Just a few things.
 

It's "pique," not "peak" or "peek." They're different words. Something piques your interest. You peek at your sister while she's changing. You climb to the peak of a mountain.

"It's" = it is. "Its" = possessive form of it. It might not make sense to you, but learn the rule. It's really not that hard.

They're, there, and their. Once again, they're different words. "They're" is a contraction of "they are." "There" means at that place, as in "They're over there!" "Their" is the possessive form of "them." As in "They're peeking at their sisters changing!"

Apostrophes. Apostrophes are used in a few different circumstances. One is to demonstrate ownership. As in "MooseMan3000's grammar lesson is very helpful." Another is to form a contraction, as in "MooseMan3000's boring." (For those of you just joining us, that means "MooseMan3000 is boring.) You do not use apostrophes for plurals. Example: "There are several MooseMan3000's over there." This, we now know, is WRONG. Under no circumstance is it right, even if the word ends in a vowel. Whoever taught you this rule should be shot.

Ridiculous. Not "rediculous." It doesn't mean "diculous again." It's its own word.

That's all I can think of right now. If anyone has anything to add to the list, feel free.

It's all been done:

<img src="http://angryflower.com/aposter3.jpg">

Ah, grammar. I'm also very anal when it comes to proper spelling and grammar. I must admit that I make many mistakes in this area. Especially when I don't proofread before posting or sending a message.

The ones that irk me the most are: would of/could of/should of. They are verbs. It should be would have/could have/should have.

The only other one that I see often enough to bother me is seeing definitely spelled definately.

While I do respect those who know the difference, I try to not let it bother me too much as there are other things out there more deserving of my ire.

The "rediculous" one gets on my nerves, as does the "there" ordeal. I think I reported all of the grammar issues that bother me in another thread, but that was year's ago. :thumbsup:

-Lasereth

Yeah, it's pretty much futile. People either don't care to learn, or they simply don't care. Eventually I find that I get a little better at just ignoring it.

Oh, this one drives me crazy, and I see it all the time on message boards: "here, here" in place of "hear, hear." In fact, I don't think I've ever seen anyone write it correctly. Does "here, here" make ANY sense? No, I didn't think so.

It is an exercise in futility.

Although, my personal favorite is "piece of mind." LOL! Sounds like something you might find on the menu at the Hannibal Bistro.

You peek at your sister while she's changing?

I imagine "here, here" is used because of the existence of "there, there." I don't have such a problem with people who don't know what particular colloquial phrases are because they're so nonsensical sometimes (although not necessarily in this case).

Annoyances that, while not incorrect per se, are still annoying to me: "check" in reference to a monetary payment. It's a cheque damn it!

I've said this a million times: it's "yeah." Here's a simple chart:

Word: | Means:
=======|===============
Yeah | Yes
Yea | Yet, although
Ya | (Nothing)

That's straight phonetics. Nothing tricky there.

Also, the word "fellowshipping." You guys probably don't here this much, but I'm in the Bible belt and it makes me sick when I hear it. Fellowship is a noun, and it can't be used as a verb.

Another thing:

tspike51's Guide to Properly Using Quotation Marks (") and Single Quotation Marks (')

Single quotation marks can NEVER be used alone or outside of a set of quotation marks. That's all there is to it. Here are a few examples:

Correct: He said "So he asks 'do you love me?' and he says 'no, but that's a nice ski mask you're wearing!'."

Incorrect: The so called 'drug' school.

This thread amuses me.

While my grammar is far from being perfect, I am still irked when I spot an error and the ones listed above do irk the hell out of me.

To add to the list: than and then.

This is how I understand the two are used: "Than" is used for comparison and "then" is for sequence.

Yes: My house is bigger THAN your house.
Yes: If you want it so bad, THEN get it yourself!

No: I have more shit THEN you.
No: If that's the case, THAN you won't get any!

While we're at it, any one mind telling me when is the proper time to use ";"?

Excellent points, all. "Then" and "than" does get me a lot. "Would of" also makes me cringe when I see it.

Kelly, as far as how the semicolon is used, this is how I understand it. You can use the semicolon to link two independent clauses, so long as they're similiar in meaning. Example: "I didn't know how to properly use semicolons before; this lesson is helping me learn." You do NOT use semicolons to link an independent clause to a dependent one. Incorrect: "While I didn't know how to use semicolons before; this lesson is helping me learn." You use commas there. A good general rule to remember is that you use a semicolon where a period would work, but the ideas are too intimately entangled to separate them thus.

The one place I've seen that gets tricky is longer sentences with more than two clauses, or sentences involving lists of things. Then you can use a semicolon in place of a comma to avoid confusion. Example 1: "While I am bored by this lesson, it does help significantly; I'm glad I asked the question, else I may never have known." Note: In places like this, it's usually better to use a period anyway; it's merely acceptable to use a semicolon. Example 2: "Before they stole Greek gods, Roman gods were sort of shit gods, you know? Like Jeff, the god of biscuits; Steve, the god of hairdos; etc." (Eddie Izzard - Dress to Kill) Example 3: "Things you may bring to the potluck include: soda or juice; silverware, plates, cups, and napkins; chicken, beef, or unagi; or chips and crackers."

And who doesn't peek at his sister while she's changing?

However, I think "hear here" would make the most sense, as in "take a good listen to this guy next to me; I agree with what he is saying".

To add my peeve: the incorrect usage of i.e., e.g., and etc. (or even worse, ect.)

Well, when the phrase is used, it's usually in a large group of people and it's usually quite loud, right? So, maybe "here, here" means to "listen over here as this fellow has a good idea." At least, that's how an old school chum explained it to me.

I could also see the argument for "here, hear" (come here and listen) or "hear, here" (listen here).

I know better, but the others do make SOME sense, in my opinion.

Edit: 5 'cool' points to Mooseman for using Eddie Izzard's work as an example. :thumbsup:

Grammarians and spellers -- as I get older, I think more and more that you're born with it, or you're not.

I think it's amusing when grammarians blow their top over a pet peeve. Relatively speaking, it's not that important. Annoying, yes, even distracting, but important? I'll worry about other people's grammar when the world solves a long list of more pressing problems.

what kind of freak peaks at there sister while shes changing?

(all grammatical errors are intentional)

I'll add seven pages of them.

Since almost everything else has been covered, I'l bring up the punctuation-quote controversy. I'm on the British with this one. I mean, which makes more sense to you?

So John said "My pants?" (American standard)

So John said "My pants"? (British standard)

John was not asking a question as far as we know. To put the question mark inside of the quotes is essentially misquoting him. If it's not part of what you're quoting, leave it outside of the quotes.


I'll just mention loose vs. lose, "try and do it" instead of "try to do it" and "should of" instead of "should have".

it drives me nuts to punctuation outside the quotes (obviously, i'm american). i guess years of being told it is wrong rubbed off on me.

they're, their and there are the ones that bother me most. i will read a sentence over and over again trying to make sense of it.

I do this 'all' the time, and at tspike's post, I got to worrying. Turns out it's just another one of those endearing US/English things. Or, in some cases, if a particular word is meant to be highlighted in order to indicate a special usage or meaning, as for example in,
then single quotation marks are the preferred type.
Phew, panic over!

Also for Firefox users, this extension works wonders: http://spellbound.sourceforge.net/ Download it and you can simply right-click and spell check any text box you might happen to be filling in.

I'm sure there are Internet Explorer versions too.

That's another one of mine, and another that I see being done wrong more than right. I think this is a legitimate gripe because if people don't know what i.e. and e.g. mean, why are they using them in the first place? Just use the English. I would not write something if I didn't know what it meant.

I was being facetious when I said matter-of-factly that "here, here" doesn't make any sense, but like with i.e. and e.g., I wouldn't write something if I wasn't sure I knew what it meant. So there are a lot of people out there who either think they know more than they do or don't care that they don't know. I suspect the latter. ;)

Think of the semi-colon as the lovable halfass who couldn't decide between being a period and a comma. Also can be used in lists that incorporate commas within the list segments (not all that common to my knowledge).

Also, can someone confirm or dispute:
ie = "in essence" (or some latin/greek term meaning that)
eg = "for example" (agian, latin/greek whatever)

And another thing: when referring to a person, one is to use "who" or "whom", not "that". "There is a girl I know that is highly flatulent." is incorrect. It should be: "There is a girl I know who is highly flatulent."
Who = people
That = non-people

I.e. = id est = that is.
E.g. = exempli gratia = for example

Both Latin. Go dictionary.com!

This is why I like Australia. They're kind of in the middle of Britian and American language styles, so you can get away with almost all types of the American/British differences (in my experience).

I have one that bugs the hell out of me, though. "Who" vs. "Whom". When do you use one and when do you use the other?

AMEN! Praise the Lawd, for someone else agrees with me!

I don't think I ever use "whom", but the internet offered this up:

The "Me vs. I" debacle.

It is not "Me and him (or him and me) went to the store."
Me can't go to the store. But I can.

It is also not "She told him and I about that store."
She didn't tell I, dangit, she told me.

Don't even get me started on she/her, him/his. I'm all about making up my own words to suit my purpose, but misuse and poor grammar gets me every time. If I ever hear/see "Mine's" again, I'm likely to lose my mind.

What bothers me more than that is the improper use of "myself". Why does everybody now say "If you have any questions, ask either myself or my partner"?

I always remember those by pretending that "i.e." is short for "in explanation," and "e.g." for "example given."

So no one else gets annoyed when they see "masterbate?"

The word, I mean. ;)

ya no what, use guys are write. all the bad gramer that is postid hear really makes me upset to. Why cant people just do things write hear. i mean, its absolutley rediculous.


get a grip.....lmao

I can see these problems steadily becoming worse out here in Oz. They stopped teaching grammar here before I started school in the early 1970's, so now we have two generations that have basically no idea, and it shows. It isn't taught formally in primary school, and in high school it's just assumed that students already know as much grammar as they need. (The only attempt at a grammar lesson that I got in high school was a note on one of my compositions in English class telling me that I should investigate the use of colons and semicolons, as they would be well-suited to my style of writing.) Our universities are starting to complain very vocally about the poor standard of grammar and spelling in students' writing, and some are starting to insist on emergency grammar lessons for new students.

Apparently grammatical instruction was dropped because it was "too hard" and would make those kids who aren't academically inclined feel bad about themselves. It seems that no-one thought that grammar is a useful thing to understand when you're learning another language - which is ironic, given that Australia prides itself on being a multicultural society.

I really feel like I was short-changed by whoever put together our English curriculum.

Same here, OzOz... grammar was still a major portion of the English curriculum when I was in school learning it, up until I moved down here to Florida when I was 10. From then on, there was no grammar, because Florida schools had stopped focusing on it long ago. Good thing I got the bulk of my learning done up north, then, or i'd have shitty grammar like most everyone in generations younger than me.

I don't know who figured it wasn't important to teach grammar in schools, but they should be beaten. Yeah, learning it may have sucked, doing grammar drills constantly may have sucked, but at least I don't talk like an idiot now.

Why do we have grammar lessons? So that everyone can understand each other. Sure, I can write like a six year old boy without proper spelling or punctuation, and sure some of you could probably decipher it, but it would take you five times as long to read my post, and the point would be lost in the meaningless drivel. With proper grammar, I can express myself clearly and concisely. My argument is therefore both easier to understand and more convincing. Simple.

Side note: I use the word "drivel" on a regular basis, but I've never actually written it before. As such, I wasn't sure how it was spelled. So I looked it up. I also learned that it can be used as a verb, and in that sense it's synonomous with drool. With the simple act of typing in five letters and hitting enter, I both learned how to correctly spell it and increased my vocabulary.

My point, however, is not that I'm awesome. The point is that it's not hard to look up a word. Here's a quick rule of thumb: if you can't spell it well enough to look it up, chances are you don't know what it means well enough to use in a sentence. Think about it.

So they're instituting a grammar-free zone in US schools as well, are they, analog? That is a worry.

In the workplace I've often found myself in the position of default proofreader and grammatical "expert" - especially now, as half of the people I work directly with come from non-English-speaking backgrounds. I would consider myself to be better in that regard than most people of my generation. I don't see why I should be though. If someone asks me why I prefer wording things the way I do, I can't give a good answer. I'm usually working from gut instincts, for want of a better expression. I can't explain why. I can only tell you what looks good to me. I hate that. (I also can't help wondering where *my* grammar falls down! I just don't know. I hate that too.)

MooseMan, off topic a bit, but it's amusing to see the way really young kids totally disregard that. My brother is five years younger than I am, and given that I have always needed time to myself to unwind, and he was a real attention-seeker, he used to be quite good at driving me to the point of exasperation. Anyway, you know the way young kids will sometimes latch onto a new word that they've heard an adult using and proceed to use it themselves, ad nauseum, regardless of the fact that they don't have a clue what it means? My brother did that with the word "massacre". For a while, he used to say to people, "You forgot to massacre me." There were many times he didn't realise just how much he was tempting fate!