I think the reason I don't get these "sound similar" mistakes is that I'm a written kind of person. Especially since English isn't my first language, so I could write and read it because I know how to pronounce the words or was able to understand someone speaking it (which I occasionally still have some trouble with).
I really "get" a lot of the other "mistakes" and don't think they matter much. These baffle me because pronunciation doesn't trump grammar for me. Especially when, due to accents, people pronounce words differently, so what stays the same is the way it's written. (Granted, sometimes several spellings are accepted).
Other mistakes that frustrate me are those that...mmh... not sure how to describe it, so I'll use an example: double negatives. When I use a double negative (therefore meaning a positive), I have to deal with the fact that half the people reading will assume I meant a single negative, and therefore will understand the sentence as meaning the opposite of what it does. Similarly, if someone uses a double negative, unless I know them I can't be sure if they meant it as a double negative or as a single negative.
In cases like that, confusion doesn't just lead to an unclear sentence, but to people accidentally hearing the opposite of what was being said.
Normally I'd follow a comment like this with a "You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means", but you've spent enough time on this thread that I can't use it.
(Unfortunately, working in a public place has put me in this habit. I ask someone how they are, and they say 'good', so instead of sounding like a jerk, I swallow my pride and also say 'good.' Now it's habit. I hate my life.)
What's wrong with "I'm good"? "Good" is an adjective which means that using it as an adverb isn't too blasphemous at all (especially since doing so is in extremely common usage).
In fact, there are a lot of adverbs that are perfectly standard now which were once just used as adjectives. Some of the more common examples are: late, low and most. Using "good" will soon be considered standard English. If not, I'll eat my hat. After shitting in it.
Your pedantry is halting the progress of the English language, you filthy grammar Nazis! *shakes fist*
EDIT: On the subject of double negatives, they're just a rhetorical device used for emphasis. The fact is, in a sentence like "I didn't do nothing", the meaning is not ambiguous because a native speaker probably wouldn't word it that way if they were implying the positive. As confusing as this may be to a non-native speaker, it's a common feature of the English language. To say that double negatives like this one are "incorrect" is to place an adherence to the rules over functionality and pragmatism. Again, I understand that this is difficult for non-native speakers, but the point of learning a language is to learn how to use it pragmatically. Double negatives, in most dialects, are a part of this.
EDIT: On the subject of double negatives, they're just a rhetorical device used for emphasis. The fact is, in a sentence like "I didn't do nothing", the meaning is not ambiguous because a native speaker probably wouldn't word it that way if they were implying the positive. As confusing as this may be to a non-native speaker, it's a common feature of the English language. To say that double negatives like this one are "incorrect" is to place an adherence to the rules over functionality and pragmatism. Again, I understand that this is difficult for non-native speakers, but the point of learning a language is to learn how to use it pragmatically. Double negatives, in most dialects, are a part of this.
The thing is, if someone asks "Did you do that?" and I say "I didn't not do it", I'm using a double negative for a specific resaon. It's a rethorical device there too, but could be misunderstood. Maybe not in this example, but if the question was "did you do something?" and I said "I didn't do nothing", my point could be completely misinterpreted.
I think it's a shame. You end up having to lose the subtlety by insisting to make sure people know you meant to say what you said. ("I didn't not do it" instead of "I didn't do nothing"). You end up having to use a sledgehammer and as a result it is, in my opinion, less funny.
Double negatives are actually extremely common in Old English text. It's not until the Great Vowel shift occured and the Norman French influences altered Old English to what we now know as Middle English does this become uncommon. It does pop up occasionally in texts though, so it still was not the grammatical no-no it is in Modern English
You are required to not split infinitives.
You say "mice" when there are several mouses.
Mmh... Can't think of any others right now.
The mice thing has to do with something called i-mutation that occurred Old English. It's more obvious on certain verb progressions like sing/sang/sung, but it happens to nouns too. Doesn't explain the whole plural moose and deer thing very well, but I think those are words that bled into the language later. The first time I've ever seen the word 'deer' in an early English text was the Middle English version of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.
If anyone's actually curious, the Old English word for deer was 'heorot' and...okay, I'll stop throwing Old English at you....
Agreed. When it's just less than a clear exaggeration, but too absurd to be literal, and it just ends up being a lie. Or were you referring to exaggeration?
Agreed. When it's just less than a clear exaggeration, but too absurd to be literal, and it just ends up being a lie. Or were you referring to exaggeration?
Commas are often used for dividing lists of words phrases and many other things as well. Speling is allso verry emporetant. Aren't comas and spelling great?
The mice thing has to do with something called i-mutation that occurred Old English.
I'd always thought the "sing/sang/sung" thing was just kept from German declinations.
And it's interesting, but I was just naming rules that break the rules in the rule itself. Because I find that kind of sentence funny.
"I have never overstated a single thing in the history of the universe" (Oscar in Corner Gas)
"All generalisations are stupid"
You know, that kind of thing. I wasn't sure you realised that (it's quite likely you did but saw an opportunity to give us a class, which is something I can relate to) and in doubt I'd rather specify.
I'd always thought the "sing/sang/sung" thing was just kept from German declinations.
It kind of is, in a fashion. Old High German, Old Low Franconian, Old Saxon and Old English are all branches of the West Germanic language, which in turn is a branch off of the Proto-Indo European language. The i-mutation is unique to that particular branch of the tree, but similar things (such as u-mutation) happen on some of the other Germanic branches.
Incidentally, this actually why if you look at any of the Old Norse (old Icelandic, Old Norwegian, Old Swedish, Old Danish) languages or Gothic, you'll see a lot of similar words to those on the West Germanic branch. They're all from the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language tree.
and I realize you were making a joke, I just...I'm a huge nerd and this is sort of my thing so I couldn't resist an excuse to get all tangental on everyone...
and I realize you were making a joke, I just...I'm a huge nerd and this is sort of my thing so I couldn't resist an excuse to get all tangential on everyone...
No, no, please do, it's very interesting. As long as you keep it short and to the point like you've been doing I don't think it will get boring or annoying.
Well, I hated the part on GameSpot when the top-right ad sometimes says "Kim Kardashian Goes Au Natural" at one point or another! I hate it when they misspell it as "au natural" when it should be "au naturel"! :mad:
Comments
But as I said before, I'm pretty sure that besides being one of the seven deadly sins, pride is fine. It's "power" that is the problem
No white power? That's racist against the whites... (Whites are racist.)
Pride can still lead to a downfall though or underestmating someone and not relising till its to late.
I'm proud to be a... African American too, then?
TomPravetz - white in color only!
Proud:
African American
Latino
Asian
Native American
Alien
Other Races
White
And AMERICAN!
(Order not important)
I'm also Jewish, German, Scottish, French, Welsh, English, and Romanian.
This made my day.
Your welcome.
(TomPravetz - Hallowe'en upstager)
Tell me this was intentional...
If not, what about his welcome?
I really "get" a lot of the other "mistakes" and don't think they matter much. These baffle me because pronunciation doesn't trump grammar for me. Especially when, due to accents, people pronounce words differently, so what stays the same is the way it's written. (Granted, sometimes several spellings are accepted).
Other mistakes that frustrate me are those that...mmh... not sure how to describe it, so I'll use an example: double negatives. When I use a double negative (therefore meaning a positive), I have to deal with the fact that half the people reading will assume I meant a single negative, and therefore will understand the sentence as meaning the opposite of what it does. Similarly, if someone uses a double negative, unless I know them I can't be sure if they meant it as a double negative or as a single negative.
In cases like that, confusion doesn't just lead to an unclear sentence, but to people accidentally hearing the opposite of what was being said.
Don't question my irony. I LOVE IRONY!
And I'm not going to not hit you.
A lot of times I've found that the people who say that did something wrong, so I can't really complain about that one.
What's wrong with "I'm good"? "Good" is an adjective which means that using it as an adverb isn't too blasphemous at all (especially since doing so is in extremely common usage).
In fact, there are a lot of adverbs that are perfectly standard now which were once just used as adjectives. Some of the more common examples are: late, low and most. Using "good" will soon be considered standard English. If not, I'll eat my hat. After shitting in it.
Your pedantry is halting the progress of the English language, you filthy grammar Nazis! *shakes fist*
EDIT: On the subject of double negatives, they're just a rhetorical device used for emphasis. The fact is, in a sentence like "I didn't do nothing", the meaning is not ambiguous because a native speaker probably wouldn't word it that way if they were implying the positive. As confusing as this may be to a non-native speaker, it's a common feature of the English language. To say that double negatives like this one are "incorrect" is to place an adherence to the rules over functionality and pragmatism. Again, I understand that this is difficult for non-native speakers, but the point of learning a language is to learn how to use it pragmatically. Double negatives, in most dialects, are a part of this.
Superman does good. You do well.
Killing a puppy is all well and good, but Superman is pure evil.
Switch puppy to cat and I won't punch you.
The thing is, if someone asks "Did you do that?" and I say "I didn't not do it", I'm using a double negative for a specific resaon. It's a rethorical device there too, but could be misunderstood. Maybe not in this example, but if the question was "did you do something?" and I said "I didn't do nothing", my point could be completely misinterpreted.
I think it's a shame. You end up having to lose the subtlety by insisting to make sure people know you meant to say what you said. ("I didn't not do it" instead of "I didn't do nothing"). You end up having to use a sledgehammer and as a result it is, in my opinion, less funny.
Switch puppy to cat and I will maim you, swith puppy to... Dammit, I condone no killing of living things.
I still eat meat despite my hate of the fact we kill those animals.
He could switch puppy to Neelo...?
And I sure don't misunderstand no double negatives!
Double negatives are actually extremely common in Old English text. It's not until the Great Vowel shift occured and the Norman French influences altered Old English to what we now know as Middle English does this become uncommon. It does pop up occasionally in texts though, so it still was not the grammatical no-no it is in Modern English
Found another one. Can you see it too?
Aye, I see it - ending a sentence with a preposition.
Why would you ever need to use a rhetorical question?
You are required to not split infinitives.
You say "mice" when there are several mouses.
Mmh... Can't think of any others right now.
The mice thing has to do with something called i-mutation that occurred Old English. It's more obvious on certain verb progressions like sing/sang/sung, but it happens to nouns too. Doesn't explain the whole plural moose and deer thing very well, but I think those are words that bled into the language later. The first time I've ever seen the word 'deer' in an early English text was the Middle English version of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.
If anyone's actually curious, the Old English word for deer was 'heorot' and...okay, I'll stop throwing Old English at you....
Agreed. When it's just less than a clear exaggeration, but too absurd to be literal, and it just ends up being a lie. Or were you referring to exaggeration?
Commas are often used for dividing lists of words phrases and many other things as well. Speling is allso verry emporetant. Aren't comas and spelling great?
I'd always thought the "sing/sang/sung" thing was just kept from German declinations.
And it's interesting, but I was just naming rules that break the rules in the rule itself. Because I find that kind of sentence funny.
"I have never overstated a single thing in the history of the universe" (Oscar in Corner Gas)
"All generalisations are stupid"
You know, that kind of thing. I wasn't sure you realised that (it's quite likely you did but saw an opportunity to give us a class, which is something I can relate to) and in doubt I'd rather specify.
It kind of is, in a fashion. Old High German, Old Low Franconian, Old Saxon and Old English are all branches of the West Germanic language, which in turn is a branch off of the Proto-Indo European language. The i-mutation is unique to that particular branch of the tree, but similar things (such as u-mutation) happen on some of the other Germanic branches.
Incidentally, this actually why if you look at any of the Old Norse (old Icelandic, Old Norwegian, Old Swedish, Old Danish) languages or Gothic, you'll see a lot of similar words to those on the West Germanic branch. They're all from the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language tree.
and I realize you were making a joke, I just...I'm a huge nerd and this is sort of my thing so I couldn't resist an excuse to get all tangental on everyone...
No, no, please do, it's very interesting. As long as you keep it short and to the point like you've been doing I don't think it will get boring or annoying.
"im qoin 2 teh park w/ qabe!!! kises
I swear to God and I don't even believe in God, if I see that again, not as a joke mind you, that I will personally hunt them down and kill them.