Personally, I'm not much of a fan of standardized language, be it written or verbal. As I'm sure you've all niticed, my own posts here often contain improper English, which is in an attempt to emulate in text the manner in which I would verbally express the ideas I have. That says nothing of punctuation, which I often use in a similar manner, or not at all, depending on how long the post is and if I deem taking the time to mark up my writing reasonable. Then, of course, there are typos. I don't suppose they count as improper English, but let's be honest, they have the same effect.
There are, however, instances in which it makes life a lot easier for people to have a formalized method of communication. Message boards are one case, and I'm actually glad to see an attempt on the behalf of legible English here as, no offence, but some peoples' posts are nearly impossible to decipher (at least, without taking a disproportionate amount of time with relation to the surrounding properly formatted posts).
Recently, I've noticed a second instance in which properly constructed language makes life easier, which is in natural language parsing. I'm sure that all but the most nerdy of the patrons of the MSPB do not know what I mean, but suffice it to say that it makes my life as a programmer a little less difficult when people use proper verb tenses, pronouns, and punctuation.
DarkAries AM: I will bring Big Bird and all he represents down for the glory of all that is Aries!
Cygnus: Take your feminism to Africa, honey- it's actually needed there.
Ellis: Remember, if it has tentacles, it has to be good!
I motion for abuse of mod powers. This is precisley why I decided to stop posting here. You've all become nazi's. At least at AX, people are willing to welcome you into their circle of friends. Here, if you mistype a few words, someone is on your ass like Richard Simmons and Ai.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.- Ben Franklin
I really don't care about grammar if we can at least understand you.
I have no problem with Sean or Vipey's typing. I only have problems with Sab. She can type something meaning one thing, and everyone takes it the completely opposite way. It is frustrating.
Post by Infested Manae on Feb 5, 2005 17:35:33 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't care about a few errors in a post, since I make some myself. I've known for a long time my spelling sucks. There're things called dictionaries for that... more than once I've opened Word to paste in a sentence or whole post if I use words I'm unsure of. Mainly kills, that. This thread doesn't need to be nazi-grammar-doom, and shouldn't be taken as it. By quoting a post and fixing errors in here, we can help the poster realize a mistake by explaining it (hopefully). If they care to learn, the thread is worth their time. Otherwise, they can ignore it, and stay as they are. Just be sure to get help writing a cover letter or whatnot when the time comes for such.
I'll get to that adverb and adjective stuff soon, Cyg. The spice of a sentence, those.
Post by Cygnus X-1 on Feb 12, 2005 14:44:22 GMT -5
I motion for abuse of mod powers.
...
Your grasp of the English language is weaker than I thought it was. Look, when you motion for something, it means you're proposing that we go through with it. I.e., Motion to move into voting procedure. Motion to adjourn.
I suppose we should all abuse our mod powers, then. Motion to ban Viper.
And today's grammar note:
I see often, that when people use "person" in a sentence, they often follow with third person plural pronouns. "Person" is third person singular. In example:
"In old India, when a person was born into a certain caste, they could not change their social status."
They and their are incorrect, even though the gender is not specified. In such instances, one should use the masculine third person singular as a default. It should be:
"In old India, when a person was born into a certain caste, he could not change his social status."
Which brings me to "ith" my self-employed personal gendar-neutral third-person singular pronoun. (I mean, you don't always mean to refer to someone, or a group of someones as masculine, and I'm all for a more efficient, understandable English.) Needless to say, that one never caught on.
DarkAries AM: I will bring Big Bird and all he represents down for the glory of all that is Aries!
Cygnus: Take your feminism to Africa, honey- it's actually needed there.
Ellis: Remember, if it has tentacles, it has to be good!
Post by Infested Manae on Feb 13, 2005 23:22:51 GMT -5
Cygnus said:
And today's grammar note:
I see often, that when people use "person" in a sentence, they often follow with third person plural pronouns. "Person" is third person singular. In example:
"In old India, when a person was born into a certain caste, they could not change their social status."
They and their are incorrect, even though the gender is not specified. In such instances, one should use the masculine third person singular as a default. It should be:
"In old India, when a person was born into a certain caste, he could not change his social status."
Bonks Cyg.
I already mentioned this either in this thread or another one. I'm pretty sure it was this one. All the same, in you're case, you should use 'she' and 'her,' respectively. With no specified sex, males should use masculin, and females should use feminine.
Last Edit: Feb 13, 2005 23:23:13 GMT -5 by Infested Manae