Grammar Discussions

[JessicaTam]

A quick grammar/spelling lesson:

lose - to misplace "I don't want to lose my boarding pass"
loose - not tight "My seat belt is loose"

sort - to place in order "I sort my past flights by carrier"
sought - past tense of seek "Seat 1A was often sought after"

 

[medhead]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

A quick grammar/spelling lesson:

lose - to misplace "I don't want to lose my boarding pass"
loose - not tight "My seat belt is loose"

sort - to place in order "I sort my past flights by carrier"
sought - past tense of seek "Seat 1A was often sought after"

Which post did I get wrong?

 

[JessicaTam]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Which post did I get wrong?

None that I recall. Certainly not aimed at anyone in particular.

Just annoyed I have to reread posts to get the intended meaning instead of the written meaning.

 

[erkpod]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

A quick grammar/spelling lesson:

lose - to misplace "I don't want to lose my boarding pass"
loose - not tight "My seat belt is loose"

sort - to place in order "I sort my past flights by carrier"
sought - past tense of seek "Seat 1A was often sought after"

Lose/loose & loser/looser is one of my pet peeves when it comes to grammar.

 

[whatmeworry]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

English grammar is quite hard.

 

[Pushka]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

"Should of" instead of "should have" is one of mine.

 

[robd]

The totally off-topic thread

Ok resume up to date and just sent out an application. Should of started doing this a while ago.

Should of or should have? I'm confused on that one.

 

[serfty]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Should of or should have? I'm confused on that one.

The latter - however, to make it easy I use "should've".

 

[Pushka]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Knocking my head against a brick wall I see.

 

[robd]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

The latter however, to make it easy i use "should've".

I've never heard of "should of" before. Now it makes sense.

 

[anat0l]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

The latter - however, to make it easy I use "should've".

"Should have" is indeed correct; "should of", I believe, evolved as an unwitting contraction of the correct pair of words, which is then incorrectly transcribed.

"Should've", according to my sources, is actually a contraction that at worst does not properly exist or at best is not acceptable in semi-formal or more formal usage. "Should have" is spelled out but in speech is often corrupted and contracted. A similar error, of which I find myself often doing and needing to eradicate, is "would have" (not "would've").

Been doing a favour for a friend in reviewing her application letters and selection criteria statements. She has a bit of an issue using commas (usually not enough); I think practice has me taking this for granted as I don't know where to start to cogently explain where one should use commmas.

 

[Hvr]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

A quick grammar/spelling lesson:

lose - to misplace "I don't want to lose my boarding pass"
loose - not tight "My seat belt is loose"

sort - to place in order "I sort my past flights by carrier"
sought - past tense of seek "Seat 1A was often sought after"

You're right, your list lists some of the most egregious errors but there are others that annoy the heck out those of us who appreciate correct grammar.

 

[drron]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

All of this talk of grammar has me reminiscing.I still remember John Chance of the ABC announcing that a Newcastle woman was bitten on the funnel by a finger web spider.
Though the lady on ABC radio today made a different mistake naming the President of the USA Osama bin Laden.She then went quiet.

Then again I think we would all enjoy life a little more if we had more folks such as the Reverend William Archibald Spooner who as a Dean at Oxford toasted Queen Victoria with-Three cheers for our queer old dean.

More power to those who can mangle a language I say!

 

[whatmeworry]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I remember when I was a kid being told off by a teacher for starting a sentence with "And". Apparently it's acceptable now. Also when you first send a letter to someone, you should end it "yours faithfully" and not "yours sincerely". Something about formalities.

 

[robd]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I remember when I was a kid being told off by a teacher for starting a sentence with "And". Apparently it's acceptable now. Also when you first send a letter to someone, you should end it "yours faithfully" and not "yours sincerely". Something about formalities.

I was taught - "yours sincerely" when you have addressed your salutation by name; ie. "Dear John" and "yours faithfully" when addressed "Dear Sir/Madam".

 

[rogerkambah]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Should of or should have? I'm confused on that one.

I think the easy way is to forget 'should of' and just use 'should have', in its place. (Note no apostrophe in 'its').

(Edit) Sorry for reiterating, that which has already been iterated, but I didn't read to the end of the thread before my original iteration.

 

[robd]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I think the easy way is to forget 'should of' and just use 'should have', in its place. (Note no apostrophe in 'its').

"Should've" does sound like should of

 

[anat0l]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I remember when I was a kid being told off by a teacher for starting a sentence with "And". Apparently it's acceptable now.

In formal writing, it still really isn't acceptable. Even starting sentences with "Also" should be avoided (although not necessarily as bad as starting with "And").

Starting a sentence with "And" is likely more common in speech or in a passage which is intended to imitate speech (or written in first or second person); the result of essentially substituting a comma (or semi-colon) for a period is then what results in the unwitting error, which in speech results in a firmer emphasis of the second statement / clause. For example:

"These documents must be at the client's office tomorrow by 8 am, sharp. And I really mean it this time!"

Of course, in the example, one could probably drop the 'And' and it will still makes sense, although there is a small sacrifice in carried meaning.

Also when you first send a letter to someone, you should end it "yours faithfully" and not "yours sincerely". Something about formalities.

I was taught - "yours sincerely" when you have addressed your salutation by name; ie. "Dear John" and "yours faithfully" when addressed "Dear Sir/Madam".

I use "Yours sincerely" sometimes but have avoided "Yours faithfully" for quite some time as it seems to (whether incorrectly or not) carry a somewhat religious connotation, or doesn't seem to convey a correct emotion for the letter which was written. More common usage is now "Best Regards" or "Kind Regards", but I tend to use "Yours sincerely" for those times when a written / signed letter is required.

 

[JessicaTam]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

"Should of" instead of "should have" is one of mine.

I was trying to think of the other one that annoyed me. And you have nailed it. Thanks.

 

[rogerkambah]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

"Should've" does sound like should of

Agreed. That is another reason I suggested use only of, 'should have', without its contraction.