The Grammar Police. Who finds them an irritant?.

[said]

You are so right, of course! There are a few posters on this site who openly admit to their linguistic problems, others that regular readers recognize instinctively as people that have linguistic problems. I've never seen anyone comment on their posts in a negative manner. Like you, most of us will spend a little bit longer to get the point. But when people constantly refrain from using punctuation, while having a vocabulary that well exceeds the average, I find it annoying, to put it mildly. Maybe the poster in question might benefit (and help others) with the "education he has but rarely uses" by starting to use it? I only ask.
I have a selective memory, but maybe you can remind me of the times I have spelt members'/subjects' names incorrectly in a spectacular manner? I don't doubt for a moment that I have, at least once. Or maybe I shouldn't have Said that.

Well - I suppose it depends on the audience that the writing is intended for. I would not place the same level of importance on margin notes as I would for a public presentation. Just as I would not consider an immediate response on this site justification for precision.

A person who publicly demonstrates that they consider their own grammar to be perfect, means that they are giving more attention to the context of the written work as opposed to the content.

In consideration of the internet, the grammatical use of language differs for various nations - I doubt very much if the majority of people pay great heed as to whether they have missed out a comma or neglected to use paragraphs, since the focus is on the body of the writing.

In the above response for instance, there are three major errors - too wordy, the use of a redundant expression and in one instance consideration should be given to a personal directive. The author has shown in previous responses to have made spelling mistakes. No one is perfect - if they were, they would not be human.

[Toodles McGinty]

When did English schools stop teaching grammar, Toodles? What do they teach in the 'English classes'?

They don't seem to teach English to the standard that I was taught. Basics, but little else. As one poster said, it's a language that evolves, particularly regarding the spoken word. I guess that expressing themselves is now more important in schools than the nuts and bolts of grammar.

I have two youngsters in the family, both with Masters degrees, who have terrible spelling and grammar. My father left school in his mid teens, and his grammar is impeccable. Different generations, different priorities in education.

As I said, I don't think it is a mark of intelligence or otherwise. It's a minor irritation (another vote against 'could of, should of') but that's all.

[Derek H]

One last try:

Punctuation is part of grammar. We use grammar to make sentences, and parts of setences and we use punctuation to help us identify these sentences and parts of sentences.

Word choice is not grammar. This is known as vocabulary.

This distinction is not mine. It is Cambridge University's distinction and The University of Brunswick's distinction. Both prepare English language exams to determine the language level of those who want to live and, or work in a number of countries where English is an official language.

In the English language we talk about punctuation and grammar. Two separate parts of the build up the English language. I'm sorry you can't grasp the difference. I give up. I'm too old. But I hope the grammar you use when speaking English is correct, even if you don't need any punctuation. You use body language for that, or pauses between words, etc, When you write, however, the grammar you use will be the same, but you need punctuation since nobody can see your body language.

[Hector]

Well - I suppose it depends on the audience that the writing is intended for.

You have hit the nail on the head, Said. Audience is very important.

[Hector]

In the English language we talk about punctuation and grammar. Two separate parts of the build up the English language. I'm sorry you can't grasp the difference. I give up. I'm too old. But I hope the grammar you use when speaking English is correct, even if you don't need any punctuation. You use body language for that, or pauses between words, etc, When you write, however, the grammar you use will be the same, but you need punctuation since nobody can see your body language.

Lol! I loved the way you intentionally made so many errors there to give us all a laugh, Degsy. Old you might be, but you haven't forgotten how to clown around!

[Alikado]

Why has elbow been censored out?

I don't find someone correcting grammar or even spelling an irritant, as some of the spelling I've read over the years is shocking.

Maybe, someone could find it useful.

Don't forget, not everyone is 100%, not even me.

It was censored automatically, it didn't like me writing something that smells like poo.

[sandGroundZero]

.

…a few ways of thinking about language

Let's NOT split hairs over these distinctions; shall we?
There is a spectrum of language: colloquial to formal. However, making yourself understood is the usual measure of successful communication.

The point local has repeated, namely that his posts — as posted — are his well communicated intention. The implication is that clarity of expression is not important to him. He is content to let the reader decide whether his thoughts are muddled; or perhaps, whether it is his intention is to cloud the issue, or to confuse the reader through his carelessness.

S= Sentence, NP= Noun Phrase, VP= Verb Phrase,
D= Determiner, N= Noun, V= Verb

.

[said]

They don't seem to teach English to the standard that I was taught. Basics, but little else. As one poster said, it's a language that evolves, particularly regarding the spoken word. I guess that expressing themselves is now more important in schools than the nuts and bolts of grammar.

I have two youngsters in the family, both with Masters degrees, who have terrible spelling and grammar. My father left school in his mid teens, and his grammar is impeccable. Different generations, different priorities in education.

As I said, I don't think it is a mark of intelligence or otherwise. It's a minor irritation (another vote against 'could of, should of') but that's all.

Education standards have dropped considerably over the years. Remember when we were in the EU? In exchange for suitable trade agreements the EU promised employment and training for people? Thousands of students took up University places in the UK with fees paid by their home country, but they did not have the required level of education required previously for such places. The result was that the percentage pass levels had to be greatly reduced so that they could pass.

[local]

Now you've lost me, Pub. Are you saying that a version of what you write that has all punctuation or grammatical errors corrected in it would be a sanitised approximation of what you want to post. That your punctuation and grammatical errors are important, maybe even essential, for our understanding of what you post? The unsanitised true and complete (not approximate) version? That is really surprising, even coming from you. I have a feeling that you might well have lost of few others with this argument in favour of erroneous grammar and punctuation.

Why ?

if you met someone with a different dialect, would you not take it as part of them ?

Taking someone as they are is the mark of a receptive and tolerant person.

Ignoring the content in pursuit of grammatical correctness exhibits a strange obsession.

Couldn't you try and join in constructively ?

[Toodles McGinty]

Education standards have dropped considerably over the years. Remember when we were in the EU? In exchange for suitable trade agreements the EU promised employment and training for people? Thousands of students took up University places in the UK with fees paid by their home country, but they did not have the required level of education required previously for such places. The result was that the percentage pass levels had to be greatly reduced so that they could pass.

Yes. That's why 9 year olds aren't taught much about grammar.

It's the EU's fault.

[said]

Yes. That's why 9 year olds aren't taught much about grammar.

It's the EU's fault.

SPaG is taught to young children from Year 1. By the time they reach Year 6, young students should be completely familiar with basic English grammar. In fact there is a specific focus on grammar today, as opposed to earlier education systems in which grammar formed part of all essay writing. The result of this present system is, that most children can form completely correct sentences, but have a lack of intuitive writing. Many young minds are so concentrated on 'rational grammar' that they lose the ability to link sentences in an interesting context, then wonder why their writing ability does not conform to the books that they are given to read. Hence the reason why text talk is so popular.

[Alikado]

Yes. That's why 9 year olds aren't taught much about grammar.

It's the EU's fault.

My 7 year old granddaughter and 13 year old grandson seem to know plenty about grammar.

[said]

My 7 year old granddaughter and 13 year old grandson seem to know plenty about grammar.

Does that mean Grandad is never around?

[Toodles McGinty]

My 7 year old granddaughter and 13 year old grandson seem to know plenty about grammar.

Good to hear. Sounds like they go to decent schools. Lucky to get really good ones nowadays.

[Toodles McGinty]

Does that mean Grandad is never around?

Uncalled for.