"Definately" is not a word! (1 Viewer)

[Ron-P]

Peace Out~

 

[Dennis Reno]

I could make the effort to spell it correctly, but I really don't give a rats ass.

You summed up my feelings. I guess I won't get the HTF Proof Reader position! Damn, life is so unfair...

 

[NickSo]

Me fail english? Thats unpossible!

 

[Drew Bethel]

>>>Guess I'm just not as smart as you there Allen. BTW, if your going to bag on people for there spelling, maybe you should proof read first.

 

[Kevin P]

These threads always turn out the same. Someone posts a reply and then someone else comments on "they're" grammatical errors!

KJP

 

[KeithH]

Dam, we's gots sum reel iliterits hear.

 

[Ron-P]

Uhhh, I think you mean "you're"..."YOU'RE".

Well, like I said in my first post, "I don't give a rats ass". But, if you are going to correct someone, you better be correct yourself.
Everyone misspells words and makes grammatical errors. Some of you need to accept that and move on.
Peace Out~

 

[Mike Broadman]

For engineers participating in the same thread!

Four, not for.
Wow, what a complete waste of energy. How fun.

 

[Craig F]

Here is the definitive list of good writing rules. Enjoy!!
http://www.plainlanguage.gov/library/writegood.htm

 

[Sean Oneil]

What train companies do you engineers work for?

 

[TonyD]

hmm this certinly has been an interesting ideal for a thread.
probly go-on fer a while to.

 

[TheoGB]

Everyone misspells words and makes grammatical errors.

Well I'm a physicist. For what it's worth, grammatical errors are a hell of a lot easier than misspellings. I might well (and have) fail to use an apostrophe correctly or put the wrong their/there when typing fast. This is reasonable.
However, I never misspell definitely because I know how it's spelt. I taught myself to get it right (partly by pronouncing it in my head with an 'i'). There is a difference. Some people have trouble spelling. Well I'm one of them but I've learned from my spell checker - 'separate' being one of those words I've learned to spell correctly because of it...
I'm not trying to be some sort of fascist here but I imagine there are internet users now who believe 'definately' is a word. In fact I've met some of them. But I'm not having a go at your Ron, however you seem to have taken this thread as some sort of personal crusade/insult!! Any man with a pint of bitter in his sig can be exempt from being told how to sort out his spelling/grammar!!

 

[Rex Bachmann]

TheoGB wrote:


Quote:



I'm not trying to be some sort of fascist here but I imagine there are internet users now who believe 'definately' is a word.






This whole thread is based on utter folly. The premise you are working under: that the spelling of a word establishes the word as "legitimate" is not only a leftover notion from the 19th century, but is wrong-headed as well.

The spoken language is the language! Writing is merely a highly imperfect and highly mutable (and ultimately futile) attempt to codify language. Rules of prescriptive grammar are ultimately the dictates of one group in power trying to impose its dialect of the language on the others who speak other variants of that language. ("A language is a dialect with an army . . .")

Long before there was ever writing people were speaking their various dialects in their various languages and whether they said [tuh-may-to] or [tuh-mah-to] was something they understood as variation by distant neighbors. The early history of even modern English shows sometimes wide variation in spelling. Would you argue from among those variants that the speakers in ca. 1500 didn't know their own language just because they may have had 5 different variant spellings (and perhaps pronunciations) of any given word? Preposterous.

Speakers who "mix up" words like they're, their, and there, or are and our, or your and you're in writing do so in many cases because in their dialects these are homophones. That means, to them, these words sound EXACTLY alike one another, even if they don't in your dialect. That tends to increase the so-called grammatical error count (which is usually misunderstood spelling error). As long as they know where to use them naturally in context, there's no "grammatical" error.

Attempts to dictate how language will be spoken based on often arbitrary rules for a written standard always fail---ALWAYS. And that's because language, like almost every other phenomemon around us, changes over time. Words and whole expressions change meaning, pronunciation, or are lost altogether. That's why we have "dialects" (e.g., your could care less/couldn't care less silliness of a thread or two ago).

As some of the posters here have said, they "could care less" about rules dictated by an elite, and they will go on speaking (and writing) the way they do, despite the "rules".

"Definately"/"definitely" exists as a meaningful sound sequence (i.e., a word) regardless and independent of its spelling!!! (I could try to explain why this is so, but that gets us into the "bored-to-tears" territory for this audience.)

You really need to take a good introductory course in linguistics and human language. For a "scientist", you---as well as some of the persons who have backed you on some of your claims---really have some very unscientific notions about language.

 

[TheoGB]

Sorry Rex, of course you are right. And logically following from your argument 2+2=9 or indeed any other number because logical rules aren't there enhance communication. After all, it seems logic has nothing to do with science...

 

[Marianne]

Now I'm going to take my pedantic arse out of here.

BTW TheoGB there is no such word as "arse" the correct word in this instance would be "ass"!

 

[Drew Bethel]

For shizzle, Marriane

 

[Derek Miner]

When it comes to message boards and other Internet sites, the one thing that really annoys me is the use of "would of" instead of "would've" or "would have".

Nobody learns these things by reading them it seems, they just pick them up by ear. Then when they write them out, it becomes something new. I wish I could remember more of these that I have observed...

I'm certainly not immune to all this. I know I've misused "irregardless" and "entitling" before. I used to always screw up the "it's"... you can use apostrophes for contractions AND possessives EXCEPT in this case. The possessive of "it" is simply "its." I've finally stopped that one.

A lot of the other stuff like "than" and "then" or "affect" and "effect" never were much of a problem for me, oddly enough. I do get bothered when I see the wrong ones used, but I usually keep it to myself.

 

[Mike Broadman]

So, Rex, are you saying that "definately" is just as valid a spelling of the word as "definitely?" That doesn't make much sense. The whole point of a written language is to have a way of communicating with people who we don't speak to. Comparing it to the 15th century doesn't really work. Back then, most people were limited to contact with their local communities, except for traveling merchants and such. Today, the US is uses one written language.

Also, the relationship between spoken language and written isn't as simple as you make it out. Hebrew and Chinese, for example, place much stronger emphasis on the written language. Hebrew speaking people all over the world conform to one written language, even though they sound very different when they speak. African cultures are the opposite, with a strong oral tradition and little written.

 

[Dennis Reno]

...these are homophones

Rex - calling us all homophobes will not solve anything
BTW, anyone else long for the days when the HTF included a spell checker??? Uhtrocity's lyke thees kud be prevented!

 

[Malcolm R]

BTW, anyone else long for the days when the HTF included a spell checker??? Uhtrocity's lyke thees kud be prevented!

Spell checker is back, announced several weeks ago. Big gray button on the right, at the bottom of the post form, next to "Submit Reply" and "Reset Form." I can see it.