Comments on: Random Grammatical Rant http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/ personal finance tips, tricks, and commentary Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:39:46 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Guest http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-16276 Guest Mon, 07 Aug 2006 00:22:24 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-16276 My biggest pet peeve are people who only speak, read, and write ONE language. And while we have current politicians "mandating" that the "official" language become English, it is an inevitability (with current population trends) that we will all end up speaking other languages to conduct business. Chinese, Indian and Spanish come to mind. My biggest pet peeve are people who only speak, read, and write ONE language. And while we have current politicians “mandating” that the “official” language become English, it is an inevitability (with current population trends) that we will all end up speaking other languages to conduct business. Chinese, Indian and Spanish come to mind.

]]> By: Jeremy http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-1050 Jeremy Thu, 22 Dec 2005 04:04:03 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-1050 Mine is <i>impacted</i> as in it impacted our vacation. It could have had an impact on the vacation or affected the vacation, but impacted only refers to teeth, organs, and passages. See <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=impacted" rel="nofollow">Dictionary</a> Mine is impacted as in it impacted our vacation. It could have had an impact on the vacation or affected the vacation, but impacted only refers to teeth, organs, and passages.

See Dictionary

]]> By: Nathan http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-578 Nathan Thu, 22 Sep 2005 08:32:02 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-578 My grammatical pet peeve is inappropriate use of 'and' when 'to' is intended, i.e. the all to common 'try and succeed/improve/do something'. You're going to try _and_ succeed? My grammatical pet peeve is inappropriate use of ‘and’ when ‘to’ is intended, i.e. the all to common ‘try and succeed/improve/do something’. You’re going to try _and_ succeed?

]]> By: Dale http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-557 Dale Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:20:12 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-557 My pet peeves aren't about grammar. Not that I don't notice when it is butchered, but I find that I have a remarkable capacity to forgive those errors in the context of good ideas. The two things that get to me are incorrect usage of words that distorts the meaning, and excessive use of passive constructs. Let me explain. I think anyone reading grammar rants will be familiar with the distinction between "imply" and "infer". The definitions are quite clearly distinct, but there are people out there who confuse the words. Usually I see "infer" where "imply" is clearly the correct choice. There are other cases, I merely offer that one as an example. My second peeve is the use of passive constructions. It has its place. It is an ellision of an implicit subject. That can be extremely useful in speaking hypothetically or abstractly where there is no subject. It is even appropriate where the subject is not known. However, it seems to get overused in cases where the subject is known and deliberately not stated. That's enough of my ranting. If I continue, I will certainly introduce some choice typos for which I will be chastised myself. However, I wanted to mention two wonderful online resources and ask if anyone else reading this can contribute more. The first is the <a href="http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/cmosfaq/cmosfaq.html" rel="nofollow">Chicago Manual of Style FAQ</a>. The second is the 1918 edition of Strunk's <a href="http://www.bartleby.com/141/" rel="nofollow">The Elements of Style</a> My pet peeves aren’t about grammar. Not that I don’t notice when it is butchered, but I find that I have a remarkable capacity to forgive those errors in the context of good ideas. The two things that get to me are incorrect usage of words that distorts the meaning, and excessive use of passive constructs. Let me explain.

I think anyone reading grammar rants will be familiar with the distinction between “imply” and “infer”. The definitions are quite clearly distinct, but there are people out there who confuse the words. Usually I see “infer” where “imply” is clearly the correct choice. There are other cases, I merely offer that one as an example.

My second peeve is the use of passive constructions. It has its place. It is an ellision of an implicit subject. That can be extremely useful in speaking hypothetically or abstractly where there is no subject. It is even appropriate where the subject is not known. However, it seems to get overused in cases where the subject is known and deliberately not stated.

That’s enough of my ranting. If I continue, I will certainly introduce some choice typos for which I will be chastised myself. However, I wanted to mention two wonderful online resources and ask if anyone else reading this can contribute more. The first is the Chicago Manual of Style FAQ. The second is the 1918 edition of Strunk’s The Elements of Style

]]> By: Carol http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-435 Carol Mon, 29 Aug 2005 03:48:58 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-435 My pet peeve is the use of "your" in place of you're. "our" is not a substitute for "you are". You're going to remember that, right? My pet peeve is the use of “your” in place of you’re. “our” is not a substitute for “you are”. You’re going to remember that, right?

]]> By: Kat http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-431 Kat Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:57:57 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-431 If I see one more person use "do" instead of "due," I'm going to scream. Such as, "We postponed the game do to bad weather." ARGH! Nickel, this is for you: http://ask.yahoo.com/20050803.html If I see one more person use “do” instead of “due,” I’m going to scream.

Such as, “We postponed the game do to bad weather.” ARGH!

Nickel, this is for you: http://ask.yahoo.com/20050803.html

]]> By: EDWD45 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-363 EDWD45 Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:54:09 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-363 My favorite is "flounder" and "founder". Flounder is a fish, and founder is to drift aimlessly. But over usage of "flounder" with the meaning of "founder" has almost eradicated the difference. My favorite is “flounder” and “founder”. Flounder is a fish, and founder is to drift aimlessly. But over usage of “flounder” with the meaning of “founder” has almost eradicated the difference.

]]> By: Bob http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-322 Bob Thu, 11 Aug 2005 23:19:02 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-322 Personally, I despise the use of "definiately" and "was" in place of the contrafactual "were." Personally, I despise the use of “definiately” and “was” in place of the contrafactual “were.”

]]> By: Madame X http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-295 Madame X Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:30:17 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-295 I always loved this example from The Elements of Style-- about nauseous vs. nauseated. It went something like "don't say that you feel nauseous, unless you are sure you have that effect on others..." I always loved this example from The Elements of Style– about nauseous vs. nauseated. It went something like “don’t say that you feel nauseous, unless you are sure you have that effect on others…”

]]> By: Jason http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-293 Jason Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:17:01 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-293 And "alot" is not a word! A person may have a lot of money but they cannot have "alot" of money. And “alot” is not a word! A person may have a lot of money but they cannot have “alot” of money.

]]> By: mbhunter http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-292 mbhunter Wed, 03 Aug 2005 00:58:10 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-292 Oh, one other one .. "every day" vs. "everyday." As in, "I try to post every day, but the everyday advice can get repetitive." Oh, one other one .. “every day” vs. “everyday.” As in, “I try to post every day, but the everyday advice can get repetitive.”

]]> By: DavidB http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-291 DavidB Wed, 03 Aug 2005 00:00:08 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-291 irregardless. The all time biggest offender. The word you want is "regardless", people. And innapropriate use of double quotes to make a point. Especially if you wiggle four fingers when you do it. irregardless.

The all time biggest offender. The word you want is “regardless”, people.

And innapropriate use of double quotes to make a point. Especially if you wiggle four fingers when you do it.

]]> By: nickel http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-290 nickel Tue, 02 Aug 2005 23:26:51 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-290 Another pet peeve of mine is the improper usage of "i.e." and "e.g." The former is short for "id est," which means "that is." The latter is short for "exempli gratia," which means "for example." But in everyday usage, these get flip-flopped all the time. Another pet peeve of mine is the improper usage of “i.e.” and “e.g.” The former is short for “id est,” which means “that is.” The latter is short for “exempli gratia,” which means “for example.” But in everyday usage, these get flip-flopped all the time.

]]> By: mbhunter http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-288 mbhunter Tue, 02 Aug 2005 18:58:48 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-288 Its vs. it's bugs me too, as well as other misuses of possessives. Another is "alright." It's spelled "all right," without exception. All right? ;) Its vs. it’s bugs me too, as well as other misuses of possessives.

Another is “alright.” It’s spelled “all right,” without exception. All right? ;)

]]> By: Flexo http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/comment-page-1/#comment-287 Flexo Tue, 02 Aug 2005 17:14:16 +0000 http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2005/08/02/random-grammatical-rant/#comment-287 "Could/should of" is one of the most irksome grammatical muckups to me, as well. So many others... it's vs. its, for example. That's one's not just on blogs, it's everywhere in professionally published media, too. “Could/should of” is one of the most irksome grammatical muckups to me, as well. So many others… it’s vs. its, for example. That’s one’s not just on blogs, it’s everywhere in professionally published media, too.

]]>