[Closed] Somethink annoying

Feel sorry for me.

I am a pedant. I am also a teacher, marking coursework written by 16-year-olds.

Shakespeare spelled his own name 5 different ways

Don't you mean that the person (or persons) who wrote "Shakespeare" couldn't manage to be consistent at spelling his assumed name?

no, I mean, pre-dictionary, people were less hung up on spelling, particularly their names. I believe Walter Raleigh also pronounced his name 'Rayley' or 'Rowley' - it was more mutable...

ellipses

[b]IS[/b] there a '...' key ??

IS there a '...' key ??

[option]+[;] on a Mac. I only said that to be sarcastic though 🙂

"my bad"...WTF??? it either 'my fault' or it isn't

and "can you borrow me a pen?"....no,i can lend you one but i can't borrow you one, idiot!!!

I was having a discussion with my mate who was insistent 'bestest' makes sense.

If something is the best, then can anything really be any better?

OMITN wrote:

Little of this affects (note, not "effects") our understanding, but that's only because some of [b]use[/b] have the brains to understand how it ought to work, but also have to compassion to make allowances for the illiterate and imbecilic.

Sod it.

Sod what?

IS there a '...' key ??

I'd suggest the much more serious issue is using 4 full stops in place of an ellipsis when 3 is perfectly sufficient....

… oooh, yes it works 🙂

but ... is quicker!

actually, I do have an annoyance, which is the use of 'visualise' for 'display' when the former meaning was an act of cognition 🙁

alt+0133 doesn't work for me 🙁

you have to use numeric keypad

Just coz u dont spk lk da queen dont mean nuffink, yeah?

It's interesting to note that many people seem very attached to the idea of their knowing some details of grammar as an ipso facto proof of their supposed intellectual ability. Beyond that, there is an evident mood of intolerance in many of the above posts. Language evolves, and some examples of its use may be more subjectively pleasing than others. I wonder why this is such an emotive subject for some of you. Are you scared that the only thing that makes you better is an apostrophe?

I do [have] is perfectly acceptable?

To some perhaps, but not to me.

Seriously though, it is a bit odd to reply with a contraction of a different word to that used in the question.

I blame all those US sitcoms she watches.

Hear what you're saying duntmatter, but surely 'somethink' is pushing it a little far?

"unique" - it either is, or it isn't

Also the repetition of a word/phrase/statement using slightly different vocabulary to empahasise a point. Very common with tv 'personalities' and those in the workplace who seem to think that we are too stupid to understand a single statement or beleive that their words of wisdom are so important that we have to hear them twice eg. xyz football manager has had his contract terminated, he has been sacked and it is believed he is now longer employed by xyz football club ........grrrrr

Yes Rich I concur, like. 🙂

I wonder why this is such an emotive subject for some of you. Are you scared that the only thing that makes you better is an apostrophe?

I have no idea where that train of thought emerges from, other than a feeling of inferiority? 😆 I never could figure out apostrophe use on anything other than the common applications. I refer to my other half when checking anything of importance before it goes "out of the door". That doesn't stop people having pet hates.

I wonder why this is such an emotive subject for some of you

it is for me as evidence of pointless snobbery

sfb- Surely you meant "hic, HAEC, hoc"?

sfb- Surely you meant "hic, HAEC, hoc"?

um, I got grade 9 Latin 'O' level in 1969 (ie troll grade 🙂

I'll let yer off, innit!

Soz, "Ego te absolvo", if you could visualise it for the moment.

Are you scared that the only thing that makes you better is an apostrophe?

Not at all. There are so many things which make me better. And having the capacity to understand the difference between written and spoken English being one of them.

It's interesting those whose work requires them to maintain sufficient precision in their communication. As a lawyer, I would be embarrassed (personnaly and professionally) to have my written English corrected when negotiating a contract, not because my legal skills were not up to scratch but because I had failed to utilise elementary skills taught to me when I was a child.

Language does evolve, yes, as does the use of it; the skill that so many lack is to understand when to use or not to use certain langauge skills or modes of communication.

you have to use numeric keypad

Thanks…

🙂

the skill that so many lack is to understand when to use or not to use certain langauge skills or modes of communication.

I think rather the maintenance of arcane and readily misunderstood forms of language undermines many people's confidence

Blimey it's still going on.

Don't you think the use of somethink and nothink makes people sound a little bit stupid?
It actually makes no sense, it's not even easier to say!

Should people who say "somethink" be drownded?

Should people who say "somethink" be drownded?

isn't it "sumfink" ??

I think rather the maintenance of arcane and readily misunderstood forms of language undermines many people's confidence

You assume it is arcane. What is your justification for this?

[i]isn't it "sumfink"[/i]

No. People who say sumfink [b]are[/b] stupid

I would be embarrassed ([b]personnaly[/b] and professionally) to have my written English corrected

So would I. 🙂

The trouble is, Simon, it's the misuse of language which is more likely to lead to misunderstanding (hence why lawyers have to get it right).

You assume it is arcane. What is your justification for this?

if you make all the arbitrary grammatical rules into a pile:
split infinitives
I not me
to be or not to be an apostrophe
and all the others brought up in this thread I can't bring to mind just now

one begins to wonder if they're not kept for any intrinsic worth but merely as a stick to beat the less well versed. To concentrate on these trivia is to deny the basic point of language, which is communication, not conformance 🙁

"basically its an eclectic mix that ticks all the boxes!....."

AAAAAAAaaaaaaggggggghhhhhhhh........

LOL I noticed that one too Mark b. Not often you get to embarrass a lawyer with a superiority complex

There are so many things which make me better

😆

I said somefing the other day, I was horrified. Not only am I losing my welsh accent but now turning into a council estate chav. Where's my velour tracksuit....

In the name of the dear, sweet little Baby Jesus who has a subscription to Angling Times....

As SFB has correctly pointed out, it's SUMFINK. And, likewise, NUFFINK.

I despair, I really do, to be surrounded by a world full of imbeciles…

Mind you, whatever I say is not going to make any difference at all. In fact, if it was not for the fact that I know I am always right, and youse are always rong, I think I'd go stark raving mad.

Ah well, I spose it does not in any way matter....

Good spot, Mark B (and Woody). I'm pleased some people were paying attention at the back.

SFB seems to have retreated into semi- ee cummings territory, seeking to eschew certain rules of punctuation, while maintaining others ("...beat the less well versed. To concentrate on...") to illustrate the point that, in spite of the nose on his face, he too must conform to certain rules for communication.

On an everyday basis, of course one can be lax with the "rules", but when seeking to ensure a level of precision in language beyond the mundane, then it does become necessary to have sufficient common understanding of exactly what someone means. Take what I do: if I draft something which, as a result of my use or misuse of certain prevailing rules or accepted norms of written language, remains subsequently open to interpretation, then what I wrote was not sufficiently clear for all concerned to rely on it wholeheartedly. This is one of the prime reasons that the courts are full of arguments over the precise meaning of drafting and, ultimately, its commercial effect. Given how costly going to court is (not least because you need two types of lawyer on each side), it pays to get it right in the first instance.

There have been several occasions on internet forums where bad spelling and/or punctuation have lead to misunderstandings.

Oriented is OK by me yeah, no? Look it up, it's perfectly valid and is generally prevalent, over 'orientated', in technical and scientific literature.

Ignore the American who think 'orientated' isn't a word, this is a good pedantic discussion:

http://inluminent.com/2003/05/08/its-oriented-not-orientated/

seeking to eschew certain rules of punctuation

hmmm, does *anyone* know what a semicolon means ? I don't 🙁 It seems to me punctuation is open to creative use as much as any other part of written language 🙂

The suggestion that legal language leads to clarity is hilarious :o)

[i]There have been several occasions on internet forums where bad spelling and/or punctuation have lead to misunderstandings. [/i]

There have been several occasions on internet forums where [i]correct[/i] spelling and/or punctuation have lead to misunderstandings.
🙂

if it werent for punctuation abuse we would be without the great ; ) or indeed more common : ).

Not to mention the hilarious : P

Punctuation: Enriching our online existences since 1991

[IMG] [/IMG]

Evolution innit.

What have you started here Dez!;)

There are only two that I can think of, and they may have been already mentioned. One is schedule pronounced 'skedule' and the other is the letter 'h' pronounced with a hard 'h'as in hat, if that makes any sense.

Australian soaps are to blame for 'skedule' IMO.

and the other is the letter 'h' pronounced with a hard 'h'as in hat, if that makes any sense.

apparently not - it which contexts ?

[i]What have you started here Dez!;)[/i]

Its cos I'm so middleclass 😉

To concentrate on these trivia is to deny the basic point of language, which is communication, not conformance

Communication goes out of the window if two people are not following the same rules; even in general discussion and talking the meaning of sentences can be completely obvious or utterly vague depending on how you structure your sentence. This might lead to more social contact and laughter but it does not improve [b]communication[/b]. The prime example is the mixture of linux and windows - software engineers write the drivers for windows. Linux bods deconstruct the language the drivers use and try to reconstruct it so Linux can use that hardware too - but generally they miss bits, bugger up the odd rule and make their own implementations of things - this is fine if you're making your own hardware but when you come to plug your webcam into a linux box it is a matter of plug and pray - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, but more often than not only [b]part[/b] of the potential of the item is available. The same goes with communication between humans, if we degrade our communication by removing rules that make its foundations, we limit our potential to communicate complex matters.

One more, for the road....

I bought a tyre. [b]NOT[/b] I [i]brought[/i] a tyre. Come on, I know they sound the same, but they are two totally different words and the one you're mis-using is even longer to type (or say)!

I blame yoda.....................

Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will.

Lifted from a current ebay ad.

I think the man has a point.

hi

you a biding on a dd32 doble wall front disc wheel. The wheel has some marks onit, but nothink of any damage as you can see in the pictures. Its a disc wheel and is a good light wheel to go on any 26inch bike.

take a look at my othere items!

thanks for looking

Simon, 'h' as in saying the letter 'h' - a b c d e f g h etc. Pronounced 'aitch' and not 'haitch'.

We're all pedantic here! ;0)

Unless that ebayer is under 6, or has recently moved to Britain from overseas, or is not very fluent in English, I'd say that is absolutely appalling. Bloody Hell. How can someone's use of language be so bad?

Communication goes out of the window if two people are not following the same rules;

Disagree. [b]Everyone[/b] has different rules, for language and everything else too. Obviously this impinges upon understanding, but we have enough flexibility to muddle through most of the time. Some rules make more difference than others, as "don't talk with your mouth full" is much more important than 'no apostrophe in "its" when referring to something belonging to a thing'

Pronounced 'aitch' and not 'haitch'.

I quite like 'haitch' and 'skedule', though I choose not to use them myself :o)

Disagree. Everyone has different rules, for language and everything else too. Obviously this impinges upon understanding, but we have enough flexibility to muddle through most of the time. Some rules make more difference than others, as "don't talk with your mouth full" is much more important than 'no apostrophe in "its" when referring to something belonging to a thing'

But, as you say, you have to muddle through and it only works "most of the time". I'm not disagreeing about talking with your mouthful, but i'd not say it was more or less important - we should strive to do things correctly if we wish to be taken seriously. Obviously correct is dependent on your context, so using legal description in a north-east youthclub wouldnt get you very far, but that is only because the people at the club do not follow the rules prescribed (hopefully) in primary school. But likewise, the "dumbing down" of the language due to adoption of lazy alternatives makes it less likely that the average person can understand anything *"more" than banter online or in a pub. *by more I mean complex use of our language such as, but not limited to, legal or academic use for example.

At some point we have to take it to extremes and say where does it end, when we regress back to grunts because we can't be bothered forming correct sentences? Sure, there are bigger problems in the world, but that doesnt mean we have to stop trying at the smaller ones.

But likewise, the "dumbing down" of the language due to adoption of lazy alternatives

I suspect people having been moaning about this since they felt grunting was being devalued. Times change, get over it 🙂

Has no-one here heard of Hart's Rules?

Sometimes people must be precise, but they meet the limits of language, and argument over meaning is then inevitable. My point is that the even most finely honed cutting edge use of language is not the cure some think it is. Legal language [i]is[/i] archaic, as recognised by Lord Woolf and the reforms he put into place. That's not always a useful criticism, though. Experts' terminology is often impenetrable to others.

Sometimes gist is more important than specific detail. It's a question of [i]register[/i]. Despite their professed level of literacy, few people are comfortable with, or able to, step out of their own register. Who is a better linguist, the specialist/one trick pony or the generalist/master of none? (rhetorical question alert)

I think people have probably always worried that we're 'all going to hell in a handcart'(™Daily Mail). I also think there's no basis for saying so. In this context, literacy levels are rising. So called 'dumbing down' is what made English the language it is today. It has followed an organic dialectic process whereby elements of different languages were simplified in order that everyone could communicate. (eg Norse met Saxon, and lost the bits of words they didn't have in common, kept the bits they did..have. etc)This led to maybe the real advantage of English per se over other languages; it's flexibility and the ease with which it can evolve.

Yes, but this ISN'T evolution, or the addition of extra languages and their advantages - it's degredation from within. If you think literacy levels are increasing I fear you dont have much contact with the current university level youth?

Times change, get over it

What a silly attitude.

What a silly attitude.

oh, you can say that in grunts then ??

uggh.ughhhh ug ugh. 🙂

uggh.ughhhh ug ugh. [:)]

ah, but surely you meant, "uggh.ughrrhhhg ug ugch." ??

I'll check that wheel out on Ebay. Sounds like a bargin.

I think you'll find that's a grocers' rr you've added there simon.

Looking anecdotally at university students' literacy is no measure of trends.

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy ]As late as 1841, 33% of all Englishmen and 44% of Englishwomen signed marriage certificates with their mark as they were unable to write (government-financed public education became available in England in 1870)[/url]

I wasn't talking about the addition of extra languages and their advantages, but something quite different. Each language in the process would encounter 'degr[b]a[/b]dation', as perceived by its speakers. They would probably also say this wasn't evolution. I don't take a position on whether 'sumfink' represents an evolutionary step, in the same way that a Galapagos Islands finch couldn't take a position as to whether its chick's slightly different beak represented one. We're in it and too close to it to have such an overview.

As late as 1841, 33% of all Englishmen and 44% of Englishwomen signed marriage certificates with their mark as they were unable to write

an interesting statistic, but I wonder how one could tell in retrospect if something is a 'mark' or a signature, given the typical illegibility of most signatures ?

[i]We're in it and too close to it to have such an overview.[/i]

I don't think so - it's easy to recognise many traits and Americanisms that have become part of everday English speak eg, "Cool" "nerd", or more recently "my bad" (which isn't going to go away, unfortunately!)

"Somethink" & "nothink" are just moronic though.

(Actually I'm not that bothered by "sumfin" or "sumfink" as that's usually down to regional accent. Like what I've got.)

it's easy to recognise many traits and Americanisms that have become part of everday English speak

just because they're nominally American does not make them intrinsically bad. Language is essentially the fashion of grunts - where the fashion originates hardly matters. Also many 'Americanisms' are in fact fossilised Elizabethan Englisisms...

I know I am going to annoy SFB with that but hey I don't really care.
As foreigner I have bee in situations where my poor english and very bad knowledge of the grammar have made me look daft, or even worth, made me buy stuff I didn't really wanted or get a service I wasn't looking for.
I am most annoyed by people (french or english lets face it) that butcher the language under the so wrong excuse to sound cool, or to be an anarchist (a bit like you SFB). Grammar and other language rules exists for a purpose, make the communication between being easier. The same way traffic rules exist to make the journey easier.

You all could ask people who have meet me, and I am sure they all would be able to tell you a very shameful story where I said something and they understood something else.

So I am sorry SFB and others but grammar is useful, and do serve a purpose.

Looking anecdotally at university students' literacy is no measure of trends.

I would say that looking at (supposedly, by definition) the better educated percentage of a society for a trend in literacy is a perfect measure of trends - it is the place where the standards should have fallen the least. Regardless of perceived worth, these people should be better able to string together a sentence in their mother tongue than anyone. Its hardly anecdotal, its from a few years of working with them in a couple of institutions reviewing and marking their work. It's reached the point where the majority of incoming chinese students are now more capable of writing a technical paper, with fewer mistakes in grammar, than the English students.

I'm all for the incorporation of new words from other areas, and to some extent I'm happy with local "mis-use" of the language, but in written form the rules exist to maintain a backbone on which evolution can run its course. But evolution does imply improvement, redusing ar sentenses and grammer t ummmm a ummmm fingy where whathizface cannt say what ee meens cz iz basic language skillz ave gone is not improvement, even if it does convey a basic "gist" of a sentence.

Anyway, I'm bored of this argument now. Have a nice day, all! I am fascinated by what "service" you accidentally bought, Juan! 🙂

[i]just because they're nominally American does not make them intrinsically bad.[/i]

I didn't say they were bad, I use them myself (Except "my bad"!)

[i]You all could ask people who have meet me, and I am sure they all would be able to tell you a very shameful story where I said something and they understood something else.[/i]

I know one... "I'd rather stay here looking at you": I'm sure you meant something else!! 😀

yes surely when was that BTW?

Southampton General. To the receptionist... 😆

ROFL yes remember now 😉 but that is what I meant she was very pretty 😉

I know I am going to annoy SFB with that but hey I don't really care

you'll have to try harder than that if you wish to annoy me

Grammar and other language rules exists for a purpose, make the communication between being easier.

however there is no defined authority to set these rules, which have arisen instead by general agreement [BTW I could have put 'instead arisen' with no change in meaning], and we are all capable of coping with a steady drift in usage, spelling and pronunciation which in due time leads to the development of new languages. I didn't say we didn't need grammar, only that it need not be immutable.

Steady drift is fine, single-generation jumps due to laziness and lack of knowledge are not. The problem is that English is an international language, in order for it to remain an international language, understandable by all of its speakers, the basic rules must remain the same, and it must be hed more rigidly than that of a small and little used language. If we dont do this we end up with different languages again, as I understand it the Chinese have a few variations on Chinese - while they may get the gist of something the other is saying as the language is similar, they need to formally learn the other language to be fluent with people in their own country?

Steady drift is fine, single-generation jumps due to laziness and lack of knowledge are not.

here's a thing - there's nothing you can do about it. Because it's fashion, everyone gets to choose how they use it, and a dynamic consensus emerges, which no one can control