So all these pedants who correct posters grammar

[MamaMaiasaura]

Seen posters correcting grammar on here, do they do so in RL situations?

No, I think if something was affecting meaning, I'd ask for clarification, rather than "correct".

Surely that's inappropriate rather than incorrect?

but like using no grammar right or punctatun or nufing cos its to long is makin it much more dificult ti get at what its realy bout yknow cos really wen all u can do is go on like tis wiv no proper words an evryfing then no1 reely knows wat you like want yeah?

And yes, I have taught adults who write like this. And it's really sad.

Ha! I spent ages learning how to read medieval manuscripts from the era before punctuation or bloody spaces between words. Now that is a nightmare. In fucking Latin.

Linguistic relativism can go too far.

Oh yes, habbibu, he wrote about linguistic purism, no? Interesting guy.

Honestly, it makes me cringe when people who consider themselves educated go around correcting stuff. Would you correct someone who was speaking in ebonics? Or would that be considered racist?

Of course there are mistakes people make that annoy me too, including "should of" and its modal cousins, but unless I was correcting someone's work, or if it was an official letter the person was sending out, I would never say anything.

What I think people should do is to record themselves for one day. If you did that, you'd realise how many so-called mistakes you make every day.

Maybe the issue is that a chat forum blurs the lines between spoken and written English.

Yes, it's hard to read that 3birds, but only because we're not used to seeing things written down like that. It wouldn't be hard to understand it in spoken English.

Yes, I think that's exactly what it is 3inabirdsnest...when I type on here, I tend to just type as I would speak. It's a different style to how I would type if I was writing an essay or something.

Because I don't think grammatical 'mistakes' are quite the same in spoken language, are they? It does not matter - even in very formal situations - if you don't always speak in full sentences. But it looks odd on paper, unless it is reported speech.

I notice grammar mishaps but I don't feel the need to point them out. If I understand the point they're making then their Grammar is a non-issue. This isn't school or an exam. I don't see how patronising a person's use of English is relevant to anything. It just comes across as a self-delivered ego boost if I'm honest. Whatever turns you on I suppose!

Most descriptive linguists I know do have expressed preferences for appropriate style; they just make the distinction between style and other elements of language, iyswim? So dialects/idiolects are given equal weight in analysis, but in essays/publications adherence to certain parameters of style are expected. I think this is reasonable, and more broadly applicable, so that we can, say, on an international but UK based forum like this, wish people not to write in very dialectal forms, without stigmatising those forms.

I am tired and no longer making sense to myself...

But as directly transcribed speech is extremly difficult to read, we DO have to adapt our language when we type on MN. And how far we adapt seems to be the question.

Some people do not have the ability to adapt their language, for whatever reason, I guess. Everyone understands what you mean when you write "should of", however much it makes you cringe.

I honestly don't see that many posts on MN that are hard to read, except maybe ones which are one big long paragraph.

Cool, me too. But I've enjoyed this - makes a change to be able to discuss lingusitics rather than whether your SIL has been unreasonable...

I think if people do speak in full sentences it actually becomes quite stilted and strange - we need the repetitions and redundancies etc for spoken language to flow.

Looks like civilisation has won the day! Goodnight and thank you.

Hurrah!

Goes back to work

It's my job to correct grammar in real life, but I never do it on here, because a) it's profoundly nobby to do so and b) I can't type so usually post barely literate things which no one complains about and c) grammar's only there for clarity, so if a post makes sense, even if it's missing its apostrophes, why pick over it?

Actually, I think incorrect spelling and grammar shows lack of respect to those who read it. However, my personal bete noir is the the inability to use an adverb correctly.

The real pedants post in their own corner. It's probably the only part of MN where threads about threads are OK, presumably because they are talking about the use of language in a way which doesn't derail the original thread, and it puts it in separate forum which is easily hidden by those who do not like it.

Those who correct on other forums are often having a pop for a different reason, and one that can be unkind.

Yes, the ability to use standard English is important; no it's not the be-all-and-end-all when chatting. Yes, attention to expressing yourself clearly shows respect for your audience; no the odd typo (or predictive keyboard gremlin) doesn't impede this. It's very rare for poor expression to make a post impenetrable - aside from those, and others where there might be ambiguity and clarification needs to be requested, it just seems rude to comment.

I find this thread infinitely amusing. I am a member of a few Australian forums, and the grammar pedants run rampent there too. LOL.

Lying

I didn't realise I was part of an 'ilk'

Little bit dramatic to say you feel sorry for me.

I think I explained why I think good grammar matters. For the record, I didn't say I corrected people's grammar, I said I think it is vital we all keep standards up or the next generation will think it doesn't matter all all how they express themselves in writing.

Having a 'thing' about grammar isn't that different to other posters holding strong views on their 'things' - be it extra marital affairs, the price of pork in Tesco or parking in disabled spaces etc etc. We all have our points and very many of us are fairly forthright and direct in expressing them! What's the difference?

Merry Christmas

lattelady I actually think that insisting on perfect grammar and punctuation shows lack of respect and flippancy to boot. So someone isn't all that hot at English. I don't see how that's a sign of how respectful they are. They genuinely might suck at english like I do math and for varying reasons. No-one gets offended because I can't do my 75 times tables do they? Even shop keepers get away with being bad at maths because tills do the sums. People can get away with being bad at maths without being called disrespectful. The same ought to apply to those of us with a less than perfect lexigon.

Proud... I don't disagree with you that good grammar matters. We have an education system in this country that accords with that view too.

There's a huge difference though, from having strong views on things (I do too) - when asked AIBU? Solicited opinions. It's something quite different to draw out a cyber red pen on the way somebody has written their post.

I do feel pity for people so lacking in manners that they would choose to critique somebody's grammar/spelling/punctuation without being asked. It's rude. It's disruptive to the thread and there's a board for posters to do that on. The last twenty or so posts on this thread show why that board is needed but perhaps a larger audience was desperately needed? I don't know or care - peope who feel the need to pick apart others' posts in this way are lacking themselves.

I expect I'll agree with you wholeheartedly on some other thread, Proud, but not this one. Merry Christmas to you too.