If you went through all the grammatical and spelling ewrrors on here it would be a lifetime (Charlton Lifetime) job. This is a fans' site not one for scholars, and not all fans have had the time or luxury to undergo extensive schooling. Many have probably been too busy making a living and bring up their children to spend too much time exploring the mechanics of the English language. So long as the message is clear and states its case, spelling and grammar, although errors can be slightly grating on the nerves, are unimportant. It's the thought what counts, though it would be wonderful if we all had the literary and grammatical ability of (say) Stephen King
If you went through all the grammatical and spelling ewrrors on here it would be a lifetime (Charlton Lifetime) job. This is a fans' site not one for scholars, and not all fans have had the time or luxury to undergo extensive schooling. Many have probably been too busy making a living and bring up their children to spend too much time exploring the mechanics of the English language. So long as the message is clear and states its case, spelling and grammar, although errors can be slightly grating on the nerves, are unimportant. It's the thought what counts, though it would be wonderful if we all had the literary and grammatical ability of (say) Stephen King
If you went through all the grammatical and spelling ewrrors on here it would be a lifetime (Charlton Lifetime) job. This is a fans' site not one for scholars, and not all fans have had the time or luxury to undergo extensive schooling. Many have probably been too busy making a living and bring up their children to spend too much time exploring the mechanics of the English language. So long as the message is clear and states its case, spelling and grammar, although errors can be slightly grating on the nerves, are unimportant. It's the thought what counts, though it would be wonderful if we all had the literary and grammatical ability of (say) Stephen King
If you went through all the grammatical and spelling ewrrors on here it would be a lifetime (Charlton Lifetime) job. This is a fans' site not one for scholars, and not all fans have had the time or luxury to undergo extensive schooling. Many have probably been too busy making a living and bring up their children to spend too much time exploring the mechanics of the English language. So long as the message is clear and states its case, spelling and grammar, although errors can be slightly grating on the nerves, are unimportant. It's the thought what counts, though it would be wonderful if we all had the literary and grammatical ability of (say) Stephen King
If you went through all the grammatical and spelling ewrrors on here it would be a lifetime (Charlton Lifetime) job. This is a fans' site not one for scholars, and not all fans have had the time or luxury to undergo extensive schooling. Many have probably been too busy making a living and bring up their children to spend too much time exploring the mechanics of the English language. So long as the message is clear and states its case, spelling and grammar, although errors can be slightly grating on the nerves, are unimportant. It's the thought what counts, though it would be wonderful if we all had the literary and grammatical ability of (say) Stephen King
*Error's
minus the '
I am sure that was a deliberate error.
No I think it's because E and W are next to eachother on a keyboard.
What's the point in all the various grammar rules we have? To make educated people feel superior to those who weren't, back when we have a rigid class system?
So you only know basic grammar if you had "the luxury to undergo extensive schooling", really? I'm pretty sure you're taught it is "songs" not "song's" at a very early age and at every state or private school in the country. The only possible excuse is if you grew up with English as a second language, or at least in a country where English wasn't the first language.
So you only know basic grammar if you had "the luxury to undergo extensive schooling", really? I'm pretty sure you're taught it is "songs" not "song's" at a very early age and at every state or private school in the country. The only possible excuse is if you grew up with English as a second language, or at least in a country where English wasn't the first language.
When do you use an apostrophe for plurals? And more to the point, why the complexity? Why not have a standard rule for all words? Definitely a class thing.
in the words of the immortal Leroy Ambrose ... Y'AAL FAIL the second deliberate ewrror test .. it's the 'thought THAT counts' l'il grasshoppers, and NOT 'the thought what counts' .. now y'all go stand on one leg out in the rain for six hours
So you only know basic grammar if you had "the luxury to undergo extensive schooling", really? I'm pretty sure you're taught it is "songs" not "song's" at a very early age and at every state or private school in the country. The only possible excuse is if you grew up with English as a second language, or at least in a country where English wasn't the first language.
When do you use an apostrophe for plurals? And more to the point, why the complexity? Why not have a standard rule for all words? Definitely a class thing.
There is a standard rule although there are exceptions ie Child and Children. Ox and Oxen which are relics from older English usage. Also words ending with S are sometimes given an apostrophe and sometimes not ie St James Park or St James' Park.
The apostrophe indicates ownership rather than a plural.
I can see lots of ewrrors in the England defence happening when we have our next England manger.Perhaps we will have a mis-pwonounciation thwead ,if we dont have one alweady .Its a shame Fwank Wibewy has never been the victim of a wobbewy.
So you only know basic grammar if you had "the luxury to undergo extensive schooling", really? I'm pretty sure you're taught it is "songs" not "song's" at a very early age and at every state or private school in the country. The only possible excuse is if you grew up with English as a second language, or at least in a country where English wasn't the first language.
When do you use an apostrophe for plurals? And more to the point, why the complexity? Why not have a standard rule for all words? Definitely a class thing.
you NEVER use an apostrophe for plurals .. 's is shorthand for is .. the song is good .. the song's good .. IS more often is used for emphasis .. He IS a good player more emphatic than he's a good player
you NEVER use an apostrophe for plurals .. 's is shorthand for is .. the song is good .. the song's good .. IS more often is used for emphasis .. He IS a good player more emphatic than he's a good player
You only use an apostrophe on plurals in two cases:
1)The word already ends in an S and there is no different plural term (which there are for many 's' ending plurals, such as foci being the plural of focus) 2)Attributing ownership of to many subjects, e.g "The players' socks", i.e. socks belong to the players, as opposed to "The player's socks", which is the socks belonging to a player.
"word" apostrophe "s" though is never the plural. (cue somebody finding an obscure exception to this rule)
I'm not sure why this is seen as complicated by so many people. It's not as if I was brilliant at English in school. The only place I can see for genuine confusion around the apostrophe is with "its" and "it's". Even then it's not very complicated, but it is counter-intuitive. "Andy's" as in belonging to Andy is the normal grammar, but when we replace and with "it" then it becomes "its" instead of the expected "it's".
This is because we have "his", "hers" and "its" as the three ownership denominators. Therefore "Andy's thing" is actually a shorting/combination of Andy and His. However, with "it" we'd have a duplication. If "it's" was used that would suggest the the full term was "it its", so in this case the first "it" is drop and it becomes simply "its".
And it's not a class thing, both my parents grew up on council estates, and they both had decent grammar, and that's despite both leaving school at 15.
It's a laziness thing, people are too lazy to use or even learn how to properly use language. It's a very British thing to a certain extent, too lazy to learn English properly, let alone foreign languages. It's just like the stupidly long maths thread a while ago. People arguing over and over again for the wrong answer, despite being told the correct answer and why it was correct. Even after that they argued that's not what they were taught in school, despite it then being proved that the correct way is taught to every 11 year old in the country and has been since the war.
There seems to be an undercurrent in western culture at the moment of being proud of ignorance and being suspicious of anyone who shows any form of intelligence. It won't be long until we're as bad as America, legislating against the education of scientific theories on superstitious ground.
So you only know basic grammar if you had "the luxury to undergo extensive schooling", really? I'm pretty sure you're taught it is "songs" not "song's" at a very early age and at every state or private school in the country. The only possible excuse is if you grew up with English as a second language, or at least in a country where English wasn't the first language.
When do you use an apostrophe for plurals? And more to the point, why the complexity? Why not have a standard rule for all words? Definitely a class thing.
you NEVER use an apostrophe for plurals .. 's is shorthand for is .. the song is good .. the song's good .. IS more often is used for emphasis .. He IS a good player more emphatic than he's a good player
You use an apostrophe for the plural of single letters and numbers, e.g. dotted the i's and crossed the t's. Completely pointless other than to correct people.
Comments
solly salad!
(This will be on Football Rumours within the hour!)
The apostrophe indicates ownership rather than a plural.
Nothing to do with class at all.
1)The word already ends in an S and there is no different plural term (which there are for many 's' ending plurals, such as foci being the plural of focus)
2)Attributing ownership of to many subjects, e.g "The players' socks", i.e. socks belong to the players, as opposed to "The player's socks", which is the socks belonging to a player.
"word" apostrophe "s" though is never the plural. (cue somebody finding an obscure exception to this rule)
I'm not sure why this is seen as complicated by so many people. It's not as if I was brilliant at English in school. The only place I can see for genuine confusion around the apostrophe is with "its" and "it's". Even then it's not very complicated, but it is counter-intuitive. "Andy's" as in belonging to Andy is the normal grammar, but when we replace and with "it" then it becomes "its" instead of the expected "it's".
This is because we have "his", "hers" and "its" as the three ownership denominators. Therefore "Andy's thing" is actually a shorting/combination of Andy and His. However, with "it" we'd have a duplication. If "it's" was used that would suggest the the full term was "it its", so in this case the first "it" is drop and it becomes simply "its".
And it's not a class thing, both my parents grew up on council estates, and they both had decent grammar, and that's despite both leaving school at 15.
It's a laziness thing, people are too lazy to use or even learn how to properly use language. It's a very British thing to a certain extent, too lazy to learn English properly, let alone foreign languages. It's just like the stupidly long maths thread a while ago. People arguing over and over again for the wrong answer, despite being told the correct answer and why it was correct. Even after that they argued that's not what they were taught in school, despite it then being proved that the correct way is taught to every 11 year old in the country and has been since the war.
There seems to be an undercurrent in western culture at the moment of being proud of ignorance and being suspicious of anyone who shows any form of intelligence. It won't be long until we're as bad as America, legislating against the education of scientific theories on superstitious ground.
Here's a good link about apostrophes
http://www.eng-lang.co.uk/apostrophe_rules.htm
You'll notice at the very top it states when the apostrophe should be used, and that that list doesn't contain plurals at all.
Unless the second f is the initial of someone that owns the sake. Then it's FF's.