This post has been edited by neonrain24: 30 December 2011 - 09:04 PM
Grammer Nazi or A-hole? Differences with video and disscuion
- 29 December 2011 - 08:33 PM
Just because you don't have to spell correctly or use correct grammar doesn't mean you shouldn't.
- 29 December 2011 - 09:11 PM
Admittedly not the best example. If he hadn't said before hand "The tree is over there" then I think that it would be hard to know if he meant "The tree is there" or "The tree is theirs"
- 30 December 2011 - 06:27 AM
what if we all start shortening this to ths
you know what it means right??? everyone does! get over it!!
well what if we all start shortening sentences like that to "wt f all of uz start 2 shorten ur words lik ths"
still kinda makes sense but guess what happens if you allow this — words blur together, you lose subtlety of meaning, vocabularies shrink and minds shrink and english becomes even harder to learn and harder to use ("what's the collective version of ths? is there some kind of rule to figure that one out?" no because it was killed off by this youtube idiot)
there's a reason people who love words get bitchy about TXT language and it's not just because they're pedantic snobs.
-- successful english major and failed linguistics major who can tell this guy is an uneducated blathering idiot simply by virtue of his not saying the word "sign" or one of those wasteful derivatives like "signifier" even once.
karo prove your worth and back me up
- 30 December 2011 - 08:21 AM
Or were thinking of the whole "snowball rolling down a hill" kind of thing?
This post has been edited by ChewySmokey: 30 December 2011 - 08:50 AM
- 30 December 2011 - 08:42 AM
It's clearly evident in two of the examples he uses: "Your a good person" vs "You're a good person". If the former is allowed, then how can I refer to "the good person that you own", without ambiguity? You say the determiner "a" in "Your a" makes the difference? I think many non-English speakers would be left aghast by the confusion this introduces.
"Ur" is essentially the same as allowing "your" to become the sole spelling of this homophone, and if we are to reduce our language to be ruthlessly (and superficially) efficient as this idiot indicates, it is a better way of spelling "your". Do you see what difficulties might follow if I say "ur sheep" or "ur love" or, to introduce another complex problem: "ur fail"?
- 30 December 2011 - 09:15 AM
It is said in the video that the purpose of language is to communicate, and I completely agree. The problem is that he based his thinking - as Suit pointed out - in the short term. What happens if we were to begin
Let's take that abortion of a statement that Suit vomited out:
""wt f all of uz start 2 shorten ur words lik ths""
I barely understood that. The beginning was a mystery to me until the ending of the... clause? I basically had to rely on context clues to even deduce what that meant. Now, that is clearly an extreme case, and since the person in the video's problem is actually the lack of communication, then this defeats itself, simply because it is unintelligible. The problem is statements like these are unavoidable. They happen even now, despite the fact that grammar and spelling is still a generally praised thing - and sometimes a required thing - on the Internet. If you removed that and all pressure not to conform to societies ever so difficult grammar restraints, then it will get worse - much worse. You are going to start mixing in local dialects, creating new, text based dialects, and eventually it will get to the point that you will have language within language - or so to speak. The Internet will become Africa. And nobody wants to be Africa.
Now, what if we were to just apply rules if things got to bad? Make a few restrictions... a few agreements... no problem! Not quite. All you would be doing then is forming a new language. Why form a new language when you could just stick with the old, working one?
Now that I have gotten that out of the way, I will explain my opinion. Yes, there is a time and a place for corrections. Obviously, I'm not going to correct an autistic every second, and I'm not going to bitch at a dyslexic; shit, I won't even give trouble to somebody who at least put a little effort into it. But I WILL correct people who want to be corrected (like me), people who seem to make deliberate mistakes, or people who abuse the privilege of shortening words. Yes, I called it a privilege, and while it may more over be a right, I don't particularly care for the semantics of it since when all is said and done, if that person does indeed abuse his "privilege," their punishment will be my judgment - no matter how disagreed-upon or immoral it may be.
In truth - selfish truth - I am glad people make these mistakes. It is like how gangsters advertise their colors, how dangerous people take effort to look dangerous, or how untrustworthy people come off as shifty: it gives me an opportunity to be prejudiced. Yeah, I fucking said that shit.
This post has been edited by Meowth: 31 December 2011 - 09:54 AM
- 30 December 2011 - 09:31 AM
To the argument, teens are doing to words what Doctors and scientists do to handwriting; Create in-decipherable dialects.
This post has been edited by skmojo: 30 December 2011 - 09:46 AM
- 30 December 2011 - 09:44 AM
This post has been edited by ChewySmokey: 30 December 2011 - 10:01 AM
- 30 December 2011 - 09:56 AM
- 30 December 2011 - 11:19 AM
Just a bit of trivia. It's fun to read England's history.
Anyone who's learnt a foreign language can know how 'blunt' or direct they can sound, but I think it's the other way around. I think the English language is the funny one.
- 30 December 2011 - 02:42 PM
Then again, probably most English words are of Latin, French or Greek origin.
- 30 December 2011 - 07:50 PM
- 30 December 2011 - 11:31 PM
It's not so much that it's a foreign word, but how it's used. On top of that, it's a noun, so it's not really important. Nouns can be anything.
- 31 December 2011 - 07:52 AM
Personally, I don't mind being corrected occasionally, but there are certain times when it just becomes pointless and annoying. Imagine if you posted a couple paragrafs explaining something, and all someone had to say about it was that you misspelled "paragraph"?
So I don't completely agree with him, but I think it's a valid and understandable opinion that I can definitely respect.
This post has been edited by Boringamus: 31 December 2011 - 08:22 AM
- 31 December 2011 - 08:20 AM
- 31 December 2011 - 08:44 AM