Just stop it! It's driving me mad!

Well you should of said, then I would of stopped!

The poor spelling and punctuation on hear at time's, drive's me mad to!

Totally agree, standards slipped badly.

Because not one of us on here knows what you were meaning to say...

cricketfield73 wrote:The poor spelling and punctuation on hear, drive's me mad to!

Almost got sucked in by that one!

cricketfield73 wrote:The poor spelling and punctuation on hear at time's, drive's me mad to!

Think you mean 'two', dummy!

I just blame my phone.

My friend was crying over people's awful use of grammar - So I hugged her and whispered in her ear, "There, their, they're."

I tell my Grandad over peoples awful use of my grammar

This is also my biggest pet hate by far. I hate people who type as they would speak, and it's this particular one which drives me bonkers.

If your into grammar and spelling get yourself on countdown or something ! This is a football message board with people from all walks of life. Get a grip !

The sad thing is some people think it's correct grammar..It just shows the state of our education system nowadays .. Saxo Is a prime example of this..

I tend to notice a correlation between those who are unable to construct a sentence and those who are unable to construct a coherent argument. Poor grammar serves as a pretty good indicator that it isn't really worth reading on (and by poor I'm not referring to the odd misplaced punctuation mark, typo or auto-correct fail.)

To put it another way, if you want to be taken seriously it's probably a good idea to write in a manner that wouldn't have a primary school teacher reaching for the red pen. Presentation matters.

conyoviejo wrote:The sad thing is some people think it's correct grammar..It just shows the state of our education system nowadays .. Saxo Is a prime example of this..

Surely that should read ' It just shows the state have our education system these days...'

Bacchus wrote:I tend to notice a correlation between those who are unable to construct a sentence and those who are unable to construct a coherent argument. Poor grammar serves as a pretty good indicator that it isn't really worth reading on (and by poor I'm not referring to the odd misplaced punctuation mark, typo or auto-correct fail.)

To put it another way, if you want to be taken seriously it's probably a good idea to write in a manner that wouldn't have a primary school teacher reaching for the red pen. Presentation matters.

Superb post Bacchus.

Shocking spelling in the OP.

Cud ov. Shud ov. Wud ov.

Surely?

Big_Ears_BFC wrote:If your into grammar and spelling get yourself on countdown or something ! This is a football message board with people from all walks of life. Get a grip !

Didn't mention the message board so you get a grip big ears !

TheFamilyCat wrote:Shocking spelling in the OP.

Cud ov. Shud ov. Wud ov.

Surely?

Sorry, you're correct. That's even worse!

Of for have and your for you're are the two that drive me mad

There and Their
Were and we are

If you didn't have this you could of have that

I hate people who say meh and my bad...there I have said it.

Grammar - the difference between knowing your sh1t and knowing you're sh1t.

seriously who gives a flying f**k! more to life than spellings you gimps! UTC

Whoop whoop this is the sound of the police............ spelling police obviously.

seriously who gives a flying f**k! more to life than spellings you gimps! UTC

obvs peeps on ere do or else their wunt be a fred on it, cudda, shudda dun better dan dat.

I remember my A-level English Language teacher telling me there's no such thing as good and bad grammar; instead there is standard and non-standard grammar, the latter being good enough to get a point across without being misunderstood.

For the record, I thought he was talking **** at the time and I still think the same.

Burnley loyal wrote:seriously who gives a flying f**k! more to life than spellings you gimps! UTC

It's not spelling. Gimp

Big_Ears_BFC wrote:Whoop whoop this is the sound of the police............ spelling police obviously.

It's not spelling. But you're funny.

I've started replying with things like 'yes, I of', and 'I of seen that', just to get a reaction.

"Sir, can I lend a pen?"
To which I always replied,
"No, but you may borrow a pen, I'll lend it to you."

The look on their faces! It did no good whatsoever, they just thought I was mad.
The error was repeated virtually every lesson by every age group.
Eventually, I began to think it was me that was wrong.
No, I didn't teach English, as you can probably tell by my punctuation.

Would you help your uncle jack off a horse

Would you help your Uncle Jack off a horse

2 Bee Holed wrote:"Sir, can I lend a pen?"
To which I always replied,
"No, but you may borrow a pen, I'll lend it to you."

The look on their faces! It did no good whatsoever, they just thought I was mad.
The error was repeated virtually every lesson by every age group.
Eventually, I began to think it was me that was wrong.
No, I didn't teach English, as you can probably tell by my punctuation.

So did you borrow it to him?

Walton wrote:So did you borrow it to him?

No, I lended it to him.
I think.

claretdom wrote:Would you help your uncle jack off a horse

Would you help your Uncle Jack off a horse

Wot, know kwestion marks ?

Double negatives really get to me, such as :-

I haven't been nowhere.

I haven't done nothing.

I haven't got nothing.

Eats, shoots and leaves.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/search?inde ... kenbook-21" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Then my breakdown became complete and I knew it was time to retire when the kids all shouted;

"Sir, if you haven't got no pen to borrow him, you could of just said so, you shouldnt of like embarrassed him."

q.e.d.

2 Bee Holed wrote:Then my breakdown became complete and I knew it was time to retire when the kids all shouted;

"Sir, if you haven't got no pen to borrow him, you could of just said so, you shouldnt of like embarrassed him."

q.e.d.

There goes that bloody double negative again. See what I mean ?

Funkydrummer:
I can't see no double negative in my post!

2 Bee Holed wrote:Funkydrummer:
I can't see no double negative in my post!

You don't think you haven't not done one ?

I aks you too think agen.

2 Bee Holed wrote:"Sir, can I lend a pen?"
To which I always replied,
"No, but you may borrow a pen, I'll lend it to you."

The look on their faces! It did no good whatsoever, they just thought I was mad.
The error was repeated virtually every lesson by every age group.
Eventually, I began to think it was me that was wrong.
No, I didn't teach English, as you can probably tell by my punctuation.

This is where teaching has really gone down the pan.

Surely the response to the initial question from the child should have (of) been "of course you can who are you going to borrow one from?

"Surely the response to the initial question from the child should have (of) been "of course you can who are you going to borrow one from?"

I contend that the response should have been, "of course you can, who are you going to lend one to ?"

I haven't not done one no. (crikey is that a triple?)
I could of if eyed wanted too,
but I ain't got no axe to grind with you.

OK funky...you've outlasted me, I'm of for mi tee now innit.

It's never too late to learn ! !

I think spelling is important, but I am generally content to let spelling mistakes pass, and must admit to the occasional slip myself. There are also some simple grammatical errors that are fairly logical or understandable.
The "could of", "should of" etc thing I just don't get though. It simply doesn't make any sense, and it makes me wonder what people's thought process is when they write it. How can "of" - a preposition (expressing the relationship between a part and a whole), possibly be considered to be in any way related to the past tense?

One from Mr Longstaff, my 2nd form English Teacher....

Boy: Can I go to the toilet please, Sir?

TL : I've no idea, young man! I'm an English teacher not a Urologist!

Clarets4me wrote:One from Mr Longstaff, my 2nd form English Teacher....
the irony of his
Boy: Can I go to the toilet please, Sir?

TL : I've no idea, young man! I'm an English teacher not a Urologist!

Out of interest, was this the legendary Mr Langstaffe at St Ted's?. If so he would love the irony of you getting his name slightly wrong on a thread about spelling and grammar.

nil_desperandum wrote:Out of interest, was this the legendary Mr Langstaffe at St Ted's?. If so he would love the irony of you getting his name slightly wrong on a thread about spelling and grammar.

Unfortunately not... this was TJ " Jack " Longstaff, at QEGS during the 1970's... he was my first year form master, and trust me, my friend, you wouldn't get his name wrong either !!

Clarets4me wrote:Unfortunately not... this was TJ " Jack " Longstaff, at QEGS during the 1970's... he was my first year form master, and trust me, my friend, you wouldn't get his name wrong either !!

Actually I should have realised that it wasn't the late Mr Langstaffe, since I don't think anyone ever dared ask if they could be excused to go the toilet during his lessons!