Grammer - puncturation - riting. Disgusting...

grey_til_I_dye

Suze

ðæts gʊd tuː nəʊ

SuzanneClaret

;nonono


How rude...

chicagohammer

read vs read (red) has always puzzled me and I also struggle with learned vs learnt

MrsGrey

Grey occasionally gets alumni-type emails from University of Reading (ie, redding) but at first glance my brain always sees it as University of Reading (reeding) which pleases me.

That a University should be for reading.

;biggrin

grey_til_I_dye

It was. It was!

I got an actual grant to spend my days reading great literature.

Happy days!

Expat_Hammer

Dems were the days when they paid you to be a student ................... *sigh*

MrsGrey

It was fab. Your tuition fees were paid AND you got a maintenance grant.

*sigh*

What a civilised world we once lived in.

NEoldiron

Chicago, especially confusing when you think about lead (present tense) and led (past simple and past participle) and nothing whatsoever to do with the poisonous metal (or is that mettle) ;biggrin

Ironduke

Mrs G, yes yer right on there , there be more than one tongue spoken...I myself speak a dialect of Klingon, particularily to cold callers...and my other language is talking $@??@&;£S

I accept that there is progress in this techno age, but I believe our younger generation are losing the skills of good diction by not engaging in convo...I kid you not, but about 4-5 yrs ago my b in L `s male offspring sat in my front room barely a yard apart and texted each other...

MrsGrey

;lol ;lol

That's nothing to do with the techno age, and everything to do with being teenagers.


Or, possibly, boys.

;wink

MrsGrey

Ironduke, I know you will appreciate this....


Me and grey enjoy a crossword puzzle of a morning, wiv our ;coffee

Here are solutions in a recent one we tackled:
iastic
sarsit
syrets
veena
ad captandum
appestat
huarache
peepe
thrist
a salti
naik
pastance

;nonono

;lol

I'd never heard of any of them before.

Iastic sounded feasible, while grey knew 'a salti' from his music, but otherwise we were thanking the lords of the internet for google and OED-online. ;phew

Ironduke

very brave of you , I cant begin to guess what publication such a word teaser would break to the world of crossword afficanadoes

MrsGrey

I love it. It's completely bonkers.

I often think (while solving ) 'Ooh, excellent word for scrabble. Must remember that! next time I have a K, J and X and no vowels.'

Sadly, I never do. ;doh ;lol

MrsGrey

Ironduke said:

what publication

Azed (in the Observer)

cryptic ;ok

chicagohammer

I thought that in such puzzles, is it not the clue that is designed to be cryptic, looking at the answers above, I can only conclude that it is the answers and not the clue that is indeed cryptic, which is simply not cricket.

All I know is.....

There would be at least twelve unanswered clues if I was tackling it

;wink

MrsGrey

;lol

We use all available resources to ensure the grid is always completed. ;wink

grey_til_I_dye

I treat it as part crossword, part jigsaw, and part 'treasure hunt'.

We couldn't possibly do it without resorting to a crossword solver or anagram finder for some of the clues, but it's fun trying to get that far, and you do come across some amazing words.

MunichHammer

A woman, without her man, is nothing.

A woman! Without her, man is nothing.

Just goes to show how important punctuation is.

MunichHammer

I've always loved Lynne Truss' "Eats, shoots and leaves" and recommend it to anyone interested in correct punctuation.

billybondsbeard

I hate it when people write loosing, rather than losing

That is all ;ok

NEoldiron

bbb, but it depends on whether they're loosing their arrows or losing their way ;biggrin
I hate it when people write (believe it or not) "are" instead of "our".

Vorselaarhammer

A colleague just sent me this...

http://www.boredpanda.com/funny-english-language-jokes/

Swissiron

grey_til_I_dye said:

thorn

Your proposed changes follow the option of introducing a coordinating conjunction between two main clauses.

What they did is an example of comma splicing, which is a punctuation no-no.

Herb

Oops. Sorry!

No, there are no no nos in punctuation except those agreed to maintain clarity, no?

grey_til_I_dye

Swiss.

No.

Although, perhaps I haven't understood what you were trying to say.

Joining two main clauses with a comma is an error according to current English punctuation rules.

MrsGrey

If you have a comma at the end of a main clause before you start the next one, you are doing full stops, semi-colons and connectives out of a job. Not to mention capital letters. ;nonono ;weep

Swissiron

Greys, there aren't any official, current, established, let alone generally accepted English punctuation rules, there are various collections of rules at different times and in different cultures from diverse people, institutes, authorities and associations, from Jamaica to Oz to NZ, and back to Ireland, Csnada and the US and none of them can legitimately claim that their rules are even dominant, let alone acceptable to the vast diaspora of English speakers and writers.

No one is in charge of English punctuation and certainly not the English, whose own customs have changed considerably over the last 500 years and doubtless more (when there was no question about any rules). Commas were then used as an assistance to speakers who knew by the comma when to draw breath. Before that and originally they actually took the places of spaces between words in old texts when parchment was scarce and writers and illustrators didnt want to waste the expensive material with spaces, you can see the development of spaces into commas as it happened in manuscript terms. Commas (and punctuation in general) were for nearly 200 years the prerogative not of the writer but of the typesetter or printer.

Old documents from hundreds of years ago reveal that the comma has been used in many ways and for many reasons. Original Shakespeare manuscripts show very conclusively that the Bard, even within the same plays, used commas totally arbitrarily and without any consistency. In fact, he probably didnt use any at all, on the basis of the typesetter's prerogative and custom above. In modern times, and at the last count (even this is virtually impossible), there are over 500 separate rule books claiming rights on English grammar and punctuation rules and there is nothing in common amongst them, least of all on commas.

More recent claimants that their rules are the official ones are just pure fantasy, Burchfield, Purdue, Straus, Strunk, Oxford, Ebbit, White, Chicago et alI included, they are all different sets of rules but claim to be the original. Even today there is a big division of opinion about the Oxford comma. And US and UK punctuation customs are getting wider apart, not closer when it comes to the comma.

I recommend to you The Sense of Style by Steve Pinker and Making a Point: The pernickety story of English punctuation by David Crystal. The latter is exhaustively researched and referenced through history, and provides an authentic and knowledgeable assessment of what is out there now and recently as arbitrary and subjective rule books go.

grey_til_I_dye

Swiss

Im really? not! sure, what: your point!! is."

Have rules regarding punctuation changed over time? Undoubtedly.

Are they arbitrary? Well, yes, of course, since they don't represent any universal law.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to bring up Shakespeare, a man who couldn't even spell his own name.

Are you suggesting there are currently no punctuation rules for British English? I would say there are.

It's unlikely that you will find many people who would say that we don't need to mark the start of a sentence with a capital letter, and the end with a full stop, question mark or exclamation mark.

It seems to me like arguing that there are no grammar rules because there are a wide variety of grammars, and that grammar has changed over time.

Or arguing that since spelling has changed over time, then there are no rules to spelling.

Are there areas where more than one choice can be considered correct? I would say yes. (For example, whether or not to use a comma preceding a coordinating conjunction.)

If you prefer 'consensus' to 'rule' fair enough, but to suggest that 'anything goes' when it comes to punctuation does not, for me, reflect the current situation.

MrsGrey

maybe I should have said 'conventions', and clarified that I was talking about the modern Standard British English dialect.

I mean, if we all suddenly chose to punctuate according to whichever historical period or other dialect of English that we felt like, we would struggle.

Never mind if we abandoned all modern English spelling conventions, and dabbled with any dialect vocabulary and grammar. It would be difficult enough if we stuck with British English dialects - if you want to throw other Englishes (US, Oz, Indian etc) dialects into the mix..... well, good luck with that.

MrsGrey

Swissiron said:

Greys, there aren't any ... generally accepted English punctuation rules

Tell that to anyone teaching/sitting/marking English exams.

Swissiron said:

. Original Shakespeare manuscripts show very conclusively that the Bard, even within the same plays, used commas totally arbitrarily and without any consistency. In fact, he probably didnt use any at all, on the basis of the typesetter's prerogative and custom above.

Bear in mind, Shakespeare wasn't writing for me or you. He was writing for his actors. They needed to know their lines - they probably never even saw the whole play written down. The lines were an aide-memoire. They 'performed' them as actors. I think they probably decided when (and even if - despite the absence of commas) they would take a breath. ;wink

MrsGrey

Or should I have said

bear in mind shakespeare wasn't, writing for Me or you he was writing for his actors they needed to know their lines they probably never even saw, the whole play written down the lines were an aide-memoire they performed, them as Actors think they probably decided when and even if, despite the absence of commas they would take a breath


;biggrin