English - our language under attack

A

andya700

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,071
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
I logged into my email a few minutes ago on MSM, and noticed an article about Richard E Grant, the actor, who had received a head injury after being whacked across the head with a metal bar.
The article printed this:

"He failed to reveal the cause of the accident, leaving fans puzzled and some worried he may of been attacked."

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...-smashed-into-his-skull/ar-BBJwo6O?li=BBoPWjQ

A couple of years ago, my wife and I attended a course where unemployed people were supposed to be instructed in the "dark arts" of how to compose letters of introduction and the like, to prospective employers, and this sort of grammatical error was very evident. The team leaders responsible for running the course did not seem to realise that there was anything wrong.
 
Interestingly the Mirror article that’s the basis for the msn article has that sentence corrected (though it’s far from grammatically brilliant)
 
With most newspaper articles written by teenagers straight out a media studies college course, it’s hardly surprising.
Our local paper is pretty much unreadable most days.
 
andy700 said:
A couple of years ago, my wife and I attended a course where unemployed people were supposed to be instructed in the "dark arts" of how to compose letters of introduction and the like, to prospective employers, and this sort of grammatical error was very evident. The team leaders responsible for running the course did not seem to realise that there was anything wrong.
Click to expand...
Was the use of a comma followed by and, mentioned in the course too? ;)
 
nilagin said:
Was the use of a comma followed by and, mentioned in the course too? ;)
Click to expand...

You have just used a comma after "and" when I do not think it was necessary.
A comma can be used before "and" when it divides two different/independent clauses, or to put it in a much simpler way, when it allows the speaker to draw breath without using a full stop.
 
So one word in one article means our language is under attack? Languages evolve, the use of words change. You could argue that English has actually go stronger, because we now tend to use less Latin words. The use of words "from the street" is signs of a language evolving, not one that is stagnant.
 
munch said:
So one word in one article means our language is under attack? Languages evolve, the use of words change. You could argue that English has actually go stronger, because we now tend to use less Latin words. The use of words "from the street" is signs of a language evolving, not one that is stagnant.
Click to expand...
But that isn't the case here.
"Of" does not mean "Have" just because it sounds a bit similar doesn't mean they are interchangeable.
 
munch said:
So one word in one article means our language is under attack? Languages evolve, the use of words change. You could argue that English has actually go stronger, because we now tend to use less Latin words. The use of words "from the street" is signs of a language evolving, not one that is stagnant.
Click to expand...


The word in question "of" when used in the wrong context - "would of", "could of", instead of "would have" and "could have", has nothing to do with evolution of the language, it is simply bad grammar. When you say "words from the street", I tend to associate that with badly educated people, who, because of their surroundings, peer groups, use a kind of "patois" or "gangsta speak" - "is you goin' out?", "you is not goin' out, I is tellin' you that".
 
Graham W said:
But that isn't the case here.
"Of" does not mean "Have" just because it sounds a bit similar doesn't mean they are interchangeable.
Click to expand...

True but that doesn't mean the whole of the English language is under threat. Errors happen.
 
I can't spell for toffee.. i can't write proper either.. certainly can't do joined up writing and everythign is in capitols and unreadable after the first line.. no matter how many times in 60 year i have been told which way round the i and the e goes or which there to use it doesnt sink in...... yet i ahve had programming articles and tutorials published in computer magazines (what ever happened to proof readers :) ) and in 25 yrs of bbs , irc, forums, social media and all manner of platforms where i have tried to help people with programming and then photogrpahy.. not one single person has refused my help because it isnt spelt right.

i just think the spelling police read too much into the odd spelling mistake... its not the end of the world :)

my comments in reply to comments re users on facebook and the like.. not people getting paid to write :)
 
andy700 said:
The word in question "of" when used in the wrong context - "would of", "could of", instead of "would have" and "could have", has nothing to do with evolution of the language, it is simply bad grammar. When you say "words from the street", I tend to associate that with badly educated people, who, because of their surroundings, peer groups, use a kind of "patois" or "gangsta speak" - "is you goin' out?", "you is not goin' out, I is tellin' you that".
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether you feel it is bad grammar, it is how languages evolve. To me it is no different from regional dialects some words become mainstream others don't. If I talked about a waddledickie I doubt most of you would know what I was on about, but I suspect if I said something was "on the huh" more of you would have an idea. Both are examples of Suffolk dialect.


As in "The picture of the waddledickie was on the huh"



waddledickie, is actually a donkey. on the huh means uneven or not level.

I actually think most people currently living in Suffolk would not know what a waddledickie is (My granddad always referred to donkeys in that way) . Which goes to prove the point about languages evolving.
 
KIPAX said:
I can't spell for toffee.. i can't write proper either.. certainly can't do joined up writing and everythign is in capitols and unreadable after the first line.. no matter how many times in 60 year i have been told which way round the i and the e goes or which there to use it doesnt sink in...... yet i ahve had programming articles and tutorials published in computer magazines (what ever happened to proof readers :) ) and in 25 yrs of bbs , irc, forums, social media and all manner of platforms where i have tried to help people with programming and then photogrpahy.. not one single person has refused my help because it isnt spelt right.

i just think the spelling police read too much into the odd spelling mistake... its not the end of the world :)

my comments in reply to comments re users on facebook and the like.. not people getting paid to write :)
Click to expand...
But the whole point is that it's not a spelling mistake, it's using the wrong word.

Of / Have...different words, different spellings, different sounds and different meanings.


(Now you know what gets me angry! :) )
 
There also seems to be a shortage of maternity wards as I see so many 4 birth caravans for sale. :rolleyes:
 
I rail againft the diftracted deftruction of the Englifh language itf all going to the jakef.
 
Marc said:
The use of 'of' instead of 'have' has been around for as long as I can remember. I would image that people who write 'of' do so as that's generally the way they've heard it said as most tend to use the contractions "would've" and "should've" when they speak.
Click to expand...


As you are no doubt aware, "would've" is a contraction of would have and not "would of". Perhaps, in the "old" days our qualifications - "O" Levels and CSE's, particularly in English and Maths were worth a bit more than their modern day equivalents? We used to write essays of two hundred to four hundred words, about all kinds of subjects, and thinking about it, we had to do the same in History and Geography. We had to provide answers in exams, not select from multiple choices.
 
I’ve no idea how old you are @andy700 but I can see retirement in the med future and my exams were largely multiple choice. My guess is that the only people who’s education reflects your rose tinted view are very old indeed.

And whilst this example is one of the ‘errors’ that I find annoying, the reality is that language does evolve and I’m afraid we’ll likely lose this one. The same way we lost affect to impact because people couldn’t differentiate between affect and effect.
 
Phil V said:
I’ve no idea how old you are @andy700 but I can see retirement in the med future and my exams were largely multiple choice. My guess is that the only people who’s education reflects your rose tinted view are very old indeed.
.
Click to expand...
I left school in 79, very few of my school exams were multi guess. In fact I can only remember 1 or 2 at most. I took CSE and O level. Same goes for the Mechanical Engineering OTC and HTC from my apprenticeship
 
I left in school in 75 and only one of my O levels was a multiple choice paper

Language does evolve, but really do wish people would stop saying train station, in this country it is a railway station
 
I was educated in another country where the medium of instruction was English, and we went to great lengths to make sure our grammar was as perfect as possible.

Having moved to the UK many moons ago, I've been amazed to see how many native English speakers have poor grammar and more importantly, have no inclination to change when made aware of their mistakes.
 
andy700 said:
The word in question "of" when used in the wrong context - "would of", "could of", instead of "would have" and "could have", has nothing to do with evolution of the language, it is simply bad grammar. When you say "words from the street", I tend to associate that with badly educated people, who, because of their surroundings, peer groups, use a kind of "patois" or "gangsta speak" - "is you goin' out?", "you is not goin' out, I is tellin' you that".
Click to expand...

Very true Andy, although I was shocked to find out recently that 'Youse' is an actual word, recognised by the Oxford dictionary to mean 'more than one person'.

Youse learn something new everyday.
 
nuttyboy78 said:
I was educated in another country where the medium of instruction was English, and we went to great lengths to make sure our grammar was as perfect as possible.

Having moved to the UK many moons ago, I've been amazed to see how many native English speakers have poor grammar and more importantly, have no inclination to change when made aware of their mistakes.
Click to expand...

A bit off topic, I was taught English at a time when teaching grammar was out of fashion. My lack of foundation in basic grammar has been a big hindrance to learning any other foreign language.
 
newbie1 said:
A bit off topic, I was taught English at a time when teaching grammar was out of fashion. My lack of foundation in basic grammar has been a big hindrance to learning any other foreign language.
Click to expand...

How’s that then? Surely grammar is different in foreign languages.
 
nilagin said:
I left school in 79, very few of my school exams were multi guess. In fact I can only remember 1 or 2 at most. I took CSE and O level. Same goes for the Mechanical Engineering OTC and HTC from my apprenticeship
Click to expand...
I left in 80 and off the top of my head
The sciences and humanities subjects had multiple choice sections.

We were ‘modern’ and had some 16+ subjects (the precursor to GCSE) and I took commerce (would now be economics) and Social Studies (politics) for my humanities subjects, because they seemed more relevant than geography and history which back then was all about naming rivers and kings and queens.

I also did English language and eng lit, the maths was mostly about trigonometry which unless you’re a scientist or programmer serves no useful purpose after school.

As per the shooting thread, I hated secondary school and couldn’t wait to get out and start an apprenticeship.
 
On this subject, one of the most common grammatical mistakes has been around for so long that it has become the most common form of usage. I know it shouldn't irk me, as it's not that important, but using "Try and" instead of "Try to" as in "I'm going to try and do it." If you are going to do it then the question of attempting it doesn't arise. I know, I know :-)
 
Someone misspells something in an online article and your language is under attack?

This is (a brief summary of) what a language under attack looks like

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/guardian-welsh-language-row-schools-13213847

http://www.cambrian-news.co.uk/arti...ignage in shop&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2017

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=b...AUICigB&biw=1920&bih=974#imgrc=X8aQRWV0efjSDM:

and most recently of course this knuckle dragger

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWOkgjBXkAA0lAL.jpg
 
Earley Man said:
On this subject, one of the most common grammatical mistakes has been around for so long that it has become the most common form of usage. I know it shouldn't irk me, as it's not that important, but using "Try and" instead of "Try to" as in "I'm going to try and do it." If you are going to do it then the question of attempting it doesn't arise. I know, I know :)
Click to expand...

upload_2018-2-25_12-37-27.png
 
newbie1 said:
A bit off topic, I was taught English at a time when teaching grammar was out of fashion. My lack of foundation in basic grammar has been a big hindrance to learning any other foreign language.
Click to expand...

Ricardodaforce said:
How’s that then? Surely grammar is different in foreign languages.
Click to expand...

I agree. I speak four languages and English grammar has no bearing on the other three.
 
nuttyboy78 said:
I agree. I speak four languages and English grammar has no bearing on the other three.
Click to expand...

When I was at school we had no education in grammar. This means I had no understanding of grammatical concepts. Foreign language classes assume that you know these basics which made it harder the learn.
 
Marc said:
The use of 'of' instead of 'have' has been around for as long as I can remember. I would image that people who write 'of' do so as that's generally the way they've heard it said as most tend to use the contractions "would've" and "should've" when they speak.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I was going to say.

"'ve" sounds a lot like "of". People just in a (bad) habit of writing like it sounds irrespective of the different usage.
 
Phil V said:
I’ve no idea how old you are @andy700 but I can see retirement in the med future and my exams were largely multiple choice. My guess is that the only people who’s education reflects your rose tinted view are very old indeed.

And whilst this example is one of the ‘errors’ that I find annoying, the reality is that language does evolve and I’m afraid we’ll likely lose this one. The same way we lost affect to impact because people couldn’t differentiate between affect and effect.
Click to expand...

We lost affect?
I must have missed that particular memo. :-)
 
viv1969 said:
We lost affect?
I must have missed that particular memo. :)
Click to expand...
How often do you hear it said / see it written.

It’s been replaced in common usage by impact, which has subsequently had its dictionary meaning amended to suit.
 
I use affect rather than impact - unless I'm talking about something hitting something else.

Like it or loathe it, language evolves; just look at Samuel Johnson's dictionary (and earlier ones) to see just how much spellings and meanings have changed.
 
I suspect every older generation moaned/moans about the language of the newest generation

I also suspect that Chaucer's generation moaned a lot too, as did Shakespeare's, and both of their writings I find hard to read with their 'incorrect' language and even letters - f for s for example

So yes, it can be annoying to hear 'sloppy' language bastardising our beautiful English - said every generation ever

Dave
 
Shakspear used several variations of spelling for his own name!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top