Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 1125
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:19 pm
- Location: Beautiful Aurora, Ohio
Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
What is with the multiple commas? I'm starting to see them everywhere.
Next!
Next!
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 2194
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 4:16 pm
- Location: Northern Illinois
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Could the commas be from typing on a tablet or cell phone?
My biggest peeve is the misuse of the apostrophe. You do not use apostrophes to denote plural!!!
My biggest peeve is the misuse of the apostrophe. You do not use apostrophes to denote plural!!!
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
"Feathers" on a horse.... No, feathers are on birds, and feather is on a horse.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 363
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:02 am
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
PaulaO wrote:Could the commas be from typing on a tablet or cell phone?
My biggest peeve is the misuse of the apostrophe. You do not use apostrophes to denote plural!!!
YES! They are horses, not horse's. (Example, I am going to feed my horse's.) There are four Saturdays in a month, not Saturday's.
I also cannot stand when people use inappropriate commas. (Example, Jethro, is going, to come home today. )
I blame autocorrect. :/
-
- Novice
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:32 pm
- Location: Formerly Above AZ
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
When you are referring to another person and yourself, "Bob and I" is not an ironclad rule. If you don't know which pronoun to use for yourself, take the other person out of the sentence and see how you'd refer to yourself. And then add the other person back in. And please. PLEASE. I's is not a word. If you're talking about something possessive, the same applies - whatever pronoun you'd use if it was just you is the same one you use if it's Bob and you. Whose is this? Bob's and mine. It's Bob's and my anniversary this week. Not Bob and I's anniversary. That makes no sense.
Thank you and good night.
Thank you and good night.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
The first menu item on this web site almost killed me when I stumbled onto it.
-
- Novice
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 4:21 pm
- Location: South Texas
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Loose weight and lounging horses.
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 1125
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:19 pm
- Location: Beautiful Aurora, Ohio
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Seen on a shelf label at Schneiders - yes, that Schneiders:
"Prince of Whales Spurs"
See, I don't consider that to be a grammatical error, as it's not something we could have and should have learned in school.
"Prince of Whales Spurs"
silk wrote:"Feathers" on a horse.... No, feathers are on birds, and feather is on a horse.
See, I don't consider that to be a grammatical error, as it's not something we could have and should have learned in school.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Spelling, not grammar, but "balling my eyes out" just kills me. Really???!?! Think about that for a minute. It's "bawling," people. And, of course, "lounging" and "confirmation." <shudder>
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Ok, ok, ok, I make the "lounging" error. I have no idea why. I know better. Please don't hit me with a lounge whip!!
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Oops. I mean LUNGE whip.
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 1125
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:19 pm
- Location: Beautiful Aurora, Ohio
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Actually, it's longe.
According to Wikipedia:
According to Wikipedia:
The word is believed to be derived from either the French word allonge,[1] meaning "to lengthen",[2] or the Latin longa ("long").[1] In both cases, the root word featured spelling with an "o" and emphasizes lengthening and extension, so although always pronounced "lungeing", the traditional spelling of the word in English is "longeing"
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Lunge. I deserve the rolling eye expression!
But, as far as someone balling her eyes out, anyone who makes such a darling home for Guinea pigs can cry anyway she wants over a sick 24 yr old mare.
But, as far as someone balling her eyes out, anyone who makes such a darling home for Guinea pigs can cry anyway she wants over a sick 24 yr old mare.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Oops. I mean LONGE.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:13 pm
- Location: New York, instead of New England
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
AirsAboveNC wrote:When you are referring to another person and yourself, "Bob and I" is not an ironclad rule. If you don't know which pronoun to use for yourself, take the other person out of the sentence and see how you'd refer to yourself. And then add the other person back in. And please. PLEASE. I's is not a word. If you're talking about something possessive, the same applies - whatever pronoun you'd use if it was just you is the same one you use if it's Bob and you. Whose is this? Bob's and mine. It's Bob's and my anniversary this week. Not Bob and I's anniversary. That makes no sense.
Thank you and good night.
It's not "Bob and my's anniversary" either. Heard that one too many times.
Heighth. Not a word. Sorry.
The over-use of apostrophes kills me. I fear that it's become so rampant that it's going to become the new norm and people are just going to accept it.
Some of the errors that could just be typos don't get to me *as* much, though it would be nice if people proofread their texts/emails/etc.
The lack of interest in properly conjugating verbs. "I falled down," "I runned to the store," etc etc. Your spellcheck should be ALL over that...
The misuse of common phrases be people trying to make their statements wordier - "all intensive purposes" is far more common than it should be.
-
- Greenie
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2015 9:36 pm
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
silk wrote:"Feathers" on a horse.... No, feathers are on birds, and feather is on a horse.
I've heard and used this for so long (singular or plural) that I thought it was just another piece of horse-y jargon and it doesn't bother me in the least.
Chestnuts on horses' legs on the other hand.......
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
FlyingLily wrote:Loose weight and lounging horses.
I don't know, my weight has become looser since my horse has been lounging on stall rest.
-
- 500 post plus club
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:59 pm
- Location: eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Then/than - some people don't seem to understand the difference.
"My horse was wondering around in the field." Not wandering around? I picture a horse assuming a very philosophical stance as it grazes, wondering about life & such!
There are many more, but I'll stop there.
"My horse was wondering around in the field." Not wandering around? I picture a horse assuming a very philosophical stance as it grazes, wondering about life & such!
There are many more, but I'll stop there.
formerly known as "Deanna" on UDBB -- and prior to that, as "DJD".
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:06 pm
- Location: Tennessee
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Oh, don't get me started! Just about every single article on the web is full of grammar and spelling mistakes. I admit I'm an old fart, but why isn't this taught in school anymore?
I cringe when I hear "I'ma".
I cringe when I hear "I'ma".
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Gifted. Lessoned. Cliniced. Trialed.
-
- Greenie
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2015 9:36 pm
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
^^ And flatted. UGH.
-
- Greenie
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2015 9:36 pm
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
and honestly, I'd be really happy never to read about the fabulous dressage horse "Tortillas" again.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Afraid to post for fear I might make a mistake
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 1125
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:19 pm
- Location: Beautiful Aurora, Ohio
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Go ahead. Make our day.
- Suzon
- Herd Member
- Posts: 395
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 5:44 pm
- Location: Bay Area, CA & Middle of Nowhere, OR
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
hoopoe wrote:Afraid to post for fear I might make a mistake
Or maybe that should read: I's afeared o' farkin' up.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 8:25 pm
- Location: Northern IL
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
See/seen/saw....I cringe when those are misused.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 363
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:02 am
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
capstone wrote:The first menu item on this web site almost killed me when I stumbled onto it.
I saw that! It makes me grind my teeth repeatedly.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
The use of the incorrect tense of a word drives me nuts.
Judy come over and we had a great time.
My SO and his mom use come instead of came and it drives me INSANE. I want to scream, 'It already happened, she CAME over.'
Ok, I'm better now.
Judy come over and we had a great time.
My SO and his mom use come instead of came and it drives me INSANE. I want to scream, 'It already happened, she CAME over.'
Ok, I'm better now.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Could we please discuss further and farther?
Lest I further err farther down the road.
Lest I further err farther down the road.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 11:44 pm
- Location: NorthEast Kingdom, VT
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Their, there, and they're seem to be something that has not been taught in elementary school anymore. Should there have been a comma after they're??
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 2194
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 4:16 pm
- Location: Northern Illinois
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Dapple Field wrote:Their, there, and they're seem to be something that has not been taught in elementary school anymore. Should there have been a comma after they're??
If you believe in the Oxford comma, yes, there (not they're or their) would be a comma before the last thing in your (not you're) list. I'm an Oxford comma person.
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 3:04 pm
- Location: Texas (o_O)
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Seeing my own grammatical errors drives me nuts.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
redsoxluvr wrote:capstone wrote:The first menu item on this web site almost killed me when I stumbled onto it.
I saw that! It makes me grind my teeth repeatedly.
Well, I emailed them about it. And they fixed it!
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
The use of "loose" for "lose" gets me every.damn.time. BAH!
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 2194
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 4:16 pm
- Location: Northern Illinois
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Kudos to you Capstone! And kudos to Signature Spurs for correcting it.
-
- Bringing Life to the DDBB
- Posts: 1125
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:19 pm
- Location: Beautiful Aurora, Ohio
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
PaulaO wrote:Dapple Field wrote:Their, there, and they're seem to be something that has not been taught in elementary school anymore. Should there have been a comma after they're??
If you believe in the Oxford comma, yes, there (not they're or their) would be a comma before the last thing in your (not you're) list. I'm an Oxford comma person.
This is a little confusing. No, there should not be a comma after "they're," but if you're an Oxford comma person (as are all reasonable people IMHO), the comma after "there" is correct, right, and righteous.
-
- 500 post plus club
- Posts: 866
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 5:20 pm
- Location: NW Michigan
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
silk wrote:"Feathers" on a horse.... No, feathers are on birds, and feather is on a horse.
Wracking my old brain, but don't we call the long loose hairs around the fetlocks of draft horses (and Fresians), "feathers"?
"Literally", when one means "figuratively". Aghhhhhhhhh!
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Yes, the hair on drafts = feathers https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/horsefeathers
And far as the work for lunge, or longe... it comes from longier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longeing and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/longe?x=25&y=9
I had an english teacher who went ballistic over: the reason why is. It is either: the reason is, or the why is....but not both together.
And far as the work for lunge, or longe... it comes from longier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longeing and http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/longe?x=25&y=9
I had an english teacher who went ballistic over: the reason why is. It is either: the reason is, or the why is....but not both together.
-
- 500 post plus club
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:59 pm
- Location: eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
I wouldn't trust wiktionary to be the definitive guide to whether the hair on a draft's legs is "feather" or "feathers".
Here is a site that goes into great detail on feathered horses. At the very end, there is a statement about "feather" vs. "feathers".
http://www.gypsyhorses.com/feather.htm
And here is a link to the breed standard at the "American Shire Association" website where, again, they refer to "feather" not "feathers".
http://shirehorse.org/breed-standard-page/
However, the UK Shire Association site shows only one reference to feather vs. feathers on their breed standard page, and they say "feathers" in that one reference. So, either feather or feathers is used by Shire authorities, but it seems that feather is favored over feathers in the reading I've done.
Here is a site that goes into great detail on feathered horses. At the very end, there is a statement about "feather" vs. "feathers".
http://www.gypsyhorses.com/feather.htm
And here is a link to the breed standard at the "American Shire Association" website where, again, they refer to "feather" not "feathers".
http://shirehorse.org/breed-standard-page/
However, the UK Shire Association site shows only one reference to feather vs. feathers on their breed standard page, and they say "feathers" in that one reference. So, either feather or feathers is used by Shire authorities, but it seems that feather is favored over feathers in the reading I've done.
formerly known as "Deanna" on UDBB -- and prior to that, as "DJD".
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Highly recommended reading for the peeved:
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-English-Histo ... 0399165584
This isn't to say that I don't ever draw a line in the sand (seriously, people, if you're truncating a year it's '98, not 98') but it does help put things into (historical) perspective.
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-English-Histo ... 0399165584
This isn't to say that I don't ever draw a line in the sand (seriously, people, if you're truncating a year it's '98, not 98') but it does help put things into (historical) perspective.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 7:47 pm
- Location: San Jose, CA
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
PaulaO wrote:Dapple Field wrote:Their, there, and they're seem to be something that has not been taught in elementary school anymore. Should there have been a comma after they're??
If you believe in the Oxford comma, yes, there (not they're or their) would be a comma before the last thing in your (not you're) list. I'm an Oxford comma person.
ack Ack ACK! NO!!!!!
-
- Novice
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 5:46 pm
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
capstone wrote:The first menu item on this web site almost killed me when I stumbled onto it.
It seems so random!! Why the apostrophe on some words and not others??
I saw a sign in front of a furniture store the other day advertising Tables, Chairs and Sofa's. WTH?
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
My boss overuses quotes in her emails. And she overuses air quotes when you talk to her in person.
Sigh.
Sigh.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 1:13 pm
- Location: New York, instead of New England
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
I kid you not, the library local to where I used to work had a sign out for donations for their annual book fair: "Wanted: used DVD's, CD's, and Book's."
It hurt. It just hurt.
It hurt. It just hurt.
-
- Herd Member
- Posts: 312
- Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:20 pm
- Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Astral wrote:I kid you not, the library local to where I used to work had a sign out for donations for their annual book fair: "Wanted: used DVD's, CD's, and Book's."
It hurt. It just hurt.
Yes, ouch.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Also:
- "I had a couple dogs" instead of "I had a couple of dogs." I've heard it on NPR, so the end of the world has arrived.
- "I had a couple dogs" instead of "I had a couple of dogs." I've heard it on NPR, so the end of the world has arrived.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1126
- Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:26 am
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Don Giovanni wrote:capstone wrote:The first menu item on this web site almost killed me when I stumbled onto it.
It seems so random!! Why the apostrophe on some words and not others??
I saw a sign in front of a furniture store the other day advertising Tables, Chairs and Sofa's. WTH?
I'd love to know why the LAST on the list needed the apostrophe but none of the others.
I was horrified that I actually used an apostrophe where it didn't belong and left it that way for awhile on Facebook! It's become too commonplace now to see misplaced apostrophes.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Chancellor wrote:I was horrified that I actually used an apostrophe where it didn't belong and left it that way for awhile on Facebook! It's become too commonplace now to see misplaced apostrophes.
Lol. I find this a bit like alot. Even though I know awhile can have its place, I believe this is not one.
"A while is a noun meaning “a length of time”
“I slept for a while.”
– (compare with “I slept for a bit” and “I slept for three hours”)
“I was away from my desk for a while.”
– (compare with “I was away from my desk for two minutes”)
Awhile is an adverb, meaning “for a time,” or literally, “for a while”.
“I slept awhile before dinner.”
(compare with “I slept deeply before dinner” and “I slept badly before dinner”.)
As you can see, the words can be used almost interchangeably in some cases – but a while needs to be accompanied by a preposition, such as “for” (“I slept for a while”) or “ago” (“I left work a while ago”). Awhile always means “for a while”."
Just goes to show that grammar is hard and we can easily make mistakes even while discussing it specifically.
Last edited by capstone on Tue Nov 24, 2015 3:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Reconvening the Court of Grammatical Peeves
Don Giovanni wrote:capstone wrote:The first menu item on this web site almost killed me when I stumbled onto it.
It seems so random!! Why the apostrophe on some words and not others??
I saw a sign in front of a furniture store the other day advertising Tables, Chairs and Sofa's. WTH?
My guess is that the section for dog's (ha!) was done by someone different than the horse sections.
Return to “The Observation Lounge/ Cookbook Forum even Hot Topics”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 100 guests