Correcting people's grammar - acceptable?

hollydays

Some spelling mistakes are fun.
http://www.lolbrary.com/Funny/Bike-For-Seal/15146

maman

LittleMax wrote: »

But if significant numbers of people are perpetuating the same errors then it becomes accepted usage and the language evolves.

At Christmas someone asked for a slither of cake, and someone else asked isn't it sliver, I always use sliver? There was then a bit of a debate and comments about snakes slithering until finally we googled it and found that slither is now in the OED as informal for sliver. So both are acceptable. Give it another generation of slither of cake being published on menus and slither will become the norm and sliver will be classified as an old fashioned term for slither. Finally sliver will disappear from use altogether.

I know you're right but it disappoints me hugely. It's not that I want to go back to archaic language but to me what you describe is not evolution, it's dumbing down.

LittleMax

maman wrote: »

I know you're right but it disappoints me hugely. It's not that I want to go back to archaic language but to me what you describe is not evolution, it's dumbing down.

But don't you realise that what you have written would have seemed appalling even 40 or so years ago? I was taught that you never ever abbreviate when writing unless you are recording direct speech!

You say you don't want to go back to archaic language, but if everyone had taken your stance, that is exactly how we would all be talking and writing. Even the French gave up on trying to protect the language, it doesn't work, language evolves over time.

thorsoak

Having spent goodness knows how long proof-reading legal documents and typing up students' thesis I correct grammatical errors - in my head - automatically.

However, unless I am asked to make corrections, they remain in my head.

Loz01

I correct grammar if its blatantly wrong but it doesn't annoy me as much as bad spelling!! I work with people twice my age who cannot spell for toffee. And I mean words such as entitled, advice/advise, stable (yes really) :rotfl:

missbiggles1

LittleMax wrote: »

But don't you realise that what you have written would have seemed appalling even 40 or so years ago? I was taught that you never ever abbreviate when writing unless you are recording direct speech!

You say you don't want to go back to archaic language, but if everyone had taken your stance, that is exactly how we would all be talking and writing. Even the French gave up on trying to protect the language, it doesn't work, language evolves over time.

But written language 40 years ago didn't include writing/chatting on forums; it's still incorrect to use abbreviations in things like reports and essays so nothing much has changed.

Pollycat

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I never claim to be perfect - I just admit when I'm wrong, which is why I edited my post.:D

Really?
I didn't read any admission of being wrong - just an amended post.
Of course, you could always have taken you own advice and posted:

missbiggles1 wrote: »

"whoops, I made a mistake!"

missbiggles1

Pollycat wrote: »

Really?
I didn't read any admission of being wrong - just an amended post.
Of course, you could always have taken you own advice and posted:

You obviously missed where I said that a chose a bad example - that's what I amended my post to say. I didn't amend my post to make it look as if I hadn't given that example in the first place and I rather object to your implying that this is what I did.

getmore4less

missbiggles1 wrote: »

But written language 40 years ago didn't include writing/chatting on forums; it's still incorrect to use abbreviations in things like reports and essays so nothing much has changed.

the practice was to use full version then the abbreviation.
(very common in technical reports)

I am a regular contributer tothe forum MoneySavingExpert(MSE).
One thing you find with MSE is contributers like to argue over trivia..

Pollycat

missbiggles1 wrote: »

You obviously missed where I said that a chose a bad example - that's what I amended my post to say. I didn't amend my post to make it look as if I hadn't given that example in the first place and I rather object to your implying that this is what I did.

I didn't miss anything at all.

You say you chose a 'bad example'.
You actually chose a wrong example.

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

No it doesn't. However, sideboards is a perfectly acceptable alternative name for them and therefore is correct.

Lily-Rose wrote: »

I have to agree with Georgie. You are wrong about this Miss Biggles.

From Wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sideburns

And also the Oxford English Dictionary confirms there is more than one meaning.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sideboard?q=sideboard

We always said sideboards, (I grew up in the Midlands,) we never said 'sideburns.' It IS a regional thing, and it's not incorrect.

Saying 'I want to go to there house,' instead of 'their' is wrong. Saying sideboards instead of sideburns is not wrong.

I get incredibly irked by someone saying that I am saying things 'wrong,' when I am not.