Posts by Steve Parks
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
But if you have a way of marking agreement between nouns and adjectives, then that allows considerably more freedom in how you can position those in a sentence without creating ambiguity (as there may still be only one noun that that particular form of the adjective could go with).
Ah, I see. Thanks. And Giovanni too.
-
I often find for instance that when I see its written instead of it's or viceversa I do a little mental double take.
Yeah, me too, to be honest, and I think Mrs Skin said something similar upthread. Well, I'm not planning to stop using apostrophes any time soon. I suspect, like it or not, they will go - especially with the increasing prevalence of text speak. But part of me definitely wants to continue to put my knowledge to use, and wants to say "come on, people, just learn the rules and write properly". (Also, I want those pesky kids to get off my lawn.)
...being able to convey gender in the stem of nouns and adjectives.
How does that work, by the way?
-
Sam, I think you may be over-stating the case Janet Holmes made, then. I don't think she really meant it as that much of a conspiricy.
Well, if the only reason to learn good grammar is to show that you know good grammar, then the only real reason to insist upon good grammar must be to defend the time you spent in learning it, right? So "good" or "bad" grammar is just a power play...
I don't think anyone was saying the only reason to learn good grammar is to show you know good grammar. If the grammatical convention serves a value, then fine. (Heck, I know how to use apostrophes correctly, and if someone can convince me that context isn't suffucient to disambiguate between the vast majority of "its" and "it's" and so on, then so be it - I'm all for keeping them.)
Janet's arguement was that this was a particular instance of there being little other reason to worry too much about this rule. Her argument gave me pause for thought.
-
It’s good grammar, therefore you should learn it, because it shows you know good grammar.
That was certainly my grandmother's perspective. But I just like good grammar. I don't think it has anything to do with showing that I know good grammar but I can't explain, even without three beers for lunch, why it feels good when I see it.
It's a bit like the difference between seeing someone wearing a well-made jacket and someone wearing one from Hallensteins. It doesn't make the slightest bit of practical difference to my life whether a person is wearing special clothes or more ordinary ones, but seeing the good jacket somehow makes my day a little sweeter. And good grammar does that to me too.
The point is: If "but it's just good grammar" is the reason to keep apostrophes (and I'm not saying here that that necessarily is the only reason, but let's suppose), then that is circular reasoning.
One could have made exactly the same case about having periods after 'Mr.' and 'Mrs.': "But I just like good grammar. I don't think it has anything to do with showing that I know good grammar but , ... See what I mean?
If we decide the convention serves little to no use, and we drop the convention, then it isn't bad grammar anymore, and you don't have to worry about it lessening your day.
-
Agreed, Islander. The complexity of English and its ability/willingness to just grab stuff from other languages are among its strengths.
-
Why this assumption that pointing out grammatical conventions is a moral judgment?
Who made that assumption?
-
David, do you think Ben has really understood what you're writing?
-
Has the difference between it's and its been abolished somehow?
Janet's counter to that is that context will serve to clarify. You're clearly sober, you refute it.
-
[Janet Holmes]: “The truth is that people who have learned how to use apostrophes have a vested interest in maintaining them. Its like correct grammar. Learning all those rules has to mean something doesnt it?"
[Mrs Skin]: I see why people feel this way, but good grammar sings to me in the same way that, say, a well-tailored suit does. Yes, really. I don't think I have a vested interest because my own grammar is fairly poor. I don't know why I can recognise it but not implement it.
Mrs Skin, I suspect Janet may point out that that is an example of begging the question. It’s good grammar, therefore you should learn it, because it shows you know good grammar. As she explains, people once probably defended the capitalisation of all nouns, or the periods after Mrs (Mrs.) as examples of good grammar.
However, my feeling is that dropping apostropes is a change of a different nature than just dropping unnecessary periods or caps, but I can't elaborate just now. (May have something to do with my lunch today consisting of three beers and no food.)
-
Just to push things along a bit, who finds themselves compelled to use actual sentences with proper grammar and spelling when mobile texting?
I do a bit, thanks to predictive, but not if it slows me up too much.
On that subject, in an earlier job I used to get emails from a colleague who used "dae" for "day".
What the?? I wondered... that's not even an abreviation! Same number of letters dude!
Someone pointed out it may have come from text-habit, as "d.a.e" is quicker than "d.a.y" on a non-predictive mobile. Four character selections instead of five. Sheesh.