|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 3:40:39 GMT -5
In order to agree with me, I'd have to state an opinion. I stated facts, I don't want anyone to "agree" with me. Facts are facts, agreeing or disagreeing doesn't make them more or less true. That's why "disagreeing" is disrespectful, because it's a *dismissive* attitude. It implies what I said wasn't true, even though I know it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ascended Mermaid on Mar 15, 2009 3:46:21 GMT -5
Well met. Sometimes it's best not to say that this is black, or this is white. Sometimes, it's better to say "RGB: 127.5" and call it good. This really is nothing more than gray matter.
// Corrected: uneven gray.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 3:53:18 GMT -5
 If you simply refuse to accept reality I can't make you. /end discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Falcom Director of Fanservice on Mar 15, 2009 4:29:25 GMT -5
Okay, this shit's getting too long to read.
The answer is pretty simple. The apostrophe is not part of spoken English, which evolves pretty freely. As far as spoken thing, it simply does not exist. Comparing it to spoken English examples in either case is missing the point.
It is part of written English, which is quite standardized and artificial as a comparison. It does have arbitrary rules and such, because there are necessary to properly convey emotion and meaning, as the constructs we use in speech, like tone and volume, do not exist.
As such, the proper use of punctuation such as the apostrophe is fairly important, as there are some cases where misuse will weaken and confuse your message.
|
|
|
|
Post by Incog Neato on Mar 15, 2009 4:40:52 GMT -5
Ah, its not a problem really. I didn't focus on grammar when writing it, since it's just poetry, but yeah, still criticism. :( It's still a form of writing though! Don't just throw grammar awaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy~ ........... Why are we going back to the fantasy and reality thing again? We never get anywhere with these discussions. :B Some people are hellbent on facts and the truth (insert trademark here) and everyone else is going "Nonononononono". Sigheth. :3 |
|
|
|
Post by Incog Neato on Mar 15, 2009 12:51:38 GMT -5
It sounds like YOU'RE the one who's throwing away reality (grammatical rules) for what's convenient (colloquial language). Nooooooooooooo, why are you continuing with this? :(( This isn't productive arguing when you start accusing others of shtuff! :((((((((((((((((( Man, Allen's gotta make an angry song about this stuff! |
|
|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 13:01:36 GMT -5
You realize it's the masses who have this power don't you? English will change, you realize we've developed over 100 different dialects of English just in the last 100 years you mention? Not you, nor anyone can stop the unrelenting tide of language evolution.
The goal of human communication is to express the most amount of thought in the least amount of effort.
Even if you consider American English "true" English(another logical fallacy mind you, and you refuse to address the first one), you must admit it is the bastard son of UK English. Of which there are also many dialects, each one with very different prescriptive "rules" to them.
Plus, languages that adhere to the tenets you put forth...die. I recommend reading about the death of French, it's on a death spiral because the French thought what you thought. Another language that happened to? Latin.
I admire your conviction, but you must realize you live in an ivory tower in this matter.
If he doesn't I think I will! I wish I could say this was an isolated incident, but reality is linguists and lit majors often butt heads over this same issue.
It's like speaking to an indoctrined cult member, presenting facts that tear away at the fabric of the world they've built for themselves.
My apologies to you Wyrdwad, I know that's quite a rude thing to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Hairdo on Mar 15, 2009 13:15:05 GMT -5
darusgrey, just a quick question.
You're saying that as long as both sides understand the semantic, it's "correct", right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 13:34:57 GMT -5
I don't consider American English to be true English by any means - but the its/it's rule is equally true of British English, and has been true for the last 100+ years. There have been very minor changes to the basic grammar of each language, but its/it's is a steadfast rule that has not seen any alteration since the advent of modern English. I don't foresee it going anywhere. And yes, there have been many dialects, but never once has the grammar used in a dialect of a language been considered "grammatically correct" by academia. Dialects exist, but there is always one "true" version of a language that's used in official capacities. In Japanese, for example, there are a LOT of dialects, many of which are completely and utterly different from one another... but Tokyo Japanese is considered the "correct" dialect, and all business documents and academic teachings throughout the country, even in areas of heavy dialect like Osaka and Okinawa, are presented in Tokyo Japanese. Does that mean people don't speak with an Osakan or Okinawan dialect? No, in point of fact, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE speak with those dialects. Probably millions. They're widely accepted, and their grammar rules are widely used... in fact, there are probably more people in Japan who speak a dialect of the language than there are people who speak proper Tokyo Japanese. But Tokyo Japanese IS STILL PROPER. It's still the standard. It's still the rule. The same can be said of English. The number of people who regularly speak proper English is very small... but proper English is still proper English, and in any school or academic institution throughout the country, proper English is what's taught. If you use "it's" as a possessive on a college essay, there's not a college in the U.S., the U.K., Australia, or South Africa that will refrain from marking it wrong. Because it IS wrong. Even if a lot of people use it that way... it's still improper English grammar. Again, I think we're just arguing semantics here. I completely agree with you that this is happening, and that English is changing... I just disagree that it counts as "grammatically correct" usage. As long as professors in universities continue marking it wrong, then it's NOT GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT. The ideal for language has always been a set of steadfast rules with NO EXCEPTIONS - look at Esperanto, a language invented by a Polish scientist to become the universal language, and the easiest to learn in all the world. How is it made so easy to learn? Simple: steadfast rules with no exceptions! It may not have caught on, but the mere fact that THAT was the ideal for which people were striving should indicate just how important a set of grammatical rules is considered by the more scholarly/learned among us. It's the only way to ensure a language will last, and remain comprehensible throughout history. -Tom Also, I wouldn't recommend mentioning Esperanto, it's a case that proves the exact opposite of what you're trying to say. Languages that don't change die. The reason Esperanto could not catch on is because it couldn't deal with many issues, it was boring, dull, it required you to say things in a overly complex way just to get across very basic ideas. Yes, if a successful linguistic transaction occurs, then what you said, regardless of how you said it, is grammatical. We often forget that the goal of language is communication, and as long as we're communicating, it's all good. |
|
|
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Mar 15, 2009 13:42:59 GMT -5
Yes, but in poetry you can throw these things away for awesome effect!
|
|
|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 13:50:35 GMT -5
You're an English degree holder, I *know* they teach you about logical fallacies.
This proves what exactly? Not only is it arbitrary, it's anecdotal(fallacy #3). And if we're administering anecdotal evidence then it's still not correct, because as a professor myself, who has, at points, taught English(ESL), I wouldn't mark it wrong, and neither would any linguist I know.
|
|
|
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Mar 15, 2009 13:52:10 GMT -5
AN ANCIENT LAND OF Ys
taken over by disease
THERE'S NO ESCAPE
Its. It's. It is.
Your and you're.
Why can't we settle our
Differences!
Grammar or not.
We're all simply hot
And sexy gamers
[sampling from Street Fighter]
DARUSGREY VS. WYRDWAD
"ROUND 1"
"FIGHT"
"wah"
"KYA"
"SHORYUKEN"
*female losing scream*
WYRDWAD WINS
"ROUND 2"
"FIGH-"
Its. It's. It is.
Your and you're.
Why can't we settle our
Differences!
Grammar or not.
We're all simply hot
And sexy gamers
Now why don't you all shut up
I just want criticism
C'mon fools its done
I just need to know
Please now, be quiet
At least Yakra's awesome!
Everyone it should be done...
'CAUSE I WROTE THE SONG
Its. It's. It is.
Your and you're.
Why can't we settle our
Differences!
Grammar or not.
We're all simply hot
And sexy gamers
[voices are whispered and eventual overlap]
darusgry,wyrdwad,unsavory,redhairdo,nunuu,yakra,captain
IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD
IF I USE IT WRONG
ITS NOT THE END OF THE WORLD
IF ITS NOT CORRECT
Y'SEE RIGHT THERE?
THAT WAS POSSESSIVE
BIIIIIIIITCHES
|
|
|
|
Post by Nalacakes on Mar 15, 2009 14:02:49 GMT -5
Arguing about grammar tastes like burning. Arguing online also tastes like burning. Arguing about grammar online tastes like burning with extra burning. So while I've been watching the progression of this thread, I've sort of refrained from posting. That being said... AN ANCIENT LAND OF Ys taken over by disease THERE'S NO ESCAPE Its. It's. It is. Your and you're. Why can't we settle our Differences! Grammar or not. We're all simply hot And sexy gamers [sampling from Street Fighter] DARUSGREY VS. WYRDWAD "ROUND 1" "FIGHT" "wah" "KYA" "SHORYUKEN" *female losing scream* WYRDWAD WINS "ROUND 2" "FIGH-" Its. It's. It is. Your and you're. Why can't we settle our Differences! Grammar or not. We're all simply hot And sexy gamers Now why don't you all shut up I just want criticism C'mon fools its done I just need to know Please now, be quiet At least Yakra's awesome! Everyone it should be done... 'CAUSE I WROTE THE SONG Its. It's. It is. Your and you're. Why can't we settle our Differences! Grammar or not. We're all simply hot And sexy gamers [voices are whispered and eventual overlap] darusgry,wyrdwad,unsavory,redhairdo,nunuu,yakra,captain IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD IF I USE IT WRONG ITS NOT THE END OF THE WORLD IF ITS NOT CORRECT Y'SEE RIGHT THERE? THAT WAS POSSESSIVE BIIIIIIIITCHES This is magnificent. Bravo~! ^_^ |
|
|
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Mar 15, 2009 14:04:47 GMT -5
You're very welcome! This might have to be on my first indie release, kekekekekekeke.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Hairdo on Mar 15, 2009 14:21:45 GMT -5
Yes, if a successful linguistic transaction occurs, then what you said, regardless of how you said it, is grammatical. We often forget that the goal of language is communication, and as long as we're communicating, it's all good. s0 tis meanz daT sin-sy u gheto whato i meano, ima usin' propa English th4ts whut u sad And if we're administering anecdotal evidence then it's still not correct, because as a professor myself, who has, at points, taught English(ESL), I wouldn't mark it wrong, and neither would any linguist I know. So, as a teacher, you wouldn't mark it wrong the way I said what I said above, before this last quote? I hope your students get a job when they grow up and compose their CVs writing that way. I don't mean to offend (I really don't. Please, don't be; I know my sentence above was harsh and can easily come as being offensive, but it's true), but if you, as a teacher, let your students learn english and use it the way above, how well do you expect them to perform in life as professionals? They would suffer. I think that, as a teacher, it is your responsibility to "correct" them when they do such "mistakes" to assure they will stay well in the future! Regardlessly what's proper/unproper, right/wrong... you shouldn't compromise their lives for your ideals! |
|
|
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Mar 15, 2009 14:38:40 GMT -5
I personally agree with you. While it is technically that there is a right and wrong way of using "its/it's", and I agree with you I also agree with Darusgrey, since it's on a forum and it's just like if you're speaking. Only speaking you can't tell... But yes, it's a forum and it'sn't an extremely important thing. An article? Yes, do it right PLEASE! A story? Again, do it right. However, since I'm just chilling with friends for good discussion it would be annoying. Since it's about a proper writing thing, so its good for this discussion. If I had used it wrong on some Spam post I'd be mighty pissed, y'know?
|
|
|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 14:41:10 GMT -5
They're not incorrect so why would I mark them wrong? The sentence you wrote is grammatical, I can clearly understand what you said, a successful transaction, it's even normal in some dialects of English.
Arguing the social aspects of the norm of prestige is a very different discussion. There are obvious social repercussions to the style or dialect of a language you adhere to, but it's still English.
This is a red herring logical fallacy, whether or not my students get a job does not change that what you said is still grammatical English. You're trying to go down a path where by attempting to discredit a portion of my profession, you discredit me and what I say, this leads to another logical fallacy called populism. Like the fact that many of you "agree" with Wyrdwad, even though in an actual academic debate he would of lost by now the moment he refused to address fallacies, because he is an (understandably) more popular member of this community.
To Wyrdwad:
I cannot respond to you if you insist on using fallacies over and over again, we're still in the circle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Hairdo on Mar 15, 2009 15:01:17 GMT -5
This is a red herring logical fallacy, whether or not my students get a job does not change that what you said is still grammatical English. You're trying to go down a path where by attempting to discredit a portion of my profession, you discredit me and what I say, this leads to another logical fallacy called populism. Like the fact that many of you "agree" with Wyrdwad, even though in an actual academic debate he would've lost by now the moment he refused to address fallacies, because he is an (understandably) more popular member of this community. Sorry, but I was going to voice my thoughts like I did with or without Wyrdwad around, so it has absolutelly nothing to do with populism. To begin with, I started arguing with you on all that before Wyrdwad did. Being the only one defending an ideal or not doesn't change a thing, I don't mind even if I was the only one. |
|
|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 15:01:25 GMT -5
I clearly mentioned the circular logic of English authoritarianism. You insist that you have some higher authority on English language over the general population, in which case we lead to the discussion of "who gave you that authority?" followed by "who gave that person that authority" and the chain continues until we get to someone who simply proclaimed authority to themselves for arbitrary reasons. There is no such authority for any language in the world(though the French certainly do try...and fail), your claim to authority is arbitrary(and is in-fact, the defining aspect of prescription), the fact that prescription cannot be enforced negates authority. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_prescriptionSince you insist this authority still exists, we are stuck in a loop. Hell, look at the people who made the rules you adhere to, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_linguistic_prescription_in_English , random people. |
|
|
|
Post by Skeletore has a boner on Mar 15, 2009 15:08:53 GMT -5
This is a red herring logical fallacy, whether or not my students get a job does not change that what you said is still grammatical English. You're trying to go down a path where by attempting to discredit a portion of my profession, you discredit me and what I say, this leads to another logical fallacy called populism. Like the fact that many of you "agree" with Wyrdwad, even though in an actual academic debate he would've lost by now the moment he refused to address fallacies, because he is an (understandably) more popular member of this community. Sorry, but I was going to voice my thoughts like I did with or without Wyrdwad around, so it has absolutelly nothing to do with populism. To begin with, I started arguing with you on all that before Wyrdwad did. Being the only one defending an ideal or not doesn't change a thing, I don't mind even if I was the only one. I said it leads to populism, not that I specifically accused you of doing that(though I think that trend is clear in comments *others* have made in this thread). Also I am not espousing an ideal, so we're not comparing two different ideologies, I am a scientist, linguistics is a science, we peddle in facts. |
|
