[skyhintack]

Incorrect-
Don't use no double negatives!

Double negatives, would (at least in a math perspective) cancel each other out making it a postive statement.
The only time we would use double negatives would be in Spanish (or other languages).

Fixed-
Don't use no double negatives!

Correct-
Don't use double negatives!


Thanks to my 6th grade English teacher for this.

[Advertisements]

A quiz on the correct use of there/they're/their.

[sari]

A quiz on the correct use of there/they're/their.

[zorba the geek]

Final Score: 9/10

No.9 got me, it's easy when you read a full sentence! If you write a sentence yourself,then the confusion starts.

Thank's sari

[Mike]

Love the quotes Oblomov, pretty funny - you might want to post it in the Joke section to get more attention.

Edited by Mike, 15 December 2008 - 06:08 PM.

[Onaipian]

10/10 for me!! That was pretty easy... I wonder what *sari got...

[sari]

I just found a shirt you all can buy me for Christmas:

"I am the Grammarian about whom your mother warned you".

[zorba the geek]

ELA TORA sari,you're not "that" bad!

This one is suits you much better and i'll gladly buy it for you!







Cheers
Zorba

[stettybet0]

Hmm... Something I noticed today from sari's sig...

I am more active on weekdays than weekends, so my response may be slower then.

I think she is trying to say that her responses will be slower on weekends, but the "then" at the end of the sentence refers to "weekdays", does it not? Not grammatically incorrect, I guess, but logically incorrect (why would her responses be slower when she's more active on the forum?).

[sari]

Hehe - yeah, I've been aware of that for a while and been too lazy to change it. Guess I have to now.

[PaulOF]

Oh, nice topic. I wish I could have joined it earlier, but I have only been here a few days.

I offer a few of those constructions which most annoy me:

1) Give it to she who can best use it.

2) The use of "seven items or less" when one means "seven items or fewer" has caused me to stand in the aisles of supermarkets screaming. (For the geeks among us, less is for floats, fewer is for ints.)

3) The words "infer" and "imply" do not mean the same thing.

4) Neither do "affect" and "effect."

5) I am distressed by people who write as if there were no subjunctive mode.

On the other hand the rules for like/as and that/which are sufficiently subtle and (for me) inutile that I regard blind obedience to them as pedantic.

Obligatory Question
Many long years ago, perhaps when the old grey mare was what she used to be, I was taught the following rules for use of "will" and "shall":

In the first person "shall" suggests intent whereas "will" expresses determination.
I shall watch television this evening. I will fail you if you don't do your homework.

In the second and third persons, the opposite holds.
He will go to the movies. You shall not pass!

Does anybody actually observe this nicety of expression?

Paul (who suggests that you paste B000O3LX1S into Google and see what you get.)

[sari]

Apostrophe Protection Society

A lot of people should go read this.

[Artellos]

Apostrophe Protection Society

A lot of people should go read this.

Wow, Informative site!
I learned quite a bit here

Regards,
Olrik

[ZedU54]

the use of may and can as in "can i?" vs "may i?" is another one i see

also who vs whom as in "for whom the bells toll" vs "who is ringing the bells?" is a more complicated one that is beyond me.

and while i am at it, me vs myself is one i have yet to get my head around

...brand new to this forum...I have a pretty good understanding of grammar myself (in a couple of different languages, no less)...forgive my 'misuse' of the ellipsis ; I use it that way to convey an ongoing train of thoughts. Some (belated) answers to these issues:
...These are some good ones. 'Can' and 'may' are often interchanged; technically, that is incorrect. 'Can' implies physical ability; 'may' implies permission. Most often, people use 'Can I?' when asking permission; they should more correctly use 'May I?'.
...'Who' vs 'whom': that is a nominative vs. objective case issue. 'Who' is nominative case; 'whom' is objective. Strictly speaking, 'who' should only be used as the subject of a sentence or clause or as a predicate nominative, and 'whom' as a direct or indirect object or object of a preposition. Both of your examples are grammatically correct:
'Who is ringing the bells?' ('Who' is the subject of the sentence)
'For whom the bell tolls' ('Whom' is the object of the preposition 'for')
Also: 'Who are you?' (predicate nominative; subject is acutally 'you' and 'to be' is an intransitive verb, that is, you cannot use the objective case with it)
'We just found out who the culprit is' (subject of the dependent clause 'who the culprit is')
...'Myself' is a reflexive pronoun rather than the objective pronoun 'me'. It refers an action back to the subject (and is sometimes used for emphasis).
...of course, these lines have been blurred in common speech, and strictly adhering to and insisting on absolutely following rules like this is likely to get you labelled a 'purist' and/or an 'old fogey'...
...also, we must consider the differences between American, British, Canadian, Australian, and other versions of English...they all have slightly different grammatical structures...

[ZedU54]

...deleted...

Edited by ZedU54, 21 March 2009 - 09:44 AM.

[antmanbee]

Sometimes I talk like regular folk.
Rather than say "You're attempting to deceive me".
I say...
yer funnin me