What actually goes on in there?
We have a few on this forum so perhaps they would like to explain.
Is there ever a time where tact and diplomacy actually trumps pedantry and you keep quiet?
Do you do it face to face when talking to someone, or is it just when hiding behind a keyboard?
Why do you do it?
Is it to show your superior knowledge or to point out the other parties lack of knowledge?
Does it make you feel good?
How do you think it makes others feel about you when you've pointed out the error of their ways?
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Sun 11 Feb 18 at 12:14
|
|
Lots of retired/semi retired on here, probably keeps them busy. I think it's boring but each to their own.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 11 Feb 18 at 12:19
|
Compared with many internet fora, this one demonstrates a remarkably good quality in written English.
It's something I like to attain myself, though I can fail to reach my ambition sometimes.
I like to see good grammar and spelling, which means that I occasionally feel obliged to correct it. I hope I do it politely. I normally start by indicating I know it is pedantic.
As to how others feel, I can remember correcting Mark on the difference between discrete and discreet. He looked it up, and I think, thanked me.
Bromp corrected Zero earlier on, on spelling per se, not per say. I haven't seen Zero's response yet, but I hope that he doesn't feel belittled by it.
I guess that I hope to educate people, which may seem arrogant. I hope I'm not
8o)
Neil
|
|
I usually content myself with marking the DT as if it were a student essay. There are split infinitives galore.
|
Not alone, the DT suffers from misplaced homophones (eg: poor, pour, pore)
Their spellcheckers will pass them since they are spelt correctly, but with the wrong meaning.
Owed two A spell Chequer
Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It planely marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea
Eye strike a quay and type a word
And weight for it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shoes me strait a weigh
As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee four two long
And eye can put the error write
Its rare lea ever wrong
Hive run this poem threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew
edited to correct there - their
oops!!!
Last edited by: neiltoo on Sun 11 Feb 18 at 14:06
|
"edited to correct there - their"
...... and their was I, thinking that you might have missed a comma after 'there'.
;-)
|
Zero is and can be a handfull but I give him is due he never has corrected me on my spelling which is sometimes a mess.
I have noticed this on some Dutch websites correcting each other on some misspelt words.Then the aggro starts and the subject is down the pan>:)
|
I wouldn't dream of correcting your English, Dutchie. (you would have a field day correcting my Dutch!)
8o)
|
>> Bromp corrected Zero earlier on, on spelling per se, not per say. I haven't seen
>> Zero's response yet, but I hope that he doesn't feel belittled by it.
I don't give a poo, but my phone predictive text fairy is devastated.
|
>> I don't give a poo, but my phone predictive text fairy is devastated.
>>
8o)
|
I agree with Neil.
I do sometimes feel the urge to correct things I know are wrong, and I acknowledge that occasionally the urge does overcome any thought that someone might be offended.
But I don't get upset when someone corrects me. I too have been picked up here over discrete/discreet - by GKNorwich I think - and I like to think I can take it like a man.
Sometimes there has been a vigorous debate/argument over a disputed point, and I don't always go along with the ultra-pedantic view, eg on split infinitives, ending a sentence with a preposition, beginning a sentence with And or But, or some of the apostrophe correctionists who don't acknowledge that possessives can turn into adjectives through useage over time.
But that's one of the joys of English - the rules are a bit flexible and mutable. But you can't really enjoy breaking a rule unless you understand you are doing it.
:)
|
CGNorwich, not GK.
Someone had to... :-)
|
I thought the pedants on here acted as the obligatory clowns...
I'll get my coat...
|
>> What actually goes on in there?
>> Pat
i think you need to find a different word for people who behave as you imply.
A pedant is just someone who cares about getting things right.
Perhaps you mean a Nobby Know-All.
As a pedant, I let things go all the time. There are a few on here who haven't bothered to learn the difference between who's and whose. I leave them to it and just try to pick the right one when I need it. Why embarrass people? If they cared about getting it right, they would.
We don't know about all this ignorance until the internet anyway.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 12 Feb 18 at 01:39
|
>> As a pedant, I let things go all the time. There are a few on
>> here who haven't bothered to learn the difference between who's and whose. I leave them
>> to it and just try to pick the right one when I need it.
Pretty much summarises my approach. Use of the term ethnic and it's derivative ethnics as a cover all term for non white/non British people crossed my line.
|
You are certainly correct that the word was wrongly used, but there seemed to be no intent to cause offence.
Were you just simply trying to educate, or did you sniff something?
|
>> Were you just simply trying to educate, or did you sniff something?
The former.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 12 Feb 18 at 00:32
|
By definition, a pedant is someone who has an excessive concern over relatively minor matters of fact, whether historical details or correct expression.
It is the excessive concern that is objectionable to others. Another aspect which may rile people is that the pedant's motives may not be simply to correct, but to show off his or her knowledge, or possibly even to put down others. Often it comes over as being insensitive at least.
Personally, I have to fight myself over this. Pedantry comes easily to me as an ex-teacher, where a certain amount of it is part of the job. Often I open my mouth to correct the pronunciation of Mrs FP, who is Polish and whose command of English is pretty good and certainly far, far better than my Polish will ever be.
|
When can we send her home ;-)
Seriously I hope she can stay her post 2019!!!!! OR you there in Poland.
|
"When can we send her home ;-)
Seriously I hope she can stay her post 2019!!!!! OR you there in Poland."
Funny you should say that. She has a British passport. And she voted Leave.
|
>> Pretty much summarises my approach. Use of the term ethnic and it's derivative ethnics as a cover all term for non white/non British people crossed my line.
And you reminded me of why I stopped visiting here during Brexit.
I have decided to leave. I may be gone some time.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 12 Feb 18 at 10:18
|
>> >> Pretty much summarises my approach. Use of the term ethnic and it's derivative
>> ethnics as a cover all term for non white/non British people crossed my line.
>>
>> I have decided to leave. I may be gone some time.
I might leave too, but purely because I am unable to understand the first sentence. It certainly is not written in English.
Use of the term 'ethnic' and its derivative 'ethnics' as a cover-all term for non-white/non-British people crossed my line.
After the removal of an apostrophe and the inclusion of three hyphens (the first being essential for understanding, the second two a reader could, I suppose, be expected to interpolate) and four inverted commas (again, probably not essential, but they certainly aid reading) at least it is now readable. I still cannot understand what point he is trying to make though.
|
"I still cannot understand what point he is trying to make though."
Sorry, but your post is obtuse as well as pedantic.
The point was that the use of the word "ethnic" etc. crossed the line of what the person quoted thought was acceptable.
|
|
But what use, which line, and how?!
|
>> But what use, which line, and how?!
It arose in the thread about Masons and the Media and involved a tangent about beekeepers:
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=25449&m=561040&v=e
|
>> But what use, which line, and how?!
That particular misuse of the word ethnic grates in same way that mixing refute and deny or infer and imply do.
|
>> >> But what use, which line, and how?!
>>
>> That particular misuse of the word ethnic grates in same way that mixing refute and
>> deny or infer and imply do.
I suggest that anybody who is bothered by such solecisms should also learn the simple rules concerning when to put an apostrophe in "its" and when to use "whose" and "who's".
It will take about five minutes and they will never get it wrong again.
Not many would spot refute/deny and I think that horse might have bolted anyway.
I told a hospital consultant the other day that I had been nauseated for two hours by a particular drug. He thought that worthy of comment because so many people say they feel "nauseous" implying that they nauseate everybody else.
Last edited by: Manatee on Tue 13 Feb 18 at 13:46
|
>> I suggest that anybody who is bothered by such solecisms should also learn the simple
>> rules concerning when to put an apostrophe in "its" and when to use "whose" and
>> "who's".
Ouch :-)
I'm actually well aware of both, just sloppy when typing.
|
|
But of course they don’t imply that at all do they? Their meaning,I suggest, is quite clear to both parties and both meanings of nauseous are to be found in dictionaries. It is simply a word whose meaning is in the process of change. Indeed I would suggest that the meaning to which you object is the more common.
|
>> But of course they don’t imply that at all do they?
It does to me.
>>Their meaning,I suggest, is
>> quite clear to both parties and both meanings of nauseous are to be found in
>> dictionaries.
Indeed they are, but linguistically it is cobbler's awls.
>> I would suggest that the meaning to which you object is the more common.
Agreed.
Now Pat knows how the mind of a pedant works (mine and the consultant's).
Last edited by: Manatee on Tue 13 Feb 18 at 14:27
|
I'm completely intrigued by all this so do please carry on.
I'm surprised that none of the pedants have expressed any regret at possibly embarrassing the person they are correcting preferring instead, to justify their rudeness.
....although I do note that only a few have chosen to answer that question.
Of those that have, there is only one who expressed a bit of concern.
When I'm training I come across a lot of drivers who will say or write words wrongly. I never feel the need to correct them and certainly not in front of a room full of other drivers.
I'm content in the knowledge that I know it is wrong, I know how it should be said or written to be grammatically correct, but above all I want them to feel comfortable and encourage dialogue, not stifle it.
Pat
|
>>I'm surprised that none of the pedants have expressed any regret at possibly embarrassing the person they are correcting preferring instead, to justify their rudeness.
I don't generally do it so I don't regret it.
Do I really need to say it is unnecessary and nasty to show people up?
Plenty do, and most of them aren't pedants, just nasty bullies.
|
No, you don't need to say that Manatee, but at times it does seem to be worn like a badge of pride by some of the pedants on here.
So, I suppose I have to ask myself, are they just bullies and is that why I react badly to them?
It's the lack of empathy I struggle with.
Pat
|
>> Sorry, but your post is obtuse as well as pedantic.
Pedantry is attention to unnecessary detail. That sentence, as originally written, was unreadable - without interpolation of additional punctuation and removal of a homophone. Fixing it is not pedantry, fixing it is essential for its understanding.
|
"That sentence, as originally written, was unreadable - without interpolation of additional punctuation and removal of a homophone. Fixing it is not pedantry, fixing it is essential for its understanding."
You may try to convince yourself that that is the case, but clearly you managed to understand it - as did I, and, I suspect, most who read it. It offended your sense of propriety and correctness - nothing more.
Fixing it satisfied something within you - your ego, perhaps.
|
>> but clearly you managed
>> to understand it - as did I, and, I suspect, most who read it.
Who wants to 'manage' when the removal of an apostrophe and the insertion of a few inverted commas makes comprehension easy. It's just plain old-fashioned courtesy to the reader to make an effort when writing.
Fixing it proved a point - in this thread.
|
> Who wants to 'manage' when the removal of an apostrophe and the insertion of a
>> few inverted commas makes comprehension easy.
It was obvious before hand, you were just trying to make a point.
|
"I have decided to leave. I may be gone some time."
Is that a flounce?
|
"I have decided to leave. I may be gone some time" is very similar to: "I am just going outside. I may be some time."
Oates was of course never seen again.
Last edited by: Focal Point on Mon 12 Feb 18 at 16:18
|
>> Was he a Quaker?
>>
Nope - he was just a friend.
|
>> How do you think it makes others feel about you when you've pointed out the error of their ways?
I don't know Pat. How does it feel, pointing out how pedantic some people are?
;)
|
If, by being pedantic, I can improve the everyday use of correct English, I'm happy to bear the label of pedant.
I only obtained a GCE "O" level in English (among other subjects) but that was in the days when grammar was taught quite carefully and thoroughly.
These days I could not define the various tenses of verbs, but because their use is ingrained in me, I generally use the correct one for the situation.
I (usually) limit my utterances to glaring examples of incorrect grammar which, unless corrected, will lead to a real deterioration in our language.
If we, as the originating creators of the worldwide English language, do not defend it, who will?
I make errors myself: I fully admit that and if a better exponent of the mystery that is English grammar and word usage is drawn to point out my error, I'm happy to accept the correction with no adverse feelings.
|
Here's one for ya ... I was gonna send an email to sofasofa. When I came to type the word material, I didn't know wevver it was spelled material or materiel, both words checked out as OK via the spiel checker.
grammarist.com/usage/materiel-material/
|
>> Here's one for ya ... I was gonna send an email to sofasofa. When I
>> came to type the word material, I didn't know wevver it was spelled material or
>> materiel, both words checked out as OK via the spiel checker.
Principal and principle is another common mix up.
|
>>Principal and principle is another common mix up.
I used to get caught out on counselor and councilor, until a friend became a counselor.
|
|
It depends if material is material.
|
|
The mind of a pedant is not somewhere I prefer to explore.
|
A pedant is not a type of person. Many types can be pedantic, and people are pedantic about different things.
I imagine you to be pedantic about railways.
|
>> The mind of a pedant is not somewhere I prefer to explore.
>>
“The mind of the pedant is somewhere I prefer not to explore†would be better ;-)
|
As Roger is happy to accept correction, here we are:
1. "I only obtained a GCE "O" level in English (among other subjects) but that was in the days when grammar was taught quite carefully and thoroughly."
Much better: "I obtained only a GCE "O" level in English..."
"Only" qualifies the word or phrase that follows.
2. "I (usually) limit my utterances to glaring examples of incorrect grammar..."
This solecism is more a matter of semantics than grammar. The sentence as it stands says that your utterances are limited to (and thus contain) examples of incorrect grammar. Presumably you meant that when you utter pedantic comments, you restrict yourself to dealing with the worst kinds of error.
Lesson over.
What pedants are actually defending is often far from clear. There is no equation between linguistic correctness and moral rectitude; it is not intrinsically "wrong" to make what most would regard as an error of grammar. Indeed, if enough people start to say and/or write what was formerly regarded as an error, then it stops becoming an error and nobody can do anything about it apart from complain.
All the pedant can do is stick to what is generally regarded as "correct" or acceptable here and now. Language changes - that is a characteristic of a living language; it must change, or it is dead - like Latin. As long as it is being used, it will evolve.
Last edited by: Focal Point on Tue 13 Feb 18 at 14:52
|
|
It's quite entertaining when an irritating pedant raises their neck and points out other people's mistakes, when their own contributions are far from perfect. It's and its would be a good example.
|
This thread has been a waste of time.
Even FP, in trying to illuminate it, has blown himself up with his own leotard.
|
"Even FP, in trying to illuminate it, has blown himself up with his own leotard."
I like it!
(The explosive minimal garment - wonderfully surreal!)
I was going to say it was an example of mixed metaphor, but I won't. Even Shakespeare did those.
|
This is what I've been playing with on Firefox of late ... not that you'd notice.
:o}
www.grammarly.com/
|
>> As Roger is happy to accept correction, here we are:
>> Lesson over.
Thanks for the correction.
In my defence (well I have to defend don't I, as an admitted pedant?).
I think that the original post was made using my phone and as it's a bit of a hassle, I probably didn't consider the construction very well.
Yes, it was clumsy and needed revision.
Point taken. :-)
|
>>If we, as the originating creators of the worldwide English language, do not defend it, who will?
Jings Rog, I don't think even the English you were taught looked much like that of Elizabethan (the first) England.
Language changes, just like society....
|
>> Language changes, just like society....
U R rite LOL
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 15 Feb 18 at 10:04
|
Inside the minds of pedants. - sooty123
