English Language Pet Peeves

[Jones, Nikka]

It annoys me to no end when I read posts using the words lead and follow to refer to leaders and followers.
I know it is part of the general laissez-faire trend in web forums of trying to save keystrokes, but it is really bad grammar, it looks wrong in the text and makes it more difficult for us whose mother tongue is not english to learn properly. Confusing!
I mean two more keystrokes... how lazy can people get!

[quixotedlm]

It annoys me to no end when I read posts using the words lead and follow to refer to leaders and followers.
I know it is part of the general laissez-faire trend in web forums of trying to save keystrokes, but it is really bad grammar, it looks wrong in the text and makes it more difficult for us whose mother tongue is not english to learn properly. Confusing!
I mean two more keystrokes... how lazy can people get!

It's English. Upper case E ;)

[Ron Obvious]

It annoys me to no end when I read posts using the words lead and follow to refer to leaders and followers.
I know it is part of the general laissez-faire trend in web forums of trying to save keystrokes, but it is really bad grammar, it looks wrong in the text and makes it more difficult for us whose mother tongue is not english to learn properly. Confusing!
I mean two more keystrokes... how lazy can people get!

Thanks for pointing that out, I thought it was kind of correct since I've seen lead/follow so often. But what about "hi" for high and "nite" for night. Or people confusing then/than or its/it's. It happens a lot, so the answer is that people can get very very lazy.

[peachexploration]

It annoys me to no end when I read posts using the words lead and follow to refer to leaders and followers.
I know it is part of the general laissez-faire trend in web forums of trying to save keystrokes, but it is really bad grammar, it looks wrong in the text and makes it more difficult for us whose mother tongue is not english to learn properly. Confusing!
I mean two more keystrokes... how lazy can people get!

It's English. Upper case E ;)

:lol: :lol:

[noobster]

It annoys me to no end when I read posts using the words lead and follow to refer to leaders and followers.
I know it is part of the general laissez-faire trend in web forums of trying to save keystrokes, but it is really bad grammar, it looks wrong in the text and makes it more difficult for us whose mother tongue is not english to learn properly. Confusing!
I mean two more keystrokes... how lazy can people get!

Thanks for pointing that out, I thought it was kind of correct since I've seen lead/follow so often.

It's not incorrect. It just has a slightly different connotation.

'Lead' and 'follow' do refer to the action itself, but if someone has a nice lead, by extension he can be referred to as 'a good lead.' It's a frequently used literary device known as metonymy.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy

I am sorry if it is confusing to non-native speakers - English is a complex and confusing language - but it is not poor grammar and it does not look wrong (at least not to my eyes, and I am a native speaker as well as a bit of a grammar nazi).

[Ron Obvious]

It's not incorrect. It just has a slightly different connotation.

'Lead' and 'follow' do refer to the action itself, but if someone has a nice lead, by extension he can be referred to as 'a good lead.' It's a frequently used literary device known as metonymy.

Ok, but what about those other examples: lite for light, lo for low etc... are they also metonomies?


... as well as a bit of a grammar nazi).

Well, I never would have guessed that (takes one to know one).

[AndrewS]

It's not incorrect. It just has a slightly different connotation.

'Lead' and 'follow' do refer to the action itself, but if someone has a nice lead, by extension he can be referred to as 'a good lead.' It's a frequently used literary device known as metonymy.

Ok, but what about those other examples: lite for light, lo for low etc... are they also metonomies?


... as well as a bit of a grammar nazi).

Well, I never would have guessed that (takes one to know one).

I thought "lite" and "hi" were just American spelling variations?
Agree with noobster about lead and follow though. Doesn't sound at all wrong to me.

I had to learn English grammar when I learnt German. I can still remember the silence in the class followed by random guessing when our teacher said "name some irregular English verbs". You'd think people would know their own language at 16 :shock:

[quixotedlm]

I'm not a native English speaker. I've been learning English all my life though...

to me, the use of 'lead' and 'follow' is intuitively correct grammar. I didn't know the idea of metonymy before, but it never occured to me that the grammar was bad there. If I'd had to bet money on it, I'd have bet that it was grammatically correct.

[desire]

I don't feel of it being wrong as well. The rest of the sentence just makes clear what is meant and when I feel it doesn't then I would use leader/follower.
On the other hand, the words I notice that are misused mostly are : there, they're, their.

[tj]

On the other hand, the words I notice that are misused mostly are : there, they're, their.

As well as too, two, and to. Or affect and effect.

[noobster]

It's not incorrect. It just has a slightly different connotation.

'Lead' and 'follow' do refer to the action itself, but if someone has a nice lead, by extension he can be referred to as 'a good lead.' It's a frequently used literary device known as metonymy.

Ok, but what about those other examples: lite for light, lo for low etc... are they also metonomies?
No, of course not. Those are intentional misspellings.
Metonymy doesn't involve misspellings. It just involves the use of a representative symbol to stand for the whole. Read the Wiki link.


... as well as a bit of a grammar nazi).
Well, I never would have guessed that (takes one to know one).
I avoid correcting people on public fora because I find it petty; but I'm quite tuned into usage errors. I'm more clever than I look, sugar. :P Keep an eye on my posts. ;)

[Ron Obvious]

... Read the Wiki link.

I did, several times. Should read the article too at which the link points ? ;)


[quote="noobster"]

I'm more clever than I look, sugar. :P Keep an eye on my posts. ;)

Ok, but this is an internet forum, I don't know how you look...

[pr]

your instead of you're is also pretty common...

[noobster]

... Read the Wiki link.

I did, several times. Should read the article too at which the link points ? ...
Ok, but this is an internet forum, I don't know how you look...
Are you a bot?

[DeeplyDippy]

... Read the Wiki link.

I did, several times. Should read the article too at which the link points ? ...
Ok, but this is an internet forum, I don't know how you look...
Are you a bot?

Yarrrr! 'tis Ron, the thread killing 'bot

[TheBear_CanDanceToo]

Bat if won is mirly beeing troo two they're locul dialekt, then iz it reelly rong? I mean - who decides? Sum stuffd shert sitting in Hoxfud or Caimbrij?

Three those north eest Engilish tipes, the fraise "Wi ei man" actually meens something (apparently). Hoo our wee too tell 'em there mistaken?

Hoo is Shugger and wai our the nazi's afer hymn? :roll:

[TheBear_CanDanceToo]

Ey up.
Just noticed my number of posts is three sixes :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: which bodeth not well unless I be thus marked, in which case it bodeth worse for the rest of you. Here's another to push me over the boundary...

[TheBear_CanDanceToo]

Phew. that wus close. :)

[tj]

I thought I smelled ozone... :)

[Ron Obvious]

Bartender: I'll have what he's having...

[tj]

Bartender: I'll have what he's having...
A lightning bolt? :shock: ;)

[Sabor]

I mean two more keystrokes... how lazy can people get!

u'd b surpri..http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/schlafen/sleeping-smiley-009.gif

[peachexploration]

Hola Sabor, haven't seen you in a while muchacho. Good to "see" you. :D

[terence]

[quote=Jones, Nikka]

Thanks for pointing that out, I thought it was kind of correct since I've seen lead/follow so often. But what about "hi" for high and "nite" for night. Or people confusing then/than or its/it's. It happens a lot, so the answer is that people can get very very lazy.



The " americanisation " of english words, are now part of the lexicon .

As far as the " lazy " quote , not quite sure I would agree with that statement .

The ubiquitos " they " , recently had a program on one of the u.k. networks , that highlighted the mis use of punctuation, ( and or the lack of it ), with a panel of 4 scholars-- even they were sometimes baffled by punctuation !!
Couple of my peeves-----
Subject and preposition, are more often , than not, reversed .

And syntax, virtually ignored . And of course , the ever present ending of sentences, with a preposition.

Am I ever guilty of these ?? ( of course not ! :roll: :roll: )

[Ron Obvious]

http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/9964/fragmentfp1.png

I really hate when Word comes with this stupid suggestion.

[noobster]

http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/9964/fragmentfp1.png

I really hate when Word comes with this stupid suggestion.

Turn off the grammar check function; it's completely useless.

[sweavo]

http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/9964/fragmentfp1.png

I really hate when Word comes with this stupid suggestion.

Turn off the grammar check function; it's completely useless.

Yeah, it doesn't even catch "Fragment (consider revising)"

Actually I find Grammar check quite useful, though you have to ignore a lot more stuff than for spell check, but then grammar checking's not as easy as a simply dictionary lookup.

[Ron Obvious]

Except that I write typos all the time, mostly those typos that form anagarms. You see (didn't correct that one).

Over the yeras I've learned typing faster, but I'm not actually writing faster.

[tj]

The one that's been appearing here on SF a lot recently is compliments vs complements.

[Ron Obvious]

Right, I didn't read so carefully, it's a good suggestion to only turn off the grammar check and not the spell check; didn't even think it was possible.

[Ron Obvious]

Now Word wants me to capitalise the word "lorry" with the motivation that "some words are always capitalized...". I am furthermore ridiculed with the following example:

---
Instead of: The pet store closes on Valentine's day.
Consider: The pet store closes on Valentine's Day.
---

If Word (which by the way soon loses the right to be capitalised in my view) confuses a lorry with the Lord (or sorry, is it The Lord), it is even stupider than I had ever thought.

[Jambo]

Sing Hallelujah and Praise the Lorry! :D

[KP-salsa]

Sing Hallelujah and Praise the Lorry! :D

Would that be the Red Lorry or the Yellow Lorry?