To refuse to engage with anyone who uses of instead of have?

[ExitPursuedByAKoalaBear]

That's it.

I use the grammatically correct form of 'could have' rather than 'could of', but I might start deliberately getting it wrong in the hope that people like Suzanne and Côte will avoid me....

I think I love you, hmc.

Not least for the wee hat-type thing you have on Cote.

On a tangent, but I do think it must only ever be students who notice errors like one misplaced bracket, mustn't it?!

It's like when you paint a door or something - it's only you who ever notices that one tiny, tiny paint drop or unevenness.

What seems to be the problem with my posting quotes from the other thread?

Those are real recruiters, honestly talking about what happens to CVs with errors.

The vast majority of these CVs are sent by people who have no disabilities whatsoever. I have posted about how those get quickly eliminated to raise awareness on this issue and urge those people to make sure their CVs are spellchecked at the very least.

Candidates with a disability who genuinely can't tell correct spelling from incorrect spelling can surely have a friend go over their CVs before sending them to recruiters. All computer software that these CVs are written have spellcheck features. There really is no excuse for sending CVs with spelling mistakes.

Once the candidate with dyslexia gets to the interview stage, she can then talk about her disability if it is relevant to the role. (Or keep it from the interviewer and then try to sue the employer if she is fired later, I suppose).

People who write code also get bothered by brackets that open and never close.

Well, I know it wasn't me who suggested there was an issue with posting quotations (NB: quote is a verb) from the other thread.

But I will jump in on your comments about proof reading.

This isn't really correct. Spellcheck is just not up to it. We've mostly talked about homophones on this thread, and spellcheckers don't reliably pick those up. I've had many friends spellcheck my work - as I said above - but they don't pick everything up.

Obviously, I needed help to get to the interview stage. It would be discriminatory to knock me out before that stage, purely on the basis of dyslexia - and I am thankful and impressed that Cambridge has done this for me twice. I like to think that the fact I got as far as the second interview (as a baby academic) proves their faith the first time (as an undergraduate) was justified. Certainly, I didn't drag their reputation down: I worked damn hard and I managed.

If they had decided instead to the ignorant and biased method, they might never have interviewed me, or anyone else like me (and I believe they interview many like me every year).

I understand this seems to offend you in some way, but I don't see why? If I am as capable as another candidate, and only held back by a disability that affects something as minor as SPAG, why should I not be given a fair chance? Why shouldn't everyone else's dyslexic children expect that fair chance?

I love the English language, but the snobbery around it frustrates me. I would not use of instead of have, but that doesn't make me more intelligent than someone who does. It just makes me someone who remembers rules about the English language (some of the time).
I'm saving my respect for those people who show their intelligence through their daily actions... even if their grammar is a bit suspect.

And btw, cote, you know, there will be real people with dyslexic children reading this thread.

When I was 7 or 8 my mum was told I would never cope. My brother was told he was just 'stupid' or 'lazy' until he was well into his late teens.

My mum could only fight that because she was reasonably well educated herself, and aggressive as heck. There are lots of parents who know very well their children are hard working and intelligent, who hear comments like those on this thread and lose hope, because they can't see how their children will ever fulfull their potential.

That's what you reinforce when you make the claims you're making.

Received an email from my boss with 'by now you should of....'. It absolutely drives me mad. Tosser.

I am one of those people with a dyslexic child, who is now an adult. He also has other learning disabilities that deprived him of some of the compensating strategies that help people with dyslexia. He had the advantage of resources that many people don't have and still struggled mightily to attain basic literacy. He is now a successful young man with a decent career and a family of his own to whom he is a wonderful husband and dad. He still makes many of the mistakes that people on these types of threads deplore.

I care about language; I make my living writing and correcting the work of others as a free-lance editor. It's not so much the concern about our language on these threads that bothers me because I actually share some of that concern. What bothers me and what I take very personally is the sneering tone and sense of moral superiority that some people express to mock others, who are in all likelihood, doing their best.

My pet peeve is reading that someone is 'on route' rather than 'en route'.

Argh!

It just makes me someone who remembers rules about the English language (some of the time).

But "of" instead of "have" isn't just a grammatical rule such as say not splitting an infinitive or not muddling singular verbs and plural subjects. It's nonsense.

"It should have been me " means something. "It should of been me" doesn't.

Yvonne Fair - It should have been me:

"an issue with posting quotations (NB: quote is a verb) from the other thread."

So, that is what you have been sniggering about You thought "a quote", used as a noun, was a mistake. It's not. See Merriam-Webster dictionary online:

2. Quote (noun) Definition of QUOTE

1: quotation
2: quotation mark —often used orally to indicate the beginning of a direct quotation

Examples of QUOTE
Each chapter of the book began with an inspirational quote.
She included quotes from the poem in her essay.
The article included quotes from the mayor and several councilors.

When I previously expressed wonder at you as an Oxbridge undergraduate teacher, it wasn't about your spelling difficulties. It was about this sort of thing - you made a judgement without proper information/understanding here, as you did previously on this thread. That is not about dyslexia.

"If they had decided instead to the ignorant and biased method, they might never have interviewed me"

Why? They could not have known about your writing difficulties (which are completely absent on this thread, by the way, so obviously you can manage).

"I understand this seems to offend you in some way, but I don't see why?"

Again, you "understand" something that is just not there. If you can do your job, that is great. If you go around "correcting" undergrad papers with the likes of "'Quote' is a verb" that may not be so great.

And re CVs:

"time was when binning CVs from women, or Irish people, or black men, was also considered a 'reality' everyone should just learn to understand"

This is not about prejudice. Badly written CVs are actual evidence of:

• candidate is sloppy (couldn't be bothered to spellcheck)

or

• candidate can't write for whatever reason (uneducated, dyslexic, etc) and didn't think of asking someone check his CV for errors.

I realise that it all looks to you like it is all about your disability, but it isn't.

"some people genuinely do not realize they might be being disablist to bin CVs with typos"

And they are not. They are doing their best to select the most able and qualified candidate for the job, regardless of whether some of the candidates have disabilities or not.

"Many people, therefore - as on this thread - believe that you cannot succeed if you are disabled"

You can, but not at every role. If you are in a wheelchair, you can't be a controller for construction sites. If you can't write well, you can't be a research analyst in a financial firm. You should not expect to be hired for a job you can't do.

"here's the list of people who proofread parts or all of my thesis"

You thesis must have been significantly longer than a two-page CV, which is fairly easy to check for errors.

" there will be real people with dyslexic children reading this thread... That's what you reinforce when you make the claims you're making."

What kind of claims am I making? Please share. (Not what you think I'm saying, but what I have actually said. With quotes ).

My first PhD supervisor abhorred 'quote' for 'quotation', as do most academics I know, actually. I'll have a look at the OED online later on this, as I trust it rather better than Merriam!

"Quotation" is better in that context, when you are taking a passage from a book which you will attribute by citation to its source.

OED agrees that "quote" is a noun as well as a verb and says the following (I can't link on this phone but I'm sure you can find it yourself):

NOUN

1A quotation from a text or speech:
a quote from Wordsworth

Anyway, I was just looking for the text of his remarks, which I didn't find, but I did find an additional quote from the speech that struck me.

Their quotes and epigrams take up a sometimes shocking amount of space in columns and essays.

The sad thing is that the quotes and slogans are not only dated - but they're stupid.

Wow - I wish I could call up my supervisor and say nyah nyah. I guess that's a good example of language changing!

What's the speech you're referencing there?

Anyway - I shall doubtless continue to flinch when I read 'could/would/should of'. I continue to think that lots of people would probably stop it, if the rules were explained to them: I do think that many people just don't get it, on this. But this thread is a useful reminder that sometimes it's not ignorance - and flinching at the mistake should be distinct from flinching at the person who makes it.

I believe (though I'll also omit the reference) that the OED has given up on insisting on 'different from' as opposed to 'different to'.

Language moves on and changes - something I think is positive.

In that context, yes, as you obviously know, you can use 'quote' (a verb) as a noun. However, it is rather funny to use it when you are a self-declared pedant about these things, isn't it?

I think you just fucked up and don't like to admit it. But then, I have no special objection to 'a bake' (other than thinking it suggests a pretentiousness about cooking that's a bit daft), and apparently the rest of MN was horrified at that cropping up in GBBO.

Cote, for the love of God will you just let it drop.

You're coming across as ridiculously persistent, dogmatic and as though you have some sort of personal vendetta against LRD. Your posts aren't making you look intelligent and educated; they're making you look petty and actually quite nasty, and I doubt that's the effect you're hoping for.

flinching at the mistake should be distinct from flinching at the person who makes it

Absolutely, which was the point I tried to make way upthread before it was somewhat hijacked. There is a difference between a person's skill with language and the person themselves.

My mil has just said "did you win her" in the context of my two dc discussing who came first in a race.

I can just about put up with her use of was and wasn't instead of were and weren't. "Where was you? Wasn't you at school?"

But I officially resign now.

Sounds as if you married beneath you Micah?

I married my dh, not my mil :)