Correcting people's grammar - acceptable?

TBagpuss

Loz01 wrote: »

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:

I don't know how old you are, but some of this may be a result of when they were at school. When I was at school (and I am now old enough that people half my age are in the workforce!) we were not, officially, taught spelling. (I had an old fashioned teacher who was close to retirement and decided that she was going to teach us spelling and how to use a dictionary regardless of the National Curriculum Guidelines, but she was not supposed to!)

We were not taught grammar. Marks were not deducted for poor spelling or grammar even in exams.

I learned some grammar as it was part of the French and German courses I took (and even now, if I need to know the correct term, as opposed to the correct usage, for a particular tense or part of speech, I have to put it into French first, because I was never taught any English Grammar)

I have always read a lot, and I find the subject interesting, so I do generally know whether or not something is correct, but I often could not explain *why* it is right or wrong.

Spelling - I am very bad at. I have never been formally disgnosed as dyslexic but suspect that I would tick a lot of the boxes if tested.

I am much better at spotting spelling errors in type than in handwriting, but there are a lot which don't register as 'wrong' for me.

Because I know it is a weak spot for me I do check words I am unsure of when I am writing formally (for instance, in business letters etc), I have learned a lot of words, particularly those I have to use regualrly, but that still leaves plenty of words which will look just fine to me when I have written or typed them, so can slip through.

Becuae it doesn;t come naturally to me, for informal writing (which to me, includes non-business e-mails or texts, comments on line including forums etc) I will not generlaly do the kind of stringent, tiome consuming checking which I would employ on a pievced of formal or professioanl writing.

Although in my case, the spelling issue is worse because it wasn't something I was ever properly taught, that is only part of the issue - my mother, several of my aunts, and my grandmother all had similar issues, and while most of them can spell better than I do because they were taught more at school, the underlying issue is the same. It's very hard to correct something when the problem is not visible to you.

I belive that people tend to read in different ways, and that this makes a diference to how easy it is to spot mistakes.

In relation to the original question, I think it is generally rude to correct people's spelling or grammar, the exceptions being when your relationship to the person makes it acceptable. For instnace;
- You are a teacher, dealing with a pupil
- A parent dealing with your own minor child
- An employer or supervisor dealing with an employee or a person you are supervising, where the correction relates to material written or produced for work
- Where you are training someone and the correction relates to the trianing.
- Flagging up errors in material provided to you as a client or customer (e.g. pointing out an error on a menu) provided that it is done politely and appropriately (e.g. in the menu example, making a big deal of it to a busy waiter would not be appropriate, mentioning it in customer feedback or sending a note to head ofice might be)

In normal, day-to-day interactions whether in person or online, I think it is only appropriate where the mistake means that the original speaker / writer's meaning is unclear, in which case I think you are really asking for clarification, rahter than correcting their grammar or spelling.

Adding to the comments about regional terminology, it is also worth bearing in mindthat region dialects can have their own grammar, which is internally consistent and corect in context, even though it is different to standard English grammar.

Rosemary7391

How about this as a suggestion? Those who would like their grammar corrected can say so in their signatures, and those interested can PM the poster. Every other post should be left alone, unless it is unclear, in which case clarification should be sought. If you're not asking for clarification, perhaps it doesn't need correcting in what is an informal setting?

I do find there is a critical density of mistakes which makes posts much harder to read. That means I spend more time understanding the problem, and less time thinking of potential solutions or useful comments. Sometimes it means I give up on the post. So it is to posters' advantage to use correct language.

maman

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.

I'm assuming that you mean the contractions rather than abbreviations.


I'm not against evolution of the language but to me that's not the same as people making sloppy errors and that being acceptable over time. That's dumbing down in my book.


I suppose I can look forward to the day when maps show the Specific Ocean, we reach the pineapple of perfection and the world's your lobster!!


Meanwhile I'll stick to my principals!:rotfl:

Jagraf

maman wrote: »

I'm assuming that you mean the contractions rather than abbreviations.


I'm not against evolution of the language but to me that's not the same as people making sloppy errors and that being acceptable over time. That's dumbing down in my book.


I suppose I can look forward to the day when maps show the Specific Ocean, we reach the pineapple of perfection and the world's your lobster!!


Meanwhile I'll stick to my principals!:rotfl:

Do you apply the same to cooking / clothing / education?

What I mean is, I have a Great Aunt who finds it appalling that the rest of the family don't darn socks, that using a microwave or buying a meal that isn't prepared entirely from scratch lazy, and that one should visit a library and not use the Internet for revision of GCSEs :eek:. She genuinely feels all of these things are a dumbing down of life skills. She never learnt to drive a car either, and refuses to set up direct debits. And whereas she's entitled to her opinion, no-one invites her round anymore as she pulls people up on their lack of skills.

maman

Jagraf wrote: »

Do you apply the same to cooking / clothing / education?

What I mean is, I have a Great Aunt who finds it appalling that the rest of the family don't darn socks, that using a microwave or buying a meal that isn't prepared entirely from scratch lazy, and that one should visit a library and not use the Internet for revision of GCSEs :eek:. She genuinely feels all of these things are a dumbing down of life skills. She never learnt to drive a car either, and refuses to set up direct debits. And whereas she's entitled to her opinion, no-one invites her round anymore as she pulls people up on their lack of skills.

Certainly not. As I said, I'm all for evolution but not dumbing down although I realise it can be a matter of opinion.


So to use your analogy I think great advances have been made in cooking and food preparation over the years, that's evolution. However I think the increase in grazing, some fast food, massive portions, added sugar and salt, lack of cooking skills etc etc. is a form of dumbing down. Not all change is progress.

LittleMax

maman wrote: »

Certainly not. As I said, I'm all for evolution but not dumbing down although I realise it can be a matter of opinion.


So to use your analogy I think great advances have been made in cooking and food preparation over the years, that's evolution. However I think the increase in grazing, some fast food, massive portions, added sugar and salt, lack of cooking skills etc etc. is a form of dumbing down. Not all change is progress.

I don't like huge portions and over salted food, but I would say it was not to my taste rather than dumbed down! Just because a change is less acceptable to you doesn't mean it's dumbing down.

LittleMax

maman wrote: »

I'm assuming that you mean the contractions rather than abbreviations.

Yes, I meant contractions.

As a matter of interest do you feel I am dumber because I used the wrong term?

Lily-Rose_3

LittleMax wrote: »

I don't like huge portions and over salted food, but I would say it was not to my taste rather than dumbed down! Just because a change is less acceptable to you doesn't mean it's dumbing down.

I agree.

And I find people shouting the 'dumbing down' old chestnut at anything that THEY deem as not acceptable or not what they'd do, extremely rude and offensive and arrogant. If I want to buy six new pairs of socks per year, rather than waste time darning them, or shove a ready meal in the microwave, rather that cook it from scratch, or have a quick shufty on the internet instead of going to the library, I bloomin' well will, and I am not having some nosey old busybody telling me I am lazy or dumb.

All that all of the above is, is timesaving. And if I can save time on boring tasks, that can be spent with my daughter and husband and friends and family, then that is a bonus. If people want to waste precious time that they could spend with friends and family cooking from scratch, darning, and sifting through dozens of books, then they are welcome to do it, but don't look down on me because you do it differently. It's just rude and arrogant, and makes you look rather unpleasant.

Jagraf

maman wrote: »

Certainly not. As I said, I'm all for evolution but not dumbing down although I realise it can be a matter of opinion.


So to use your analogy I think great advances have been made in cooking and food preparation over the years, that's evolution. However I think the increase in grazing, some fast food, massive portions, added sugar and salt, lack of cooking skills etc etc. is a form of dumbing down. Not all change is progress.

But really you are picking and choosing what you personally think is evolution and what you think is dumbing down. Just like my Aunt. She would certainly think people using a forum to debate was dumbing down. Typing rather than writing too.

LittleMax

maman wrote: »

I suppose I can look forward to the day when maps show the Specific Ocean, we reach the pineapple of perfection and the world's your lobster!!


Meanwhile I'll stick to my principals!:rotfl:

Maps will always show the Pacific Ocean; it is specific that will disappear from use