So what people, did you all get together without me and agree that we were no longer going to snipe about people’s poor grammar/spelling? I just read a thread in GQ that I had to go over 3 times to get the context of because half (it seemed) of the entire post appeared to be misspelled?
Did I miss this memo? Are we just letting people slide? Or are we actually getting more tolerant of people who can’t write to save their lives?
I’m sure this invokes the law…where’s my spelling/grammar error, Gaudere?
The thinking is that many people have limited time and type in a hurry and spelling and grammar errors will occur. It’s considered bad form to criticize occasional minor errors. We do have preview. If someone has glaring consistent spelling and grammar errors they are just being lazy. I think it’s acceptable to it out to them and suggest they use preview and a dictionary if they can’t spell. That’s helpful suggestion, not “hey asswipe, did you get past 6th grade or what?” Other than that if you’re a Mr. Fussypants and it disturbs you too much, don’t look.
Well, I’m not Gaudere, but… So what*,** people, did you all get together without me and agree that we were no longer going to snipe about people’s poor grammar/spelling? I just read a thread in GQ that I had to go over 3 times** in order to get the context** because half (it seemed) of the entire post appeared to be misspelled**.**
*
here ya go.
I’ll just be standing over here under my Gaudere Umbrella waiting for my own Gauderean fallout. .
‘So what, {we need a comma here} people, did you all get together without me and agree that we were no longer going to snipe about poor grammar and {"/" is not a substitute for “and”} spelling? I have {present perfect} just read a thread in GQ {“which” is better than “that” to introduce a defining relative clause} which I had to go over three times to get the context {no preposition is necessary here} because it seemed {“seemed” and “appeared” are an ugly tautology} that half of the post was misspelled.’
That was one ugly-arse paragraph: let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Fuck. “Let him who is without sin…” I should’ve caught that on preview. You see, my grammar’s pretty good, but we all slip sometimes in the haste to post.
Actually, Case Sensitive, you should have left well enough alone. I’m pretty sure in English grammer, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” is correct. Certainly “he” and “who” should agree which means it should either be “he who” or “him whom” and since “he” and “who” are the subjects of the phrase which ends “is without sin”, I’d use those two.
I now await my judgement by Gaudere’s minions. (A minor defense: in British English, which is as natural to me as American English, “judgement” is indeed the correct spelling. I had a discussion with my 9th grade English teacher about this.)
Unfortunately, his original quote said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” Leaving well enough alone is what got him into trouble in the first place.
Your “grammer” is pretty fine; it’s your spelling that needs work ;).
Happy to oblige. Did you mean “grammar”, or were you referring to a British cousin of the star of the “Frasier” television program?
Actually, though, you beat me to it (reprieving Case Sensitive). Until I thought about it for a minute. Case Sensitive was paraphrasing a quote, so I checked Bartleby; they’re all over the place on this one. Now I don’t know what to think, but he/who sounds right to me.
No Lefty his original quote said “he”. Can’t we just bookmark the spelling and grammer threads and just refer the whiners back to the first couple of hundred times we have gone over this?
What’s funny is I spelled “grammar” right the first time I composed the post, but I decided not to post. On my second try, of course, I spelled it wrong.
Ask not for whom Gaudere spells. She spells for thee!
Actually, “judgment” and “judgement” are both accepted spellings.
Interesting point, RSSchen. There are so many times when I want to correct someone’s grammar and spelling, but if it is obviously just a typo, I leave it alone and move on. I agree with you about posts that are so thick with typos and flat-out errors that I can hardly parse them, though. If you’ve got the time to type it and post it, you’ve got the time to re-read it and correct your errors, in my ever-so-humble opinion. Okay, since everyone’s agreed, we’ll resume pointing out the more egregious errors again. Ain’t nobody gonna learn if nobody tells 'em.
