Poor english

[lurker]

DaveGW - you have nicked my best joke!

I used to live in the far north of Scotland and bloody Charlie came up every August. We were in the main street one Saturday morning (blocked off by the A$re lick police) when he visited the town hall. A local on the other side of the road yelled " bugger off home you english tw*T" and I shouted back to the local "you mean bugger off home you German Tw*t!" Even the coppers were laughing!! I never bought a drink in the boozer for a month afterwards.

I read a description in the paper yesterday ( Jezza Clarkson), that said that when she came to the throne HMQ sounded as though she was trying to hold a peeled grape between her buttocks but now just sounds like an old headmistress. :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Stylistic choice. Honest. I'd put a red ring round it, but expect an argument!

Just checked Smudger, apparently it is 'The Oxford comma' :? and some say it is OK, some say not? Still :?

Sadly, it is true that some use it and some don't. My preference has always been to use it as when one speaks the sentence out loud, there is a short pause before the "and".

 

[Anonymous]

If you want to know about punctuation, it's really worth reading "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" by Lynne Truss - excellent and humorous.

Cheers :wink:

Paul

One of my favourite books :lol: :lol: Such a funny read.

 

[Digit]

The village of Eglwysbach (little church) is near Conwy, definitely in North Wales!

Definitely refugees from down south Dan. :lol:

A practice I was given years ago was to punctuate this,

i said and not but

Roy.

 

[RogerS]

.......
Also as I have said before this is a WOODWORKING FORUM and I wonder if the majority of members would prefer to see a post that is perfectly scripted explaining a project that is as rough as ars@@oles or one that is poorly scripted explaining one that is brilliantly executed.I know which one that I would go for every time.

Dennis

But surely it's better to have a well-written, easy to read explanation of a brilliantly executed project? If so then doesn't that mean good spelling and grammar?

I can appreciate that not everyone came out of our educational establishment with perfect grammar. But spelling can be fixed by a spelling checker if one's not sure or confident.

But at the end of the day, isn't it a bit insulting to your audience to throw together a load of words etc ? And especially if you do have a good command of English then surely it's just laziness?

 

[RogerS]

.......

As long as the context is there , one can usually (intelligently and logically ) work out what the intended meaning is.

.....

But if the author actually knows the difference but can't be arsed to correct the sentence or write things down correctly in the first place then who gives them the right to waste my time in trying to figure out what they mean?

 

[Bodrighy]

Unfortunitely most of our bad English comes from the USA. I agree that correct grammar does not seem to be taught anymore. I just ignore it all now as it is so commonplace. :?

Strangely enough much of the american 'slang' and the apparent bad grammar is in fact english but from a couple of centuries ago. We have adapted more than the americans and have very few truly british words left. Most of our Anglo Saxon words are now swear words, many of our words are in fact greek, latin,french, spanish, hindu,chinese, swahili.......so how does one actually define bad grammar or bad spelling? (Should the above all begin with upper or lower case?)

Pete

 

[Tusses]

.......

As long as the context is there , one can usually (intelligently and logically ) work out what the intended meaning is.

.....

But if the author actually knows the difference but can't be arsed to correct the sentence or write things down correctly in the first place then who gives them the right to waste my time in trying to figure out what they mean?

I guess it depends how intelligent and logical the reader is

and as for a waste of time - it depends on how important the subject matter is to the reader - 'it's not compulsory you know' to read anything here.

Besides - , I think it was Dan Tovey (?)had to work out what one of Smudgers 'correct' words meant, by the context of his post - a 'dumbed down' word could have saved him some time. Which shall it be ?

 

[BradNaylor]

.......
Also as I have said before this is a WOODWORKING FORUM and I wonder if the majority of members would prefer to see a post that is perfectly scripted explaining a project that is as rough as ars@@oles or one that is poorly scripted explaining one that is brilliantly executed.I know which one that I would go for every time.

Dennis

But surely it's better to have a well-written, easy to read explanation of a brilliantly executed project? If so then doesn't that mean good spelling and grammar?

I can appreciate that not everyone came out of our educational establishment with perfect grammar. But spelling can be fixed by a spelling checker if one's not sure or confident.

But at the end of the day, isn't it a bit insulting to your audience to throw together a load of words etc ? And especially if you do have a good command of English then surely it's just laziness?

Well said, that man!

But if the author actually knows the difference but can't be arsed to correct the sentence or write things down correctly in the first place then who gives them the right to waste my time in trying to figure out what they mean?

Well said, that man again!

 

[BradNaylor]

and as for a waste of time - it depends on how important the subject matter is to the reader - 'it's not compulsory you know' to read anything here.

Besides - , I think it was Dan Tovey (?)had to work out what one of Smudgers 'correct' words meant, by the context of his post - a 'dumbed down' word could have saved him some time. Which shall it be ?

If you had read my post properly you would have known that I actually welcomed ****'s use of a word whose meaning I had to think about.

Intelligent and thinking people are always pleased to learn something new.

Those who consider that they don't have anything to learn are generally conceited, pompous, or as thick as pigshit.

Cheers
Dan

 

[Smudger]

.......

As long as the context is there , one can usually (intelligently and logically ) work out what the intended meaning is.

.....

Besides - , I think it was Dan Tovey (?)had to work out what one of Smudgers 'correct' words meant, by the context of his post - a 'dumbed down' word could have saved him some time. Which shall it be ?

It all depends on how importance accuracy is to you. What I detect here is a HUGE dose of reverse snobbery.

 

[Smudger]

Back to the abbreviations!

"Those who consider that they don't have anything to learn are generally conceited, pompous, or as thick as pigshit. "

TAPS.

 

[Mark68]

Well..this takes the biscuit now...so if someone is not as intelligent as you, it means they are either conceited, pompous or as thick as pigshit,,well that's a new one!!!!

I would call someone who has got to go out of their way to impress on other people how well they can speak or spell pompous or conceited..

Also does it mean the someone who is not intelligent and thinking is not willing to learn???

Hell,,i could never be a brain surgeon,,i am not clever enough to get anywhere near the qualifications which are needed,,,,,,so tell me,,does that make me conceited, pompous or thick as pigshit???

ok.i'm a classical flutist,,so if someone cannot play the flute or read music, does that make them conceited,pompous or thick as pigshit???

Maybe we should have someone like Pol Pot come to power,,remember what he done in Cambodia??? Anyone who was thought to be educated or even wore glasses were either killed or sent to the killing fields!!!,
or how about the reverse, if anyone is not so well educated or finds it difficult to spell,, was killed or sent to a killing fields type place??? would that please you???

 

[Jake]

Well..this takes the biscuit now...so if someone is not as intelligent as you, it means they are either conceited, pompous or as thick as pigshit,,well that's a new one!!!!

No-one said that.

 

[Digit]

I've stayed mostly clear of this since it started to become heated, but as I see the various views we have one side claiming that it is laziness that provides the errors and tother saying it's a lack of knowledge or are stating it's a lack of importance and of no consequence.
So Mark68, are you aware of the errors in your post, which I agree is completely intelligible, or are you not, and if you are which group do you fall into?
This is not an attempt to be rude or sarcastic I assure you, rather an attempt to understand the difficulties.

Roy.

 

[Mark68]

Well..this takes the biscuit now...so if someone is not as intelligent as you, it means they are either conceited, pompous or as thick as pigshit,,well that's a new one!!!!

No-one said that.

""Intelligent and thinking people are always pleased to learn something new.

Those who consider that they don't have anything to learn are generally conceited, pompous, or as thick as pigshit.

Cheers
Dan""


My views on this are,,why do people come onto a forum and boast how well they can spell,write,use the correct grammar, etc. Have they got nothing better in their life to do than to pick on people who are less well educated than them??

Maybe we should start boasting who can pee up the wall the highest??

By the way Digit..you have spelling mistakes in your last post... :wink: lol..

 

[Tusses]

and as for a waste of time - it depends on how important the subject matter is to the reader - 'it's not compulsory you know' to read anything here.

Besides - , I think it was Dan Tovey (?)had to work out what one of Smudgers 'correct' words meant, by the context of his post - a 'dumbed down' word could have saved him some time. Which shall it be ?

If you had read my post properly you would have known that I actually welcomed ****'s use of a word whose meaning I had to think about.

Intelligent and thinking people are always pleased to learn something new.

Those who consider that they don't have anything to learn are generally conceited, pompous, or as thick as pigshit.

Cheers
Dan

Dan

I did indeed read your post correctly, and understand that you didn't mind taking the time to learn something new..

My point was - a correct word, caused someone to have to think about the meaning, just as in incorrect word would - whether the reader is bother by either or not !

Your post also confirmed that some readers of this forum might find it easier if 'correct' words were in fact appropriate for the readers too - regardless of whether you enjoyed learning or not.

the original point was ' who has the right to waste my time and make me have to think about it' I was pointing out it works both ways

 

[Argee]

Maybe we should start boasting who can pee up the wall the highest??

Marvellous retort, very well thought out.
Ordinarily, I wouldn't have replied.
Regretfully, this post is now becoming too polarised.
Once this stage has been reached, progress is almost impossible.
Naturally, I'm going to bow out now.

Ray.

 

[Tusses]

.......

As long as the context is there , one can usually (intelligently and logically ) work out what the intended meaning is.

.....

Besides - , I think it was Dan Tovey (?)had to work out what one of Smudgers 'correct' words meant, by the context of his post - a 'dumbed down' word could have saved him some time. Which shall it be ?

It all depends on how importance accuracy is to you. What I detect here is a HUGE dose of reverse snobbery.

as I stated way back when ... I dont really give a stuff about poor english. It really isn't important to me if someone is well educated in english or not.

I am however enjoying this thread and playing Devils advocate and reverse snobery will be used in an equal amount to forward snobberry

it is good that you can at least recocnise the 'reverse' part of it tho !

 

[Digit]

No mistakes that either I or my spelling checker are aware of Mark, but you see I make no claim, nor have I made any claim to perfection for myself, that is why I use a spell checker.
The reason I asked the question I raised is that you have clearly made an attempt at correct punctuation, I therefore assumed that you consider punctuation to be important, if that is so I would point out that punctuation is not an arcane science but is guided by a set of rules. Which, I once again assume, you have not been made aware of.
My point is that the rules are very simple and easily followed, so if you do attach some importance to correct punctuation I can assure that the rules are easily learnt.
I would also repeat that your posts are completely intelligible anyway.

Roy.