Slashdot Mirror

The 'should' is possessive, so yes.

WTF?! This is a joke, right? You do understand the perfect tenses are formed with the verb 'to have,' eg. You should have gone to school, not with the preposition 'of.' Of course you do!

Again I have to explain to people the English language... It's called a "parenthetical expression." A parenthetical expression is an expression which is inserted into the flow of thought. It may be in the middle of a sentence or between sentences, but it DOES NOT DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. (emphasis mine, source http://englishplus.com/grammar...)

Let's simplify the sentence and then expand it back up. The base structure of the sentence is: The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That is the meat of the sentence and the essence of the law. There is also some text in there about how the security of a free State requires a well regulated Militia, but there is no law requiring a well regulated Militia to be in place. Now I would argue that the well regulated Militia is operated by the "State" as you say through the National Guard program which is operated individually by the 50 States. However, the fact that DC is not a State and does not have a Militia should not be construed to mean that they can ban guns there as the residents of the District are still people who have rights, one of which is to keep and bear Arms, which shall not be infringed.

until the secure boot controversy was diffused

Diffused through what? Or are you struggling with basic grammar?

unfortunately it's/its is an outlier and does not follow that usual convention.

simple way to remember is it's = it is and its = possession.

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000227.htm

disclaimer: I am not a grammar nazi.

Hers or Her's? Her's does not exist. Hers is the correct spelling. Example: That scarf is hers. See also Possessive Pronouns and Apostrophes with Pronouns

"Possessive adjectives" in English are sometimes misspelled with apostrophes ("it's", "her's").

Now get off my lawn, you illiterate punk.

It's incorrect grammatically but still a common idiom, especially for spoken language.

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000270.htm
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/quite+a+ways

Alot and a lot are also used differently.

• alot = many
• a lot = a lot, where lot can mean many things, a lot can mean a parcel of land while alot always means many.

Actually, very much no. There is no such English word, "alot". The two words, "a lot", mean many.
From: Re: alot vs. a lot

"alot" is not a word in English and is clearly incorrect. "a lot" is the correct word for most purposes. See below for more details:

"Alot means nothing because it is not a word in the English language and therefore should not to be used." SOURCE: http://www.garypaulson.net/archives/allot-vs-alot-vs-a-lot-spelling/

"A lot (two words) is an informal phrase meaning a large portion or large quantity of something." SOURCE: http://www.garypaulson.net/archives/allot-vs-alot-vs-a-lot-spelling/

"Allot is a verb that means to distribute, to assign a portion, or to divide. Example: The instructor allotted me 20 minutes to take the test." SOURCE: http://www.garypaulson.net/archives/allot-vs-alot-vs-a-lot-spelling/

I invite you to read the full page of information at http://www.garypaulson.net/archives/allot-vs-alot-vs-a-lot-spelling/ for more comprehensive information on this.

Furthermore, From: A Lot or Allot?

A lot (two words) is an informal phrase meaning "many." It can take an adjective, for example, "a sizeable lot."

Example: Karl needed a lot of time for the job.

Allot means "to distribute between or among." It has the same root as lottery.

Example: He allotted three breaks a day to everyone in the department.

Alot does not exist as a word.

In addition, from A LOT / ALOT

Perhaps this common spelling error began because there does exist in English a word spelled "allot" which is a verb meaning to apportion or grant. The correct form, with "a" and "lot" separated by a space is perhaps not often encountered in print because formal writers usually use other expressions such as "a great deal," "often," etc.

You shouldn't write "alittle" either. It's "a little."

Please get a refund from all your English teachers... :-)

"It's" is both possessive and a contraction.

No, no a thousand times no.

You've made the mistake of trying to apply rules to English; they do exist, but almost all of them have at least one exception, and this one is no different.

some call it "evolution of the English language"

I call it "devolution of the English language"

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000187.htm

It seems to be gaining popularity anymore, though.
*cringe*twitch* /nokarma

The correct word is always defuse. Although I agree the mistake is more amusing in the context of something like missiles which have literal fuses. The problem is that many people pronounce defuse and diffuse the same way, which leads to confusion.

It's "would have".
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/couldof.html
http://wvde.state.wv.us/tt/2002/grammartips/grammartip0039.html
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000204.htm

Sounds like you hired a bunch of idiots. I used to be a college junior working in a computer lab 10+ years ago. We were all extremely competent and very well able to administrate the network, the PCs, the servers, and even develop some software to help us administrate the system and provide functions to the users. We got a pretty big leash from the Head Guy (who generally knew less than us about the systems), and we used it well to learn all the systems.

You should have spent more time in grammar class rather than hanging out in the computer lab.
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000172.htm

Bad vs. Badly

"The Year 2000 also wants its joke back too when you're done with it."

DOES NOT TRANSLATE TO:

"The Year 2000 also wants it is joke back too when you're done with it."

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000227.htm

Lying is the present participle> . The imperfect of to lie is "I was lying" or "I used to lie".

If you are going to be a pedant it is best to be accurate and not hide your identity.

Maybe you should look up the meanings of THEN and THAN. I thought the meanings were common knowledge, and there are lots of articles on the subject.

All in jest, but "AV forums buzzing" does not make something "common knowledge". Simple grammar rules such as when to use than or then SHOULD be common knowledge, however that is much too optimistic for slashdot :D.

"Fewer" is used for countable things.
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000214.htm

Loath is an adjective meaning "unwilling." It ends with a hard th and rhymes with growth or both.

Loathe is a verb meaning "to hate intensely." It ends with a soft th like the sound in smooth or breathe.

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000238.htm

Maybe you should administer that beating to yourself.

From http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000172.htm

Administer is the verb form for administration or administrator.

The word administrate is an incorrect form of the verb created by some who drop the -ion suffix of administration.

        Incorrect: He did a great job of administrating the estate.

        Correct: He did a great job of administering the estate.

Be careful when forming verbs from nouns that end in -ation, as the correct verb form may not end in -ate.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to be the grammar Nazi today, because your usage of the word "to" is so egregiously wrong. If you are going to write a long rant about something, you need to at least make the effort to have proper grammar and spelling.

When something is excessively complex, heavy, expensive, or whatever, use the work "too," with two o's, for heaven's sake. Otherwise, it reads like you are trying to make complex, heavy, and expensive into verbs.

Some references to help you along:

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000258.htm

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=too

http://mzbworks.home.att.net/grammar.htm

On the other hand, going "to hydrogen" is correct. Good for you.

It's so difficult to determine this one, as it seems people don't agree on whether "try and" is merely colloquial or not.

Here's some information:
http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxtryand.htm l
http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=1 9960612
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000253.htm

It's administer not administrate.

Singular: another, anybody, anyone, anything, each, either, everybody, everyone, everything, little, much, neither, nobody, no one, nothing, one, other, somebody, someone, something

Plural: both, few, many, others, several

Singular or Plural: all, any, more, most, none, some

For indefinite pronouns that can be singular or plural, it depends on what the indefinite pronoun refers to.

Correct: All of the people clapped their hands.
(All refers to people, which is plural.)

Correct: All of the newspaper was soaked.
(Here all refers to newspaper, which is singular.)

it's WARRANTY, you idiot.

"Fewer" is used for countable things; "less" for non-discrete measures.

One description:
here.

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000095.htm

I won't comment on you not being PC, but I still have a few comments...

First of all, stay in school. http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000252.htm. I usually write off grammar issues as simple typos, but this is a very simple distinction, and you fuct it up several times.

Secondly, I have been a PC user all my life and recently got a 12" iBook. Having actually used it for a little while now I can speak with some experience on your points. I wouldn't say that apps necessarily come out slower than they do on PC. I've only had mine for about 2 months now, but I haven't had any issues with trying to get apps that I want/need. With OS X having a foundation in UNIX saying that there is less apps for mac than PC is probably wrong... Unless you are basing your point on evidence you get from perusing the software shelves of Best Buy then you are probably correct. As far as the mouse thing is concerned, the one button mouse is in fact... silly. But I wouldn't say it's any dumber than paying for an eight button mouse. That's what keyboard shortcuts are for. But if you insist on purchasing a mouse with x number of buttons, I am told that mac does support them. Not sure about 8 or 10, but again more than 4 or 6 starts to get rediculous when you learn to use keyboard shortcuts.

Lastly, saying that you wouldn't use one, even if given one is just plain ignorant. It's basically saying that you are unwilling/unable to learn new things.

Writing a program to check grammar is hard. You will notice that it will frequently flag some bit of grammar and say that it may be wrong, with an explanation of how to tell. Obviously that means it will give you false positives, where it complains about something that is perfectly correct. In fact, the better your grammar in the first place, the more often the checker is wrong, and the more false positives you will have to ignore. (The worse your grammar, the more useful you will find the grammar checker, too.)

If you think the Word grammar checker is so bad, tell me something: what grammar checker is better? MS bought Grammatik and bundled that with Word, and Grammatik is the best grammar checker I have ever used. (It's still brain-dead, with lots of false positives; it's just that I have never used anything better. I'll admit I haven't used many grammar checkers anyway.)

Here's a web page, from a company that sells a grammar checker called Grammar Slammer. I've never used it. But this page talks about what you can reasonably expect a grammar checker to do for you, and it's worth reading:

http://englishplus.com/news/readthis.htm

In short, Word's grammar checker is kind of dumb, but I don't think it's really much different from other available grammar checkers.

P.S. What would it take to make a free, open source software grammar checker? When I think about it, it actually seems very doable. You need an "engine" that can read in the text, do some parsing, and apply rules; and where a rule matches, pop up a dialog. Then you just need a whole bunch of rules, and an open source development process would allow many people to contribute rules. Potentially, once the engine is done, you will get dozens to hundreds of rules and it will quickly become just as good as the proprietary, closed-source grammar checkers.

You could easily make multiple rule sets: English (American), English (Queen's), French, Klingon, etc.

Heck, how about English (Klingon): "There is no honor in passive voice! Rewrite NOW!"

steveha

You probably get modded down because this topic's thread is not grammar. I used to get really upset when people wouldn't take the time to spell-check or at least proof-read their posts/email/instant messages. My anger would be reflected in my reply because I would not proof-read it (anger = haste for me) and correct their spelling with errors of my own.

Grammar and spelling is a point of contention between my wife and I. She'll ask me to proofread an email she's about to send out to make sure iit "sounds good". To me, "sounds good" means: properly constructed, formatted correctly, and "get's the point across" (in that order). The problem is that she writes like she speaks, illustrating emphasis with initial capitals. It bothers her when I correct her grammar/capitalization/etc. I needed to learn to read so that I could look past the presentation and determine the meaning.

I've found that I think faster than I type and my fingers effectively "drop frames" and the meanings of sentences shift mid-sentence... unless I proofread it. Truly, haste makes waste.

According to a grammar site, sentence 3 would be proper as "The camper is theirs", so thank you.

Thanks for the reply and the correction!

No, for a proper noun, or for a plural ending in "s", it is not necessary to add the extra "s" after the apostrophy. So Mr Burns' is infact quite correct.

I usually make fun of the grammar snobs since I violate the rules so much... ;)

But I think in this case, I may become one:

I'm afraid you are wrong.

If you don't like English, choose another language. But don't bastardize my language with your silly PC-speak.

That's subjunctive mood , not mode.

Check the etymology. Niggard and Niggle have nothing to do with Nigger. By your argument, we can't use Niggle either, because it might "sound" like a racist epithet? I also find it funny that someone (you) who has a problem with the way others use language, use it so badly. Are capitals difficult? Do you know how to use it's/its?

You also have a problem with logic. You say the thought of its racial sound didn't cross your mind, yet that's what concerns you: are you assuming that all "average" black people don't know the difference between Nigger and Niggardly? Who's the racist here?

From an etymological dictionary:

niggard - 1366, nygard, the suffix suggests Fr. origin (cf. dastard), but the root word is probably related to O.N. hnoggr "stingy," from P.Gmc. *khnauwjaz; related to O.E. hneaw "stingy, niggardly," which did not survive in M.E.

nigger - 1786, earlier neger (1568, Scot. and northern England dialect), from Fr. negre, from Sp. negro (see Negro). From the earliest usage it was "the term that carries with it all the obloquy and contempt and rejection which whites have inflicted on blacks." But as black inferiority was at one time a near universal assumption in Eng.-speaking lands, the word in some cases could be used without insult. More sympathetic writers late 18c. and early 19c. seem to have used black (n.) and, after the American Civil War, colored person. Also applied by Eng. settlers to dark-skinned native peoples in India, Australia, Polynesia. The reclamation of the word as a neutral or positive term in black culture, often with a suggestion of "soul" or "style," is attested first in the Amer. South, later (1968) in the Northern, urban-based Black Power movement. Variant niggah attested from 1925, usually in situations where blacks use the word; without the -h it is attested from 1969. Slang phrase nigger in the woodpile attested by 1800; "A mode of accounting for the disappearance of fuel; an unsolved mystery" [R.H. Thornton, "American Glossary," 1912]. Nigger heaven, "the top gallery in a (segregated) theater" first attested 1878 in ref. to Troy, N.Y. " 'You're a fool nigger, and the worst day's work Pa ever did was to buy you,' said Scarlett slowly. ... There, she thought, I've said 'nigger' and Mother wouldn't like that at all." [Margaret Mitchell, "Gone With the Wind," 1936]

niggle - 1599, possibly from a Scand. source (cf. Norw. dial. nigla "be busy with trifles"), perhaps related to source of niggard.

Should we also tell anyone with the name Nygard that they need to change it, or at least shouldn't utter it?

Next time you're wrong, just admit it, or shut up.

You're incorrect. It is "They're". That would be a contraction.

I believe you mean 'quotation' rather than 'quote. See here for further information.</pedantic> Apparently the general public have been abusing quote/quotation for nearly 250 years.. One would think that they might have worked it out by then.

I object to being objected to about my poor grammer while objecting :P

Technically, you are right, it should have read "brothers'" showing possession, but I read somewhere recently that it is just as acceptable to use no apostrophy at all, as long as you are consistent.

See http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000227.htm

Actually, it's generally accepted that people who think that split infinitives are bad grammar are anal-retentive people who seem to think they're speaking Latin rather than English. There's nothing wrong a so-called "split infinitive."

Seriously

Think about it. What does the construction "try and" mean? Nothing.

Scott.

Then/than

I know, I did it again, but read this before starting the possessive possessive thread again :)

When I first read your post, I was confused as to why somebody would shoot a rocket 46 nano-meters. Then I noticed that 280,000 ft. is not 46 nm, so I thought maybe you meant km, but that would be 85 km. Then I figured it out: nautical miles. I did a google search, and found that n.m. is the correct abbreviation for nautical miles. I hate the english system.

Only the english system of units would have so many different measurements of length. Stupid footlongs, chains, fathoms, feet, inches, miles, and nautical miles. I hate it that we still use those units in this country.

To repeat, I hate the english system of measurement.

I'm off my soapbox for now.

I was with you until you got to irregardless. The word you were reaching for is regardless. That said, the mod wars don't bother me as I turned off visible moderations and surf Oldest First, Nested, -1.

"No, don't make me do it." is a perfectly acceptable sentence written in the imperative mood.

Only reason I mentioned it in the first place -- I usually don't -- is that it pains me when /. editors don't take a second to proofread or fact check articles before posting them to the site as official content. (kgarcia already mentioned that English isn't his/her first language, so I'm certainly not trying to poke fun at him/her.)

So get off your high horse, it makes *perfect* sense to talk about this being "very unique".

You are simply wrong and here's the evidence to prove it:

Common Errors in English Usage
Some Common Grammar and Usage Mistakes in Undergraduate Philosophy Papers
Bowdoin College -- A Style Guide
The Dirty Dozen
Additional Writing Hints (first entry)
Unique and Other Absolute Modifiers
See Curmudgeon's Corner...our soapbox where we vent our spleen regarding abuses of the English language.

I am a published writer and experienced editor, so you can stop making a fool of yourself and let this drop. Or you can amuse me further by trying to come up with some explanation of why you believe that you are right.