10 Flagrant Grammar Mistakes that Make You Look Stupid
 

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement...9273376,00.htm

These days, we tend to communicate via the keyboard as much as we do verbally. Often, we're in a hurry, quickly dashing off emails with typos, grammatical shortcuts (I'm being kind here), and that breezy, e.e. cummings, no-caps look. It's expected. It's no big deal. But other times, we try to invest a little care, avoiding mistakes so that there's no confusion about what we're saying and so that we look professional and reasonably bright.

In general, we can slip up in a verbal conversation and get away with it. A colleague may be thinking, "Did she just say 'irregardless'?", but the words flow on, and our worst transgressions are carried away and with luck, forgotten.

That's not the case with written communications. When we commit a grammatical crime in emails, discussion posts, reports, memos, and other professional documents, there's no going back. We've just officially gone on record as being careless or clueless. And here's the worst thing. It's not necessary to be an editor or a language whiz or a spelling bee triathlete to spot such mistakes. They have a way of doing a little wiggle dance on the screen and then reaching out to grab the reader by the throat.

So here we are in the era of Word's red-underline "wrong spelling, dumb ass" feature and Outlook's Always Check Spelling Before Sending option, and still the mistakes proliferate. Catching typos is easy (although not everyone does it). It's the other stuff — correctly spelled but incorrectly wielded — that sneaks through and makes us look stupid. Here's a quick review of some of the big ones.

#1: Loose for lose
No: I always loose the product key.

Yes: I always lose the product key.

#2: It's for its (or god forbid, its')
No: Download the HTA, along with it's readme file.

Yes: Download the HTA, along with its readme file.

No: The laptop is overheating and its making that funny noise again.

Yes: The laptop is overheating and it's making that funny noise again.

#3: They're for their for there
No: The managers are in they're weekly planning meeting.

Yes: The managers are in their weekly planning meeting.

No: The techs have to check there cell phones at the door, and their not happy about it.

Yes: The techs have to check their cell phones at the door, and they're not happy about it.

#4: i.e. for e.g.
No: Use an anti-spyware program (i.e., Ad-Aware).

Yes: Use an anti-spyware program (e.g., Ad-Aware).

Note: The term i.e. means "that is"; e.g. means "for example". And a comma follows both of them.

#5: Effect for affect
No: The outage shouldn't effect any users during work hours.

Yes: The outage shouldn't affect any users during work hours.

Yes: The outage shouldn't have any effect on users.

Yes: We will effect several changes during the downtime.

Note: Impact is not a verb. Purists, at least, beg you to use affect instead:

No: The outage shouldn't impact any users during work hours.

Yes: The outage shouldn't affect any users during work hours.

Yes: The outage should have no impact on users during work hours.

#6: You're for your
No: Remember to defrag you're machine on a regular basis.

Yes: Remember to defrag your machine on a regular basis.

No: Your right about the changes.

Yes: You're right about the changes.

#7: Different than for different from
No: This setup is different than the one at the main office.

Yes: This setup is different from the one at the main office.

Yes: This setup is better than the one at the main office.

#8 Lay for lie
No: I got dizzy and had to lay down.

Yes: I got dizzy and had to lie down.

Yes: Just lay those books over there.

#9: Then for than
No: The accounting department had more problems then we did.

Yes: The accounting department had more problems than we did.

Note: Here's a sub-peeve. When a sentence construction begins with If, you don't need a then. Then is implicit, so it's superfluous and wordy:

No: If you can't get Windows to boot, then you'll need to call Ted.

Yes: If you can't get Windows to boot, you'll need to call Ted.

#10: Could of, would of for could have, would have
No: I could of installed that app by mistake.

Yes: I could have installed that app by mistake.

No: I would of sent you a meeting notice, but you were out of town.

Yes: I would have sent you a meeting notice, but you were out of town.

Impact can be noun or verb. "The meteorite impact(ed/es) the North Atlantic."

I have the most trouble with effect and affect, mainly because I'm grammatically lazy.

i.e. for e.g. is my big bugaboo.

Their for they're and they're for their annoy me. Same for you're and your.
Loose and lose is a typical spelling error, and they don't "affect" me all that much.

I consider myself to be fairly proficient in the English language. But occasionaly, I will make errors. I have a bad habit of telling the dog to "go lay down". You guys wanna know the definition of a true "grammer nazi"? Marry a journalism major. Oh...my...God!

grammar nazi's got to chime in here:

don't forget how to spell "definitely..."

Mandy's in her last year...Journalism. :eek:

Believe it or not, I had to correct a "their/there" error I found in a tree removal sign posted by my city. A lady at the park looked at me as if I were committing vandalism, but then I explained that I was merely the local Grammar Nazi. She seemed surprised that even the City of Corvallis makes "their/there" mistakes.

Yes, I am an English major to the bone.

Unfortunately, since marketing power speak of the 90's, that's true, though "hit" would be the better choice. Who are you trying to impress?

I'd like to hear from the English majors in the crowd. What's the pro's take on how modern communications and changes in educational priorities have affected what's proper. Dictionary lifespans certainly aren't what they used to be.

I always considered the movie title 'Deep Impact' to have a double meaning, but considering the grammar lesson above, it's meaning is now singular. Take that, Morgan Freeman.
I'd also like to hear from the linguistically inclined on these issues. I can speak and write well enough to get my point across, but I've always found myself lacking in this area of study. I blame Steinbeck completely for writing an entire chapter in Grapes of Wrath about a fucking turtle crossing a field. Boring son of a bitch.

you people wood be verry annoyed with me.

Can we add the word "collage" when referring to an institution of higher education? Drives me nuts :)

Especially when found on job applications. :rolleyes:

And since this is quickly morphing into another holier-than-thou bitch fest, how about redundant plurals, or whatever they're called: Softwares, firmwares, spywares, deers, etc. (*kick!*)

Really, I'd be happier if I didn't notice these things at all. I did some editing years ago which didn't help, but I get indigestion thinking what it must be like to have worked through an English degree and then be thrown to the barbarians. It's already terribly distracting. Coping methods, please? :)

this is by far the most annoying, although even I am guilty of it from time to time. A lot of people simply don't understand the difference. "It's" is the conjunction of "it is," and should only be used in sentences thusly. "it's/it is the blue one, over there."

"its" on the other hand, with no apostrophe, shows ownership as in the example quoted.

I remember the difference by knowing that "it's" is never acceptable in formal writing. Whether or not I chose to be formal here is another subject.

I hate the passive voice.

I'm made fun of for this one ALL the time - thusly isn't a word. Thus is. :rolleyes:

Some people should be advised on how to properly use "advice!"

Kelly, maybe you could advice us...

;)


Being married to a journalism graduate as well has having worked for a grammar Nazi when I was in PR, forced me to learn many of the proper rules.

Most mistakes I make these days are typos rather than not knowing the rule. Either that or being to lazy to proof read my posts.

Hah, I'm in no place; 'twas merely a suggestion. :D

Just to double check, there's no plural form for advice, right? I get that mixed up some times....

I'd like to add "congratulations" as another often misspelled word. The most popular way to misspell this word is congradulations. Drives me craaaaaazy.

:P

Most of the mistakes listed are (in my experience) made by native speakers, not those who have English as a second language. We make mistakes you natives would never do though, so it evens out in the end. When to split up words or write them together in compounds is tricky business, for instance. ;)The Swedish rules and practices are way different when it comes to this. Sticking to either American English or British English is also pretty hard. I was taught British English in school, but most English I come across in movies and on the web is American.

Too*

Had to, sorry.

Hahahahaha...omg. Maybe we should have Tilted Grammar Nazi Concentration Camp for stuff like this. Bacchanal, good catch.

I'm sure you notice how often that people say 'congrats' ... sometimes because there is an uncertainty about the spelling. I'm guilty of that sin.

'Could care less' really annoys me. It's supposed to be 'couldn't case less', as in it's impossible to care any less about something. If you 'could care less' about something, then it must be something you at least care a little bit about!

Mark23, I could agree more.

Heh! Its still definetely annoying irregardless

How terribly ironic. I used your pet peeve and you've now you've used mine! Irregardless is a garbage word that uses two negative elements (ir- and -less) making it, at the very least, a double negative. It's the bastard love child of regardless and irrespective.

People that use 'irregardless' in front of me automatically lose some of my respect.

Ack, the usage of single 'quote' as opposed to double "quote" also gets me.



Tell me when this becomes annoying. ;)

I know, I also spelled the word definitely wrong. Another one that's really common is people who say 'I seen' and 'I done' instead of 'I saw' and 'I did'. Some people even manage to further confuse matters by saying things like 'I've saw that one'.

Oh, sorry Kelly that you're annoyed by my quotes! I'm writing on a mobile phone and it's much faster this way although single quotes are fine to use so it's not actually a grammatical mistake.

I'm surprised who's and whose isn't on that list....
My name is Ngdawg and i'm an ie, eg misuser

I generally post like I speak. Letters, etc., are different and I attempt, at least, to use proper written grammar and help my kids with it. It was amazing, working with middle-schoolers, how bad their usage of the english language really was when writing. And no longer do they have to dissect and diagram sentences, tasks that would really help them later when composing things in the course of business and college.

A chain mexican restaurant (Rosas,) has the slogan "Authentic is our secret ingredient." I am always wondering what their authentic secret ingredient is.

For what purpose do single quotes serve, and where are they acceptable?

Thanks, useful stuff, especially since English is not my first language.

A colleague and I have been collecting e-mails from various offenders at our place of work. The best to date:

"We have to asses the situation, the invoices are in the rears."

Difficult to take that seriously (but maybe it's true?).

and all we had to do was pay attention in skool..........:D

Double quotation marks are used for a direct quotation, whereas single marks are used to emphasize some usage of the word that may be sarcastic, arch, or specialized. Also, single quotation marks are used for quotations within quotations.

I am a total, complete, but utterly repressed grammar nazi. The eye twitch is my favoured communication tool to display disappoval.

On forums, chat, etc. it really isn't a huge deal. People make mistakes, and not everyone is perfect. What I have a hard time understanding is how a university newspaper, which I am quite sure is written in Word, can have spelling and grammar mistakes as frequently as every few sentences. Do they not realize there is a spell-check tool? Are they trying to highlight the inadequacy of the modern education system?

Or maybe, just maybe, they're too flipping lazy to check! Grr... :mad:

But, you know, I'm not really a grammar nazi. :rolleyes:

Schools?
 

My 3 year old presented me with a heart warming photo of himself from his school just after we had attended 'Doughnuts (Donuts?) with Dad'.

Preserved for all time is a picture of him holding a teacher-written sign:

"Your my hero"

There is no hope....!

What bothers me a lot are signs that read: "CD's on Sale." Um... "CD's Contents on Sale" would be correct... as would "CDs on Sale." :)

I hold a specialized English degree and I'm a full-time editor. Although I would like to comment on many of these, I will limit myself.

First, I would like to point out the difference between correctness and usage. Although it is correct to say the meteorite impacted, I would say this is poor usage. "To impact" is clumsy and should be recast as something else. Another example is the word "utilize." I think you'll find this word in many dictionaries, but, ugh!, what's wrong with "use"?

This is a good point to address. Language changes at a rapid pace in the information age. If you do some research, you will note how grammar rules have relaxed in the past few years. For example, I am willing to accept the word "their" in place of "his or her." Sometimes having "his or her" fourteen times on one page is awkward. You'll see "their" listed in the OED as a disputed usage in this case, as you will with the word "themselves."

Another interesting aspect of grammar is the comma. This will forever be a matter of dispute between editors. I tend to use an open style, but I will not hesitate to use a comma where confusion and double meanings can creep in.

Remember, language usage varies depending on the purpose and medium of the writing. Books, essays, e-mails, blogs, grocery lists all have varying levels of formality. Rules are flexible at all of these levels, but you will find more rigidity in publications such as books and journals. Books tend to have higher standards of style and usage than things such as (not like :paranoid:) magazines and newspapers.

I have one thing to say to grammar nazis: chillax!

And to all of you out there: I'm willing to field any questions on language and writing. I love this stuff!