Correcting people's grammar - acceptable?

Peter333

Newlyboughthouse wrote: »

Everywhere I look, I see terrible spelling and grammar. It is shocking. Check out the post in Pets and Pet Care titled 'out of hours vet', for example.

Question: is it acceptable to correct perpetrators? I feel that I can't without fear of being accused of being the grammar police or a grammar nazi. So I just seethe on the inside.

However, I can see the population getting dumb, and feel such corrections should be made. Otherwise, eventually, 'to' will be accepted as 'too', or 'loose' will be accepted as 'lose' etc.

Thoughts on a postcard...

duchy wrote: »

Correcting your children's grammar is acceptable . Part of a parent's role is to guide and educate their children.

Correcting the grammar of adult strangers makes you look like the sort of insecure person who always has to make others look bad to make yourself look better than you believe you are.

Perhaps you might want to think about why you feel the need to educate adult strangers- most people would consider it crass and rather bad manners.

Would you stop a burly stranger in your local high street to correct their grammar ? If not- why not ?

If you are genuinely concerned about education - many LEAs are looking for volunteers to assist on adult literacy programmes. Perhaps that might be a more useful outlet for your crusading nature without making you look like a crass busybody.

Personally I find bad manners far worse than poor spelling (which is what you appearing to be moaning about rather than actual grammar-There is a difference !!)

Weirdly, I do actually see both sides here...

I get some of what the OP is saying, and that post on the pets section is very hard to read. In fact, I gave up after the first 50 words!!! And it is frustrating to see 'I no' and 'tennant' and 'loose' instead of 'lose' etc. However, I agree with Duchy that there are far worse things than bad spelling and bad grammar.

I actually know a young woman who said that if a man she had started to date, had bad spelling and grammar; it would be a dealbreaker! :rotfl:

I 'get' that it's frustrating, like a hairdresser seeing someone whose hair is a fright probably makes them cringe, and a nail technician probably cringes at chewed nails, and it's acceptable to be irked and frustrated by poor grammar and poor spelling if you are good at it. But to mock people, or laugh at them, or call them 'dumb' as you are doing, is most definitely NOT acceptable.

I am interested to know (as Duchy said,) if you would accost a burly stranger on the street and attack their spelling though? And if not, why not? If you would have a go at someone on the internet, then why not on the streets?

Although I reckon the majority of posters on here would not talk to people in real life like they talk to people on here. :rotfl:

So although I see your point 'OP' I do think calling the nation 'dumb' because grammar and spelling standards have slipped is out of order.

onomatopoeia99

Newlyboughthouse wrote: »

Question: is it acceptable to correct perpetrators? I feel that I can't without fear of being accused of being the grammar police or a grammar nazi. So I just seethe on the inside.

My experience is that people with English as a second language are not at all offended if you correct their use of English grammar, feeling that they aren't going to learn if nobody tells them when they are making mistakes. "Too cool for school" seems to be a largely British attitude.

My feeling is that one is never too old to learn. I don't correct people's grammar though, it's not worth the abuse. My own use of English is far from perfect and I make plenty of mistakes.

Here's one of my favourites. It is a grammatically correct sentence, with no spelling mistakes. It is very unlikely that it means what the author intended though:

I was effected by the power cut.

Presumably because mum and dad couldn't find the condoms in the dark nine months before the writer was born, and they had to find something to do while the TV had no electricity.

PasturesNew

You can only correct grammar if you have a 'legal' seniority. You're their boss, or their parent - or you're the older/bossier sibling.

Anybody else will just hate you.

onomatopoeia99

Peter333 wrote: »

I actually know a young woman who said that if a man she had started to date, had bad spelling and grammar; it would be a dealbreaker! :rotfl:

She sounds interesting!

One of the things I always try to do in written communication of all kinds is ensure that I don't write anything I wouldn't say to someone's face.

Rebel_Cause

I hate when a tweet gets several favourites and retweets and it is full of spelling mistakes!!

duchy

PasturesNew wrote: »

You can only correct grammar if you have a 'legal' seniority. You're their boss, or their parent - or you're the older/bossier sibling.

Anybody else will just hate you.

I dunno
The exceptions you've mentioned would probably hate you too if adults

FredG

From my dabblings in Facebook I've noticed that the people who are intent on defending English values are the most adept at !!!!!!!ising the language.

Tiddlywinks

Heffi1 wrote: »

..... also uses been instead of being, which I find difficult to read, constantly make the same errors in multiple posts tells me that they do not know the difference and should take some time to learn.

The misuse of 'been' instead of 'being' is increasing.

I find it incredible and really depressing that such a basic word can be misunderstood. Surely, the meaning of the word should indicate that it is being used incorrectly.

Grenage

I half agree, believing that improper grammar should be highlighted and corrected; this is the same half that wants to kill people who undertake, or can't indicate.

Previous generations probably thought the same; reading older books often has me reaching for the dictionary, feeling positively simple. I think that the Internet simply makes it more apparent.

I don't correct people, but am happy to be corrected.

Mr_Toad

Newlyboughthouse wrote: »

Everywhere I look, I see terrible spelling and grammar. It is shocking. Check out the post in Pets and Pet Care titled 'out of hours vet', for example.

Question: is it acceptable to correct perpetrators? I feel that I can't without fear of being accused of being the grammar police or a grammar nazi. So I just seethe on the inside.

However, I can see the population getting dumb, and feel such corrections should be made. Otherwise, eventually, 'to' will be accepted as 'too', or 'loose' will be accepted as 'lose' etc.

Thoughts on a postcard...

I think that what you're seeing is the Internet as a great social leveler.

On a forum like this we converse and interact with people that we would not normally speak to in our daily lives.

Not everyone has the same level of education. In the real world I'm a professional with a University education and, for the most part, the people I mix with socially and professionally tend to be the same or very similar. On here I have no idea who I'm talking to or what their background and circumstances are.

Just because someone isn't well educated doesn't mean they don't have an opinion or know better than the rest of us at times. on here we have little idea if they are young or old and, sometimes, if they are male or female.

There's a good argument that it's the intention or the thought that's important not how it's written down. A good idea or good advice is still that even if on the page the spelling and grammar are poor.