Lifestyle

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

585 | 586 | 587

 ... 944

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Flux

Flux

SUICIDEGIRL

Georgia, USA

MAY 05, 2004 12:05 PM

n8tvegrl said:

rickets said:
From Merriam-Webster.com
Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."



Personally I feel that ignorance and slang should not have an such a big effect on our language. In some instances it can be acceptable and is warranted, however this is not one of them. Should we use this word because people can't comprehend that we actually HAVE a word with the correct meaning? Is it acceptable to make such changes because of lazy or inept minds?

I find it offensive that Merriam-Webster find it necessary to add this to their listing. I am not a moron and don't feel that generally accepted speech should be altered to accomodate those that cannot grasp basics of the English language.



Sorry, babe, but that's the way linguistics works. Without language's evolution and the adoption of words, you wouldn't be able to use, for example, "moron" in your above post, as it began as a purely clinical term.

However, I think "irregardless" is absurd because its prefix should negate its meaning.

rottenart

rottenart

Norman, OK
February 2004

MAY 05, 2004 12:05 PM

in my langauge class we learned all about how "rules" of grammar are arbitrary and have no bearing on how people actually communicate. while i will agree that our president saying "irregardless" fifteen million times makes him look like an assclown, speech and language is more fluid than any standard ever could be.

Rickets

rickets

Seattle, WA
March 2003

MAY 05, 2004 12:11 PM

n8tvegrl said:

rickets said:
From Merriam-Webster.com
Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."



Personally I feel that ignorance and slang should not have an such a big effect on our language. In some instances it can be acceptable and is warranted, however this is not one of them. Should we use this word because people can't comprehend that we actually HAVE a word with the correct meaning? Is it acceptable to make such changes because of lazy or inept minds?



Now we have two words with the correct meaning. Like it or not, the word exists. New words come. Some old ones go. Some become synonyms rich in meaning of their own. Who knows what the destiny of "irregardless" is?

Ignorance and slang will change language as long as there is language. Languages are living things that grow change and evolve. Just like biological evolution it's slow change over time. I would imagine that most of these changes aren't deliberate ones made by a linguistic elite. Most of them were probably due to changes and bastardizations of previously existing words. Like it or not, that's probably how we got here and it's likely where we're going.

Oh, and by "biological evolution" I meant the way that God created everything in seven days.

And one last point: unless you are Prince, or the artist formerly known as Prince, don't use "u" instead of "you." That last comment was not in answer to you, N8tvegrl. Just a general thing.

[Edited on May 05, 2004 by rickets]

Rickets

rickets

Seattle, WA
March 2003

MAY 05, 2004 12:15 PM

Crap. I spent so much time typing my statement that Flux beat me to the punch.

n8tvegrl

n8tvegrl

Bend, OR
February 2004

MAY 05, 2004 12:24 PM

I understand the concept but it irritates me to no end that the rules change because some people don't "get" it.



adjunct

adjunct

Philadelphia, PA
July 2002

MAY 05, 2004 01:06 PM

You know, if you go through and replace every instance of 'ignorant' with 'non-standard colloquial usage' in this thread, I think the poor spellers would feel like the grammarians were a little less chavaunist.

neverender

neverender

Pleasanton, CA
January 2003

MAY 05, 2004 01:52 PM

einstein could not spell

SnakePlissken

SnakePlissken

Corvallis, OR
December 2002

MAY 05, 2004 02:17 PM

Find out for sure...

*ahem* errors

[Edited on May 05, 2004 by psychoholicagogo]

Corvus

Corvus

Portland, OR
April 2004

MAY 05, 2004 02:59 PM

They say children are the greatest teachers.

I have yet to meet a 5 year old that can spell.

Wraith7000

wraith7000

Nashville, TN
February 2003

MAY 05, 2004 03:18 PM

asinine said:
einstein could not spell


True, one reason he could not spell well was because he was dyslexic. That is why I think its important to remember that in situations, like newsboards and IM, when there isn't always a spell check on all your apps, that just because someone spells something wrong initially that it may be something like dyslexia or another learning disability, and not necessarily that he/she is a doof.


...how many have gone back and re-edited their entry in this topic to make sure your spelling and grammer was correct? wink

RatBugDave

RatBugDave

Toledo, OH
July 2003

MAY 05, 2004 03:55 PM

deckwreck said:

MrRatbug said:

Stirfry said:
i agree, spelling/grammar nazis suck.







apostrophe



No apostrophe was necessary in the above statement. Though it is possible that in my mentally exhausted final exam state I missed the point of that remark, I suppose. If so, enlighten me.




inside joke with me and stirfry...

irenzero

irenzero

Minneapolis, MN
January 2004

MAY 05, 2004 04:57 PM

wingedyouth said:
Everyone needs to just shut up and get a damn Macintosh... with global spell check.



and how do I get that, cause I need it.... and yes I have a Mac.

wings

wings

I'm lost
November 2002

MAY 05, 2004 06:55 PM

irenzero said:

wingedyouth said:
Everyone needs to just shut up and get a damn Macintosh... with global spell check.



and how do I get that, cause I need it.... and yes I have a Mac.



do you have OS X? in Safari, go to Edit > Spelling > Check Spelling As You Type

smile

_Sarah_

_Sarah_

Kalamazoo, MI
January 2003

MAY 05, 2004 09:50 PM

Orgasm_Donor said:
I say they should all be subjected to children's programming until they renounce their evil ways.

I'm a writer but, GODDAMNIT PEOPLE, this is the infomation age. We have Microsoft Word to spell for us - grow up and get in the now.


Too bad spellcheck programs aren't reliable. It won't catch its/it's, their/there/they're, two/to/too, etc. wink

Kestrel

Kestrel

Austin, TX
July 2003

MAY 05, 2004 10:14 PM

My biggest annoyance (beside outright ridiculousness when it comes to spelling and grammar) is the random capitalization people like to include. Going over people's research papers in English, I'm really just befuddled... why do they Think this Is Okay? frown

_Sarah_

_Sarah_

Kalamazoo, MI
January 2003

MAY 05, 2004 10:18 PM

Kestrel said:
My biggest annoyance (beside outright ridiculousness when it comes to spelling and grammar) is the random capitalization people like to include. Going over people's research papers in English, I'm really just befuddled... why do they Think this Is Okay? frown


It's from internet usage, like when someone says something is Very Cool.

Or maybe they were raised in a German household. Germans capitalize nouns (in their own language, of course).

I'd be more inclined to blame the internet. I had a paper handed to me that included something like, "Audrey lol'd at Jason." Never has my pen slashed so quickly...

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next