To offer some grammar tips to anyone who might want them?

[UnaCorda]

I sincerely hope this doesn't come across as either rude or patronising - it genuinely isn't meant to. It's also not intended as a pedants' thread.

I just thought it might be useful to list a few common mistakes, with an explanation, so that anyone who isn't very confident with their written English might be able to correct errors which, for example, could perhaps count against them in a job application or when used in a professional context.

I'll start with three:

1. "Your" shows that what you're referring to (probably a person or object) belongs to whoever "you" is in the sentence; for example, "Your brother showed me your book". If you mean "you are" you need to write "you're".

2. "Non" is not a word on its own - it is negating something, such as in "non-stick" or "non-committal". ("None-stick" would be incorrect, as would "non of them".) "None" means there aren't any. "How many cakes are left?" "Sorry - none." Or, "How many of the children finished the test?" "None of them."

3. "Alot" is not a word and the same goes for "abit", "infront", "incase" and "inbetween". Instead use "a lot", etc., just like "a little".

Hope I haven't made any mistakes myself...

1) The snow is laying

2) The snow is lying

IE When the snow is landing on the ground & staying there, not melting immediately

In that circumstance I would say the snow is settling, but I think it would not be incorrect to say the snow is laying i.e. it is laying itself on the ground. If the snow was already on the ground it would definitely be lying, and incorrect to say laying.

But you'd have to add the 'itself upon the ground'. And that sounds a bit odd IMO.

@SarahAndQuack

But you'd have to add the 'itself upon the ground'. And that sounds a bit odd IMO.

Yes I agree it used to sound odd to me too, but it was a commonly used colloquialism where I used to live. A grammar pedant friend insisted it was OK. :D

Your grammar pedant friend is wrong!

But it doesn't matter, does it?

I prefer 'snow settling' anyway. It sounds lovely.

@SarahAndQuack

Your grammar pedant friend is wrong!

But it doesn't matter, does it?

I prefer 'snow settling' anyway. It sounds lovely.

Yes I agree about settling. It’s almost onamatopoeic.

It also wouldn’t be the first time he was wrong...🤣

OP, or anyone else, could you help me put an end to a regular argument I have with DH? He says 'want' about inanimate objects when cooking where I think it should be 'need'. For example, 'Do the potatoes want turning over?' I always respond with 'No, but they do need to be turned over.' It really annoys me but if I'm wrong about it I shall give him and apology.

Lose and loose can be added to the list!!

@Hotwaterbottlelove

OP, or anyone else, could you help me put an end to a regular argument I have with DH? He says 'want' about inanimate objects when cooking where I think it should be 'need'. For example, 'Do the potatoes want turning over?' I always respond with 'No, but they do need to be turned over.' It really annoys me but if I'm wrong about it I shall give him and apology.

I’m afraid you are wrong! Want meaning need is fine. From Collins dictionary:

1. (transitive) mainly British

to have need of or require (doing or being something) your shoes want cleaning

For want of a nail...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ForWanttofaaNail

“For want of a nail“ is slightly different. “Want” there is a noun, meaning lack.

I think this is thoughtful and helpful.

I know that sometimes the words ITS is spelt IT’S can someone explain when to ditch the apostrophe? I think it’s an exception word to the apostrophe rule or something.

Thanks OP.

I think it’s been explained up thread somewhere, but basically...
It’s = it is, it has.
Its = possessive form of “it”.

If you cannot replace with “it is” or “it has”, it is always “its”.

The cat has a manky blanket.
It’s sitting on its blanket that it’s had for a long time.

It is sitting on its (possessive) blanket that it has had for a long time.

I just saw a thread title with something like "If your children was...."

It is children + were.
Children is plural (they).
They were... Correct.
Were they...? Correct
Was they...? Incorrect

The same for 'we were'. Not 'we was'.

Unless you are playing a 1950s poor character in 'Call the Midwife'. Then it's fine.

I think it’s an exception word to the apostrophe rule or something.

@Pollyputthepizzaon - I understand what you mean.

Harry's wallet, the dog's ball - apostrophe to denote belonging.

The wallet belonging to Harry and the ball belonging to the dog.

But it's does not denote belonging - use its. The cat licked its paws.

Similarly you would not use her's your's, our's, there's, for belonging to her, you, us or them.

It's ALWAYS means it is.

It's ALWAYS means it is.
No, that’s not right. It can mean it has.

It's ALWAYS means it is.
No, that’s not right. It can mean it has.

@daisypond - You are absolutely correct. It's been a pleasure to contribute to this thread!

@SockYarn I don't think that example from Spanish uses different verbs to show formality though. It is the same verb in different conjugations.

Estás cansado/a - informal
Está cansado/ a - formal (not 'es')

Same verb though, 'estar' to be.

Japanese is the only language I've heard of with actual different verbs as well as verb forms.

Bit mean to quote a specific thread, @DianaT1969. Don't you think the OP might feel a bit shit if she saw that?

@Procne

The one that seems to be on the rise on Mn is the misuse of the past participle, eg. 'If I'd known you were going to the beach, I would have came too.' (Or occasionally, 'I would of came too.')

50% of Scottish people talk like this. It’s not new

Depending on how young they were, I would guess this was just the process of language development/acquisition. They picked out the most important words. If you think about how you would say, "I'm going to the shop," the words that would get the least emphasis would be "to" and "the" - they almost get lost in the rest of the sentence of you're speaking quickly.

@UnaCorda you gave the above answer to a poster who asked how to explain that “going to the shops” not “going shops” was correct. I don’t know where you live but where I live in London, and throughout the SE, this mistake/colloquial manner of speaking is very very common amongst adults. I suspect that the poster’s children were imitating that. So my son’s nursery keyworker will say “do you need to go toilet?” or “we’re going park today”. Teenagers will say “we went cinema last night”. The “going” is often pronounced kind of “gaahn”.
I agree that some children not exposed to adults speaking this way will make the same mistake for exactly the reason that you describe, as part of the process of language acquisition, but it’s definitely not limited to children.

OP I’m really intrigued that you chose “non” when used to mean “none” as an example of a common mistake. I don’t think I have ever seen that.

Unless you are playing a 1950s poor character in 'Call the Midwife'. Then it's fine.

You obviously don't know many people from parts of London and the south east. 'We was...' etc simply is part of their everyday vernacular. Would you take the same view of Yorkshire or Lancashire dialect usages? Scots? Irish?

@CheetasOnFajitas, I see the non/none mistake quite a lot. On here and on FB.

@ErrolTheDragon

Unless you are playing a 1950s poor character in 'Call the Midwife'. Then it's fine.

You obviously don't know many people from parts of London and the south east. 'We was...' etc simply is part of their everyday vernacular. Would you take the same view of Yorkshire or Lancashire dialect usages? Scots? Irish?

@ErrolTheDragon Surely it’s not controversial to say that colloquial/vernacular expressions are acceptable in speech but should not generally be written down (unless you are going full Irvine Welsh)?