AliThinks

Word Nerd, Part 2

Thanks for all the comments on my last post, Word Nerd. I thought it might be fun* if we all posted our grammar and spelling pet peeves.

Margaret (who kindly corrected my grammar in her comment to my Word Nerd post) wishes people would differentiate between less and fewer. I'm on board with that. If you can count whatever thing you're referring to, you need to use fewer. If it's something you can't count, use less.

And because I'm a teacher at heart, I'll give an example: If we had fewer cats, I'd have less litter to scoop. (I know, ew. Bear with me.)

Karan wrote "My daughter's resume explained that she had experience stalking shelves. I told her that stalking was against the law.

This makes me laugh, because I recently read that someone was totally against internet stocking.

Joolie made a couple of comments: Boy, you really tow the line! (ducks), and my favorite, poring over vs. pouring over. I'm sure you know you should toe the line, especially if you're poring over party documents.

If you have any grammar or spelling peeves, other than the ubiquitous your/you're, its/it's, their/there/they're, or any apostrophe catastrophes, please leave a comment.

*Okay, so maybe it will only be fun for me. I accept that.

Word Nerd

The other day I posted this as my status message on Facebook:

Your PSA for today: Hearty ≠ hardy. A meal is hearty. A plant is hardy.

You can bet that I had a motive for posting that. Someone somewhere on the internet WAS WRONG! posted about hearty plants.

While I was reading a novel yesterday, I came across the phrase "...to staunch the flow of blood." Granted, this was a galley, or advance reader's copy, which I'd gotten at work. Galleys are generally uncorrected proofs. But still, it made me want to do another PSA (sorry, public service announcement) on my Facebook status saying that staunch ≠ stanch.

Yeah. I'm that person. I'm the one who cringes when you say you're chomping at the bit. 

And yet, as I get older, I'm more reluctant to correct people's grammar, spelling, or vocabulary online*. Mostly, I don't want to be an asshole. 

These types of errors do raise my blood pressure a bit, I'll admit. This afternoon I read a blog comment in which the poster stated that the post he was commenting on was "ludacris." I had to wipe my keyboard before my tears shorted it out. 

OK, so I'm exaggerating, but just a little. Words have meaning, and they have spelling. And that's why hearty does not equal hardy, and champing does not equal chomping, and Ludacris is a rap singer who might be ludicrous to you and me. (Yes, you and me, not you and I.)

*If someone wants me to proofread their his or her (thanks, Margaret!) writing, I will point out errors without a second thought.

Tickled

Mmm, maybe "tickled" isn't the right way to express it. But "hooting with laughter" just seems kind of mean.

During work today, I ran to the grocery store (almost) next door, and I stopped short when I saw this sign on a grocery cart that stood in place of an endcap:

SPECIAL!
Easter Candy
priced as mark

Who's Mark, and how much does he cost?

While I Ruminate About My Next Post

...let me share a link to the Apostrophe Catastrophes blog. Go on. Click it.

Pete and Repeat

I noticed that I've been doubling up on adjectives in my last three posts.

tasty, tasty

happy, happy,

very, very

Oy.

A Public Service Announcement

If you have been reading this blog for a while, you know I used to teach English. Teaching in the classroom really isn't my thing, but in some ways, once a teacher, always a teacher. I can't help it.

I've seen and heard many instances of people "overcorrecting" their English, and just yesterday I saw two different people do this, one of whom should have known better. Instead of pointing fingers and getting really snarky, I'll just put the proper usage out there for people to take...or leave.

So. When you were a kid (this is a general "you," and I probably don't mean YOU), and you said "Hey Mom, me and Joe are going for a bike ride," your mom yelled "Joe and I! Joe and I!" Am I right? And now, you just automatically use "...and I," right?

(Bear with me, fellow grammar mavens.)

The thing is, "and I" is only correct if you are the subject of the sentence. If you are the object, it would be "and me." Let me give you some examples.

SUBJECT: Joe and I are going to ride our bikes. Jan, Joe, and I like to ride our bikes.

OBJECT: Mom gave Joe and me permission to ride our bikes. Jan brought cookies for Joe and me.

So how do you know the difference? Well, if wrapping your brain around the concept of subject and object is too hard, then just remove the other person from the phrase. I am going to ride my bike. Mom gave I permission to ride my bike.

Huh? No. Mom gave me permission.

Another tip: It's never, ever between you and I. Never ever never ever never never ever never, to quote SpongeBob Squarepants.

The same goes for other pronouns like she, he, we, and they. Those are subjects. The object pronouns are her, him, us, and them.

This has been a public service announcement. Any questions?

Somewhere Out There, I Have A Kindred Spirit.

Seen in the women's bathroom of a rest area on I-71 near Delaware, Ohio.

Instant Messaging

Amber: between you and me...
Ali: oui?
Amber: [deep dark secret]
Amber: hehe
Ali: (thank you for not saying "between you and I" -- the English teacher in me hates that).
Ali: Hehe.  [deep dark secret]   
Amber: it bugs me too... I suck at spelling but i get all geeky when it comes to grammer
Ali: That's grammar, dear.   
Amber: LOL
Amber: i tried that first and didn't like the way it looked
Ali: I feel like blogging that little exchange, anonymously of course.
Amber: feel free
Ali: Cool.
Amber: those who know me would love it
Amber: hell you can put my name to it if you like
Ali: I wouldn't use your name unless you agreed.
Amber: everyone knows i cant spell for shit
Ali: LOL

Grammar Gripe, Part 2

Earlier today I read a blog post.  "Yeah, so what?," you're saying.  Well, it contained the error I complained about the other day: it's as a possessive.  The blogger in question is quite high up in the blogging world, but unlike his wife he allows comments to his posts.  A commenter pointed out his grammatical error and got slammed as a result. 

This bothers me. 

Not only did other commenters criticize the critic, the blogger himself threatened to ban the commenter's IP if s/he responded to the blogger's explanation that it was late after a stressful day and who had time for editing? 

I don't agree. 

There are standards which must be adhered to with our written language.  I'll cringe if you tell me there's three blogs you read regularly.  If you write it, I'll call you on it, and tell you you're wrong. 

A living language must evolve, but that doesn't mean we should be sloppy about it. 

Grammar Gripe

Okay people, spot the error(s): 

Your cover letter tells an employer a lot about you, good or bad. Think of it as a sales pitch. It’s primary purpose is to show why your skills and background are a perfect match for the position for which you're applying. It is not the place to present all of your experience, that should already be showcased in your resume.

Hmmm...

In my stickler-for-grammar tendencies, maybe I overlooked a play on words in that CNN headline I mentioned in my last post. 

"'Evil' does good..."

Ha.  Ha. 

Lord, Deliver Me

So I went to CNN dot com to see how them Stillers were doin', and this headline on the home page caught me wee eye. 

Oh. My. God. 

Attention CNN!  You need a new copy editor, preferably someone with a grasp of  grammar. 

Hire me.   Just leave a comment; I'll be in touch.