It's should have and would have not should of and would of

[pippinleaf]

That's all.

I wonder if these sort of things sort the readers from the non readers?
A person who doesn't read is more likely to mistake the spoken contraction 'would've' for would of (because it sounds like would of)
Then again that doesn't explain why a person would use a phrase which makes no sense...unless they think it's a figure of speech?

I dunno

I'm not sure which person asked about the whole 'whom' issue but I was taught to use the he/him rule. 'He' represents 'who' and 'him' represents 'whom'. The personal pronoun with which you can answer the clause with will tell you whether you need to use 'who' or 'whom'.

Not sure if that helps much!!

Reminds me of The Idiot song by Neil Innes ' Hey you,you're such a pedant,you've got as much brain as a dead ant,about as much imagination as a caravan site.But I still love you'. Ha ha,hate pedants me.

We have a child who says that Harold . Fortunately all the other children in the class don't know what shit means!

I can't remember who posted it, but I think that whom can be the accusative or the dative case. For example,
Whom did you praise? I praised Ed. (Accusative/ direct object)

To whom did you give a trophy? I gave a trophy to Ed. (Dative/ indirect object)

foulk offed

Well as we're being bitchy......

Those therapists types you talk about your feelings with are counsellors

Those weird Tory bastards who look at planning apps. are councillors

And good manors never cost nothing regardless of how cheap property prices are in your neck of the woods.

I got my arse handed to me on a plate the other week for commenting that an article had a great many spelling and grammar errors.

Look im only learning about proper nouns at the moments from my 8 year old. I have had to buy a grammar dictionary.

I always assum Grammar police are old dithery keyboard tappers that cackle with delight everytime the correcnt someone - Im too young for grammar knowedge. but old enought to have missed its reintroduction

I'd never actually correct someone, but I do notice, writing in a certain way is a bit like having a certain accent...isn't it?

YANBU.

Haych instead of Aitch really gets to me, especially when I spell my name & when I say Aitch, the person I'm speaking to says, "You mean Haych". Grrrrrr

Bare and Bear. If you can't bare it, great, I don't want to see it!

As for correcting people being patronising or the idea being more important, I do rather feel that it is quite important to have the right tools for the job, it is easier to share an idea quickly if you are able to use the right grammar and express yourself in a manner that is clear and comprehensible. Having said that, it's not always the fault of the poster, particularly in England where education went through a 'radical' period in the seventies and decided it was more important that the children express themselves than learn grammar. Again, right tools for the job. Somebody with some common sense realised that was necessary and they started teaching grammar again.
I would not correct anyone in distress, but yep, I get snarky with some troll types.

I don't understand the "It's just a chat forum" argument; surely you don't consciously decide to misspell / use poor grammar depending on the medium used?

• Oh it's just MN so I can write "I'm stood there" and "Grammer".

Odd.

Explaining things lucidly does matter, though perhaps less so on a forum like this where it's possible to ask the OP what she really meant (and you can phrase these things politely).

It's maddening in print, though: I read an academic article recently where I really was not sure exactly what the author - a tenured academic - was trying to say because her grammar was so poor. English is her first language, and perhaps that was part of the problem: if she'd had to sit down and learn it, she'd have been more conscious of how she was expressing herself.

But then, I think she's a idiot anyway.

Self-confessed pedant here.

On a chat forum - irritating to pedants but not important. In a blog, annoying and makes you look as though you don't know the correct usage of grammar. In a work situation (email/application/letter) - unacceptable. Doubly so if you work as a teacher. If you are an English teacher and you don't know which is correct, you should be shot.

May I add to the mix:
Saink (seen on a forum buying/selling) - took me ages to work out it was meant to be "something"
aswell - rather than "as well"
baited breath - it's "bated"

It doesn't matter really. Not in the grand scheme of things. However.... It makes my heart race and teeth clench...

Dp and dsis do it and I have been on the verge of screaming at them. (Never have, obviously, because then I would be unreasonable)

It all came from have being turned into 'uv' then this slowly becoming of over the years. (My theory) I honestly don't think my sister knows it is wrong

Saink! Wow!

Forgot 'try and' as opposed to the correct 'try to'

Saink.

You win.

YANBU.

But we really have been over and over this to the point of tedium.

I know, but today I learned a new word - 'saink' - and I'm thrilled.

I like things to be correct too but there is some truth in the fact that this is a chat forum. I know when to use its and when to use it's, I know about split infinitives but when I'm typing furiously I frequently miss out punctuation. I'm sure that's the case with a lot of us.

I know a very senior lawyer who counts "one, two, free, four" He also likes to be "Pacific" about various matters

I find it illuminating, it lets me see what sort of person Im communicating with on the net, true colours and all that.

It has, as mentioned, been done to death though

I hate it when ppl try to be pompous and get it wrong

as in "you are graciously welcomed into the principle reception rooms"

and threads promoting "grammer" schools