just needs a semicolon!

For Littlemonkeys3:

A possessive subject doesn't have to be alive. So for Jasdip's rule, the apostrophe is for either "is" or "of", excepting "it". The possessive form of "it" is "its" with no apostrophe. That's one that always catches me as I'm typing fast, though, because my brain processes it as word+possessive apostrophe+s, so I'm always going back and correcting it.

The rule for plurals and apostrophes (NOT ends in "s", but plurals) is that the apostrophe goes at the end. Mothers' club = a club for/of mothers. If a word/name ends in "s" but is singular, use apostrophe+s, as usual, for possessive: Puss's boots are the boots belonging to Puss. This glass's streaks are more noticeable than that's. The streaks belong to the glass.

My own commas are a mess because American rules use more, but they're burdensome. UK rules use fewer and I read a lot of UK publications, which are a bad influence on me and my desire to use fewer. It's probably hardest for Canadians who are stuck in the middle. If you really want to know the rules, I'm sure there's a Canadian stylebook that will tell you what is acceptable for publication there. Or just keep doing what you're doing. I haven't seen a lot of egregious comma errors here. Though I do sometimes notice my own, often from where a long sentence ends in a different place than I'd intended. I try to just leave it, but they gave us the edit button, and I feel compelled to use it.

BTW, I can't always spell the words I know how to spell, let alone the ones I don't. I try to fix them with spell check, and I Google a lot of spellings, but it's not always enough. There's a specific part of the brain that handles spelling. It might be related to facial recognition, which I'm also not so good at. :)

plllog LOL why would anyone need a blow up deer? Especially with a bullseye on it? I think I should get my mind in the gutter. I was thinking more along the lines of the following ruminants

I'll use any excuse that I can to put in a picture of goats. FYI there was another goat on my legs that you can't see in this picture.
I am horrible, horrible, for using brackets. I often type as I think, which is probably very confusing for other people to read. It's worse for my husband who is often confused by what I say in person. If my posts are frustrating to others, they can always skip it. Of course if they skip it they will miss out on cute baby goats.

I laughed when I read your comment about skipping your post and missing out on cute baby goats. So true!!!!

A friend of mine raised pygmy goats for milk. Oh they were the MOST adorable little things. He's from Holland and they are common there as are goat dairy farms. Long-eared huggable little minis.

LM3, it's for velcro darts, presumably for learning hunting skills. It was just what came up when I was looking for a vinyl ruminant. :)

VERY cute baby goats! The only goat I've had a lot of truck with was a Nubian who was very cranky, always, but seemed to like me. Of course, I never tried to milk her. :)

Which leads me to one of my own favorite whacky sentences. I knew someone who had moved to a bit of land just outside the city. She had always had horses in her youth, and was glad to be able to do so again. Then she mentioned how she'd like to raise up some goats. "We'll milk them for a couple of years, then maybe have some kids." This was a mother of two who said it. :)

plllog Phew, that's a much better use than where my mind was going. LOL

ugh, don't get me started on commas! I'm forever putting the serial (Oxford) commas into my boss's documents. I don't know where people are learning to leave commas off, but it. is. not. correct! - in my neck of the woods anyway.

Why do woods have a neck, anyway? Maybe the goats hide in there.

A total guess violetwest but I'd image the neck of the woods is the opening? Goats probably do live there though. ;)

LOL Violet, re: the woods.

I was just reading an article yesterday about Oxford commas and how important they are.

My brother, cousin, parents Doug and Darlene are going shopping.

OR: My brother, cousin, parents, Doug and Darlene are going shopping

Ok, I looked it up. Here is what I found on the saying, "In Bill Bryson's "Made in America", the claim is made that the origin of "neck" is the Algonquian word "naiack" meaning "point, corner", Algonquian being the name for a North American native language (and indeed language group). This at least fits with other sources recording its first use as in the USA. "

cool!

There's a wonderful introduction to the section on commas in The Associated Press Guide to Punctuation by Rene J. Cappon. This guy obviously has a sense of humor. :)

Besides nurturing attributions, commas deftly separate clauses, clarify murky sentences, fence off appositives, asides and inessentials, organize series, sunder absolute verbs and direct addresses from the main sentence, and perform a fistful of other important chores.
Despite, or because of, the commas' versitility, they are easily overused.

Because it's for newspapers, and even more so due to AP's history as a wire service where every character literally counted, the AP book is against unnecessary commas. Even so, there are fifteen pages of when, and when not, to use a comma. If you're not sure, it's a handy little book to have. (I am sure, though I sometimes get creative or make typing errors, but it's still a handy book to have when you want a publication with many contributors from different cultures to have a unifying voice. Rule books keep everybody playing together.)

It depends on your writing purpose and audience. As I'm not a journalist, I wouldn't touch the AP rule book. I do proof read and correct others' work every day. My rule book is the Gregg Reference Manual, which I studied and memorized for the legal secretary's certification exam (which was, incidentally, the hardest examination I have ever taken -- far harder than a college final or even the paralegal certification exam.)

Honestly, consistency is probably most important. Find a rule book that applies to your writing purpose and stick with it!

I *thought* there was a word, "swum", but don't think I've ever heard anyone use it.

I'l have to ask my walking spell-check, my DH. He claims he's good at this due to taking Latin through 12th grade.

I will change a sentence to avoid having to decide if I need to use "whom".

Swum is the past participle of the verb to swim. Don't think I've ever heard anyone use it either. Do see "drug" used - i.e. "he drug out the tool kit". Drug would be more common in dialect in some parts of the States, I suppose. But "dragged" would be the correct tense.

I've used "swum"! I think "drug" as a past form of "drag" is also used in England. Violet, I was recommending the AP book because it's very clear, and is adequate for everyday use. I also have Strunk for when it's needed. :)

Whom is easy. It's just taught so poorly that people end up confused, and the language in general is going through a weird change in the use of pronouns. If you don't know the correct places to use he and him you don't have a chance with who and whom (e.g., the correct form is between him and me, since all objects of prepositions are him, her, them, me, whom. It's never right to say between he and I, but so many people are saying it that way that a change seems to be brewing. Between is a preposition, like for. You'd never say, "It's for he."). Whom is the him to the who. I/me, he/him, she/her, they/them, who/whom.

He said she should go to the store. He said who should go to the store?
He asked her to go to the store. He asked whom to go to the store?

Who should go to the store? Whom did you ask to go to the store?

Whom is the object of a verb or preposition. That's all. If you can substitute with he, it's who. If you can substitute with him, it's whom.

It does get a little hairy with subordinate clauses.

He asked Shirley, who is his sister, to go to the store.
He asked Shirley, whom you don't know, to go to the store.

These examples are much easier than some longer and more convoluted sentences. When in doubt use who. Whom isn't much used in modern speech, and didn't even exist until about Shakespeare's time, so can be regarded as an interloper and ignored if you prefer.

Not wanting to put too fine a point on it, but "drug" is conspicuously missing from the full page of conjugations of the verb "to drag". Some words just show up here and there when commonly used in one's surroundings.

This thread is starting to bother me. I feel like I'm back in school and shortly, the teacher is going to start marking a bunch of Xes all over my posts because I messed up some form of the English language horribly and would most likely get an F on my paper. I really don't want to have to think that much! I'm not in an English class, I'm not writing some paper that's going to be graded that my career will then depend on. UGH! I just want to write stuff that I'm thinking...don't want to be graded on it! I'll just leave this thread of the English Professors.

Maybe it'd be a good idea to ruminate on it for a while ... but I wouldn't want to get anyone's goat ... a good example of a ruminant ... but don't let it cow you, either.

Shouldn't we make an effort to improve ourselves, to set high standards, and make an effort, at least, to achieve them?

Is "good enough" ... good enough?

o j

arkansas_girl

You may feel like you are going to be graded, but at least you are not my van.
Just stare at the goats and it will all be ok.

joyfulguy As Stuart Smalley would say, "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it people like me." Well at least the first two parts of the statement are true. LOL

At 52 years old, it's all down hill from here, there ain't no gettin' better. HA!

ETA: Even if I did learn something new, I'd forget it in 5 minutes. :(

Arkansas_girl, some of us find this stuff interesting, but it's not directed at anyone! One of the things I love about GW is that people express themselves in pretty well formed English. Everyone here writes well enough for web posting. There are some forums where the posts are rendered incomprehensible by lack of basic formational syntax, let alone punctuation. The posts here are great. If you're bored with the topic, scroll on by, but it's not about you or your post, or any one else's.

plllog, my comment was directed at joyfulguy as his comment was directed at me(I think). He says: "Shouldn't we make an effort to improve ourselves, to set high standards, and make an effort, at least, to achieve them?"

I never once thought this thread was directed at me. I may not be a literary genius, but I'm far from illiterate!

Oh! My mother used to always say things like that. "Improve the shining hour" was her code for "get off your a** and get something done." I didn't think his was aimed at anyone in particular either coming after livestock puns as it did. :) Since I had just posted an academic style explanation of "whom", just for general interest (I really don't care about the danged word!), I figured I'd gone over the line. Agreed, we are all intelligent, educated and literate. We just can't figure out who's talking to whom, when. ;)

Quite coincidentally, someone, today, asked me if I'd read Between You & Me: Confessions of a Comma Queen by Mary Norris
(http://www.amazon.com/Between-You-Me-Confessions-Comma/dp/0393240185/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1430881290&sr=1-1&keywords=between+you+and+me)
From looking at the Look Inside preview, it seems to be something of a memoir of American English and looks like a fun read. It says Norris was in the copy department at The New Yorker for decades.

I just sent an email to a high school English teacher. English is not my strong point, but I strive to write well. I bet she could point out a mistake or two of mine, so I was a bit nervous to have to email her. I wish I was good enough to be a spelling and grammar officer, but in the meantime, I am just judgmental. Hehehe... :)

Sorry! (Not really.) I have been told if you have to laugh at your own joke that it is not funny, and I wrote it anyway!

Forgive me, Alice, but if the topic is grammar, one of your comments would have been better with the subjunctive tense. For an expression that's contrary to fact (If only I xxxxx rich), or expressing a hope ( I wish I xxxxx something or other), etc.,

Not "I wish I was good enough", but rather "I wish I were good enough".

Some will say either is acceptable in modern English usage, but many disagree. This tense and the similar distinction for use exist in European languages, it's not archaic.

Snidley, thanks for being a grammar police, but as you implied some would disagree. Does that bother you when people don't agree with you?

Not at all. If that were the case (subjunctive, contrary to fact), do you think I would have mentioned that there were different views?

Everyone has the right to be wrong. Some are just louder about it than others.

Look it up for yourself - see what you find. This is something I know because of many decades of foreign language study and use.

How lovely, Snidely, that you've spend so much time on languages, but always know so very much about everything. You must be very proud of yourself, always being so loud and vocal. Oh, excuse me...always expressing your superior skills for our benefit so very often. Please feel free to correct me, as I always learn so very much about how to be snide-ly from you.

Can I like your(alice) post a thousand times? HA!

I hadn't commented on this post because I don't really care if you (all
of you) use every rule of grammar correctly. I'm sure I don't--if I can
understand your point, then I don't need to consult a rule book.

The saving grace of this thread has been, as several posters pointed out, that no one was being targeted or individually corrected--the OP was citing a commercial website,
many of you were discussing rules of grammar in general, violet
mentioned her boss, who probably doesn't post here, and would be anonymous,
anyway. Until
Snidely's comment to alice.

Alice doesn't need me to defend her, as she eloquently demonstrated, but ... it was badly done, indeed, Snidely.

I'm glad to see "I wish I WERE" defended. This illustrates my problem with letting something slide because someone's feelings may be hurt. It's not about shaming an individual, but misuse spreads like a weed. Wouldn't it have been nice to uproot "you know" at its' origins? Would it have been 'mean' to object?

I was just lucky to grow up among people who spoke "Received English". I believe that's the correct term -- and I certainly *received* it, as a gift. I know my 'learnt by ear' English isn't perfect, but it's served me well enough for almost three-quarters of a century. DH had the same advantage. Our DS and his children have it.

Chisue, do you not think people are worth more than the words and language they use? And do you dislike that language has become more alive than it ever has been? I'm curious, as change is inevitable, and there's an idea of not worrying about that which one cannot change. However, that doesn't stop any of us from being who we are and believing what we believe. I'm generally interested in why people think the way they do and how we chose what matters, which you mentioned in your post.

Alice -- It's a reality. People DO evaluate a person by the way he or she speaks -- and appears, including facial expression and body language. On this forum, we have only written words; the visible clues are missing. Words are the only 'background' we have on a participant.

Didn't you add some 'background' when Jem posted that his mother grew up without using the past tense of "was"? It's not about her 'worth'. It's background.

We start out as strangers here, and (generally grammatical) English is "the norm" here. As people cease to be strangers -- whether in person or online -- we decide how much we can accept one another's foibles, not only writing styles, but also personal quirks.

We still don't want to read a 500-word ramble without paragraphs, and we *correct* the writer about it. The person begins to paragraph if he or she wants to be 'heard'. We are ALL always learning.

chisue I disagree with you. Not everyone "evaluates" people on how they write or how they speak. As long as I can understand what a person means it's perfectly fine with me. If I don't understand, then I can always ask for clarification. I think I'm not alone in this. I believe there are many other members who don't judge someone by the style of their writing.

Don't give a crap how people type on informal internet communications. But THIS -- spotted today on the Randall County District Clerk's website:

"e-Recording Vendor's"

(Meant as plural)

On an official, government website. Now that's just embarrassing.

I have some advice to all those looking for advise on GW. One is a verb and one is a noun. They are not even pronounced the same.

Chisue said, "Wouldn't it have been nice to uproot "you know" at its' origins?"

Yes! Another puzzle is how the plural with an apostrophe ever caught on. We've all been writing plurals since kindergarten, so why are we confused now? The only explanation I can think of is that people see it misused so frequently that they've begun to doubt themselves and now add the apostrophe just to be safe.

I also think that if you're "bad" at something like commas, spend an hour learning how to use them. Most grammar and punctuation rules aren't that complicated. There's a few words I chronically misspell, but I use tricks to remember them.

" Not everyone "evaluates" people on how they write or how they speak"

Maybe. But most do.

Not everyone "evaluates" people on how they look either. But someone who makes an effort to be neat and clean in their appearance (no matter how plain or informal is their own attire) will not have a good first impression when seeing someone who's disheveled with uncombed hair and with spots from lunch on their shirt/blouse.

I agree completely with chisue, there's nothing to see here but words and style. It doesn't take but a few seconds to read over what's written. It's easier now with the Houzz web software. I always do that and almost always make small changes. Just like combing my hair, it's my standard for myself.

I don't judge a person's worth by his language even though I can be a stickler in certain contexts. OTOH, it is well known that people who have "educated" accents are paid better, and those who write "correctly" get better jobs. This has nothing to do with their human worth or whether I'd want to be friends with them. Give me a good heart and a tolerant outlook anytime! Some of the better job/better pay people are surely scoundrels and cads, but people do judge them by their language and reward them for it.

SnidelyWhiplash I guess it depends on what you place a value on in your life. By judging someone because they use grammar improperly you are the one that is missing out on the experiences. I guess I don't place as high of a value on "outward" as I do on "inward". I suppose some of that is due to my own life experiences and knowing that everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. My own son can remember incrediably random facts, but due to a brain injury, he cannot communicate well in written form or even formulate thoughts in a flowing matter. He's one of the most caring, thoughtful people I know. He's intelligent, just not when it comes to communicating. It's a shame that if he were to come on a forum like this you'd miss out on getting to know what a great human being he is.

Greetings, Arkansas Girl,

I am sorry that you felt that my comment was directed at you, personally.

I did not mean it that way, at all.

I just wanted to suggest in general that I feel that we should always try to improve ourselves, as we travel this journey of life, including in our use of language.

Some years ago when I was working as a supply teacher, I suggested to the students that they pay attention to the consumer issues, as they'd be dealing with them throughout life ... and to English (or whatever language they might be using), as it was important to express one's self (and I don`t remember correct usage for that) as clearly and precisely as possible.

If they were able to move an idea from their mind into someone else`s, fully formed and exactly as it was in their mind, it would preclude some misunderstandings and facilitate activities going forward, whether of a business or casual nature. That capability would serve them well as they proceeded with their lives, I suggested.

When I worked as a clergyperson, I wanted to present my ideas clearly, so that people would not misunderstand/misinterpret what I was trying to say.

And later, when I worked as a financial advisor, I felt that precision of language was important, as well: misinterpretations could be costly! To the client, and only indirectly to me (if they became angry enough!).

ole joyful

Oh geesh, after reading this post I'm going to feel very self conscious posting here. I realize it's not necessarily directed at any one person, but still it stings.

I guess if the shoe fits, wear it. I'm one of those wearing that shoe.

I wouldn't feel self conscious, and would never want to make anyone feel self conscious. Some of us come by our "noticing" things by training and can't help it if things leap off a page. I had very rigorous grammar, etc. all through grade school and high school. Nuns expected precision on that score. Was an English major and precision was again demanded - and that skill set initially kicked off my career of 33 plus years. So I come by noticing grammar, spelling, punctuation, and syntax somewhat honestly although I have enough restraint not to call things out.

The thing is, it's so easy to mess up a word even if you really do know the correct way to spell it. There are times that I will use the incorrect spelling of there or their even though I am not confused about which is which. I will usually catch it if I check myself and think "DUH!?"

I am also grateful that we can edit NOW! :)

Missy.....everybody has a shoe to wear! If it makes you feel better, there have been some gramatical errors made by the experts in this very thread, lol!

Don't you worry for one second about those shoes.

missy may, enjoy yourself here and have no worries.

Little monkey, I'm sure I would enjoy meeting your son.

Good grammar, good grooming, good manners, good attitude, and other similar things. Everyone can choose to have these and they involve little or no cost. All are things most people can learn if they pay attention and can laugh at their own and others' mistakes. They are also things people pay attention to. When one makes a less than positive impression on others, it's because of what they have or haven't done, it isn't because someone else is looking.

I just wanna be the 100th poster, don't axe me why!

LOL Sleeper!