the fact the person is talking while eating are fine by me.
What I hate is when people try to write accents. It assumes too much of the reader's accent is the problem. If you have a British character and you try to write their accent, how is that going to work with British readers? From their point of view, it's the non-British that should have written accents (ignoring for a sec that there are as many British accents as British people).
I think it's much better when you use words and sentence structures differently and leave the spelling alone, especially for non-native speakers. Plus, as a foreign reader, I have a super hard time making sense out of "accented" speech.
Oh, and I think it's stupid when non native speakers can speak perfectly but keep forgetting how to say "yes" and "no". Sounds more like an English person trying to speak the foreign language than the other way around.
Speaking of dialogue, I actually don't really care about bad grammar in a dialogue, as long as it's supposed to be part of the way the character speaks. That is, if I can believe it's the character who made the mistake, not the author.
I don't mind that. It's just an abbreviation of the word, like mr instead of mister and so on.
I was very guilty of this until Avistew pointed it out to me. So I stopped. Thanks again Avi!
If you replace Avistew with "MS word", i'm exacltly the same! For me, condensing the word makes more sense, as an actual lot is a piece of land. And if you are using it to describe an amount, you can't have any more or less lot than a lot.
For me, condensing the word makes more sense, as an actual lot is a piece of land. And if you are using it to describe an amount, you can't have any more or less lot than a lot.
Well, a bunch or a load are the same though, aren't they? A lot isn't specific to land, either, there are lots in auction sales, too. Really, it's just a word that can be used for a group of things (a lot in an auction sale or as a prize in a lottery can be several items grouped together).
So just like a bunch is several flowers grouped together, and a load is several pieces of cargo grouped together, I see a lot as several items that are sold or given as a group.
Talking of lots and bunches, I found it really surprising to find out about a year or two ago that my local area is the only place that uses the word "batch" to mean a bread roll/cob/bun. If you talk about a "ham batch" here, you're talking about a bread roll with ham in it. As far as I know, Coventry and the surrounding areas are the only places in the world that use the word "batch" like that.
And if you are using it to describe an amount, you can't have any more or less lot than a lot.
Maybe if one wanted to be literal and nitpicky about it. However, it's been my experience that "a lot" is quite a bit less than "a whole lot," especially when one puts particular emphasis on the word "whole." eg. "There wasn't just a lot of it, there was a WHOLE lot."
edit: come to think of it, there can be various comparable amounts of "a lot," some more or less than others; such as "quite a lot," rather a lot," "a decent lot," "a fair lot"... [/edit]
Also, I chalk the word "alot" up to the fluid nature of language. If enough people consider it to be a proper word, at some point it will become one.
more edit: one thing that rubs me wrong is the term "Ebonics." Just because people don't speak proper English, whether intentionally or by mere ignorance, that doesn't mean their dialect should be officially recognized as a language in and of itself.
I don't actually think that the word "lot" is analogous to a plot of land or a set of goods, I think it's a word in its own right. It just means "a large number". And in England, I don't think we use all of the variations you pointed out, Chyron, apart from "quite a lot" and sometimes "rather a lot" (the latter is more posh and less common, though).
He can't expect to get himself represented by any respectable medical institution if he won't even disclose his surname. Even if he does get a job as a GP or something, nobody would ever be able to see him. It'd just be like
'Hey, I've got an appointment with the doctor'
'Which doctor?'
'"Witch doctor?"'
'No, which doctor?'
'Oh. The doctor.'
'Which one?'
':('
There is a special circle of Hell just for people who use words such as u, r, and 4. If you can't be bothered to spell a word in a text, refrain from using your phone to send them.
There is a special circle of Hell just for people who use words such as u, r, and 4. If you can't be bothered to spell a word in a text, refrain from using your phone to send them.
Reading that made a fine film of ooze leak from my ears. Only when I got it back from the doctor's office did I realise it was grey-matter. Your grammatical abortion gave me brain damage. Thanks, Fealiks. Thanks a lot.
Two Ys you are, two Ys you be, I see you're two Ys for me.
I was trying to think for a while what the Ys could mean. I thought they might have something to do with wine glasses for a second... grasping at straws
Edit: By the way, "Ys" means "wise". Also, I just realised it should be "you are" and not "you're" because it's in iambic pentameter
I'll agree with text speak being annoying on forums etc. I mean I can understand it on actual texts on a phone due to keypad limitations, however, there's no excuse when you have a full keyboard at your disposal.
There is a girl on another forum who keeps saying things like "her and I's relationship". "I's". It drives me crazy, I keep wanting to correct her.
Seriously, how do you end up with "I's"? What's wrong with "my"? It's not like she doesn't know the word, either, she uses it in other places.
Edit: I just remembered a great one. "Their are three things wrong with this sentance." Find the three things that are wrong.
Since I know the other two, I'll try this one:
First thing: it's "there", not "their".
Second thing: it's "sentence", not "sentance"
Third thing: the sentence says there are 3 wrong thing when there are only two
Although I would have said "four" to avoid a paradox, because now there are indeed three wrong things. Unless I actually missed one.
First thing: it's "there", not "their".
Second thing: it's "sentence", not "sentance"
Third thing: the sentence says there are 3 wrong thing when there are only two
Although I would have said "four" to avoid a paradox, because now there are indeed three wrong things. Unless I actually missed one.
No, that's it. The solution is that there are actually only two things wrong which, as you said, creates a paradox (meaning we're all going to die).
And while we're at it, try to figure out what "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo" means. Hint:
There are three different meanings of the word "buffalo" in there
. Hint 2 :
The meanings are: Buffalo, the city in New York; buffalo, the animal and buffalo as a verb, meaning "to bully".
I'll try this instead.
A Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo means two buffalo's from Buffalo are bullying a buffalo not from buffalo and a buffalo that is from Buffalo.
My head's beginning to hurt, and I've written 'buffalo' so many times now, it no longer looks like a proper word.
A Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo means two buffalo's from Buffalo are bullying a buffalo not from buffalo and a buffalo that is from Buffalo.
My head's beginning to hurt, and I've written 'buffalo' so many times now, it no longer looks like a proper word.
Comments
Yes, but the French spelled them with a 'u' and thus, when the words were introduced into English by the Norman invaders, we kept the 'u.' We kept the 'u' up into Modern English in Britain, which I dare say might know more about the language considering that's where it was invented (mostly.) This argument happens daily elsewhere, though, so I shall cease my rant here.
That was funny.
I have noticed that in graphic novels I really don't mind if the punctuation goes "against grammar", because I see it more as a representation of the sounds. So "What." instead of "What?" for instance gets me to know what tone was used (which can't be expressed by narration in a graphic novel).
Similarly, misspellings due, for instance, to the fact the person is talking while eating are fine by me.
What I hate is when people try to write accents. It assumes too much of the reader's accent is the problem. If you have a British character and you try to write their accent, how is that going to work with British readers? From their point of view, it's the non-British that should have written accents (ignoring for a sec that there are as many British accents as British people).
I think it's much better when you use words and sentence structures differently and leave the spelling alone, especially for non-native speakers. Plus, as a foreign reader, I have a super hard time making sense out of "accented" speech.
Oh, and I think it's stupid when non native speakers can speak perfectly but keep forgetting how to say "yes" and "no". Sounds more like an English person trying to speak the foreign language than the other way around.
Speaking of dialogue, I actually don't really care about bad grammar in a dialogue, as long as it's supposed to be part of the way the character speaks. That is, if I can believe it's the character who made the mistake, not the author.
I don't mind that. It's just an abbreviation of the word, like mr instead of mister and so on.
I was very guilty of this until Avistew pointed it out to me. So I stopped. Thanks again Avi!
If you replace Avistew with "MS word", i'm exacltly the same! For me, condensing the word makes more sense, as an actual lot is a piece of land. And if you are using it to describe an amount, you can't have any more or less lot than a lot.
This isn't a grammar thing, but whenever someone calls the character "Doctor Who" I feel compelled to correct them. He's THE Doctor!
You're very welcome!
Hey, I'm not that easy to replace!
Well, a bunch or a load are the same though, aren't they? A lot isn't specific to land, either, there are lots in auction sales, too. Really, it's just a word that can be used for a group of things (a lot in an auction sale or as a prize in a lottery can be several items grouped together).
So just like a bunch is several flowers grouped together, and a load is several pieces of cargo grouped together, I see a lot as several items that are sold or given as a group.
Maybe if one wanted to be literal and nitpicky about it. However, it's been my experience that "a lot" is quite a bit less than "a whole lot," especially when one puts particular emphasis on the word "whole." eg. "There wasn't just a lot of it, there was a WHOLE lot."
edit: come to think of it, there can be various comparable amounts of "a lot," some more or less than others; such as "quite a lot," rather a lot," "a decent lot," "a fair lot"... [/edit]
Also, I chalk the word "alot" up to the fluid nature of language. If enough people consider it to be a proper word, at some point it will become one.
more edit: one thing that rubs me wrong is the term "Ebonics." Just because people don't speak proper English, whether intentionally or by mere ignorance, that doesn't mean their dialect should be officially recognized as a language in and of itself.
My dad always does calls the Doctor "Doctor Who" and it drives me nuts!
'Hey, I've got an appointment with the doctor'
'Which doctor?'
'"Witch doctor?"'
'No, which doctor?'
'Oh. The doctor.'
'Which one?'
':('
ur a bit hrsh m8
Reading that made a fine film of ooze leak from my ears. Only when I got it back from the doctor's office did I realise it was grey-matter. Your grammatical abortion gave me brain damage. Thanks, Fealiks. Thanks a lot.
I understood this one.
This one not so much. Could someone give a translation. It looks like 'Nope man nothing for you', but that makes no sense.
I just got it.
"No problem, man. Anything for you!"
(np = No Problem; nething = N E Thing = anything)
It's like a rebus. Try this one:
YYUR
YYUB
ICUR
YY4ME
I don't think I'd have got that. Nor will I get the new ones. It looks like acronyms. I'll guess.
YYUR: Yes you understand rugby
YYUB: Yes you understand baseball
ICUR: Inside closet umbrella rests
YY4ME: You yell for me everyday
I tried to think of more common phrases, but didn't get very far.
Two Ys you are, two Ys you be, I see you're two Ys for me.
I was trying to think for a while what the Ys could mean. I thought they might have something to do with wine glasses for a second... grasping at straws
Edit: By the way, "Ys" means "wise". Also, I just realised it should be "you are" and not "you're" because it's in iambic pentameter
YYUB: yank your ugly booger
ICUR: igloos see under rashes
YY4ME: yo-yo for Mister Ed
Seriously, how do you end up with "I's"? What's wrong with "my"? It's not like she doesn't know the word, either, she uses it in other places.
Fealiks got it:
Too wise you are,
Too wise you be.
I see you are
Too wise for me.
But I like the creativity in the other answers!
Then, there's the classic punctuation puzzle:
Punctuate the following:
that that is is that that is not is not is that it it is
I'll have a go:
That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is.
Is that it?
It is.
If you succeed, you are a liar and a cheat.
And while we're at it, try to figure out what "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo" means. Hint:
Edit: I just remembered a great one. "Their are three things wrong with this sentance." Find the three things that are wrong.
Since I know the other two, I'll try this one:
First thing: it's "there", not "their".
Second thing: it's "sentence", not "sentance"
Third thing: the sentence says there are 3 wrong thing when there are only two
Although I would have said "four" to avoid a paradox, because now there are indeed three wrong things. Unless I actually missed one.
All I can say now is... Diffindo!
No, that's it. The solution is that there are actually only two things wrong which, as you said, creates a paradox (meaning we're all going to die).
Er.. Is this a trick question or something? How are we meant to punctuate this?!
I'll try this instead.
A Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo means two buffalo's from Buffalo are bullying a buffalo not from buffalo and a buffalo that is from Buffalo.
My head's beginning to hurt, and I've written 'buffalo' so many times now, it no longer looks like a proper word.
Nope, sorry
James: While John had, had, had, had, had, had, had, had, had, had, had, a better effect on the teacher.
As you can see, the character known as 'James', has a stutter.