PSA: How to avoid being hassled by grammar nazis

[jiggahertz]

Originally posted by: ahurtt
Dude, your waisting you're breath. People are not going to change there ways. Good grammer is just not important to people these days. Its just not something this generation cares about.

Nice edit, you almost used "It's" correctly.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: dullard
Get over it. Grammar just isn't that important. Solve world hunger, end crime, cure AIDS, and then come back and solve the minor grammar problems.

As long as people can communicate, who cares if they type "ain't" instead of "are not". These are just all minor arbitrary rules. The "its" vs. "it's" is the most arbitrary. English rules state it should be "it's", but then two words have the same spelling (as if that wasn't a problem elsewhere). So the solution is to make a third rule as an exception to one of the other rules. No wonder you have people accidently putting in an apostrophe.

Grammar is important in legal documents. On a computer forum, just ignore it.

I have seen so many resumes where people misspell words and make huge grammar mistakes. My favorite is when they misspell the word "detail" in the ubiquitous "attention to detail" bullet. People who pay no attention when they write in casual circumstances often don't realize they carry those mistakes over into business communication. Better to learn good habits and then not have to think twice no matter where you write.

 

[Tremulant]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
With apologies to how I met your mother, affect and effect bug the crap out of me, as does using 'of' when you should say 'have'.

As in:

"Dammit! I should of said 'have'"

I love that show.

The Class isn't that bad either.

 

[So]

"U" is not a synonym for the word you.

nub is not a synonym for the word "newb"/"noob" which is a abbreviation of "newbie." A nub is "a small lump or protuberance." I don't mind creativity, but I draw the line when you use another, real word.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Alone

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Speaking of which, it's "couldn't care less", not "could care less".

Not necessarily.

I "could care less" about all the people starving in Africa. That doesn't mean I don't care at all, nor does it mean I'm giving them my paycheck. I just don't make a big deal of it.

But I must admit that the "expression" is often used improperly as you've mentioned, I'm just trying to point out that either use is acceptable, just in different circumstances.

I've never heard someone say "I could care less" when that is what they meant. You're right that the statement is fine in terms of the rules of language, and someone could conceivably use it correctly. Even then it's not a very effective statement, but that's not the point.

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: dullard
Don't be so negative. "I could care more" is a positive version of that phrase. For example, "I could care more about all the people starving in Africa." The "I could care less" version is therefore inferior and should be banned. As a bonus, we can end the non-stop debate over which is better.

I'm not trying to defend its use, because I realize it's a stupid thing to say. I'm just pointing out that it's not entirely incorrect, even if it is...well...just stupid.

 

[Allanv]

Originally posted by: KLin
Wont vs. Want

Wont means accustomed, habit. i.e He was wont to wake up at 6:00 in the morning every day. Want means to feel a need or desire. i.e. I want to eat dinner at Tahoe Joe's tonight.

In the UK wont is a shortened "will not" hence i wont clean my room, so no mistake to be made it is the only use for that word.

Want is exactly what it should be "I want to go out" etc

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: HotChic
I have seen so many resumes where people misspell words and make huge grammar mistakes. My favorite is when they misspell the word "detail" in the ubiquitous "attention to detail" bullet. People who pay no attention when they write in casual circumstances often don't realize they carry those mistakes over into business communication. Better to learn good habits and then not have to think twice no matter where you write.

It is good to know you aren't evaluating their ability to make a profit for your company, their ability to do the work, or their ability to fit in with potential coworkers. I'm glad that spelling is what matters most.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: Allanv

Originally posted by: KLin
Wont vs. Want

Wont means accustomed, habit. i.e He was wont to wake up at 6:00 in the morning every day. Want means to feel a need or desire. i.e. I want to eat dinner at Tahoe Joe's tonight.

In the UK wont is a shortened "will not" hence i wont clean my room, so no mistake to be made it is the only use for that word.

Want is exactly what it should be "I want to go out" etc

There is a difference between wont and won't.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Alone
I "could care less" about all the people starving in Africa. That doesn't mean I don't care at all, nor does it mean I'm giving them my paycheck. I just don't make a big deal of it.

Don't be so negative. "I could care more" is a positive version of that phrase. For example, "I could care more about all the people starving in Africa." The "I could care less" version is therefore inferior and should be banned. As a bonus, we can end the non-stop debate over which is better.

I can only imagine the statement "I could care less", used correctly, as an expression of apathy toward the notion of being apathetic about something.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteven

Originally posted by: Allanv

Originally posted by: KLin
Wont vs. Want

Wont means accustomed, habit. i.e He was wont to wake up at 6:00 in the morning every day. Want means to feel a need or desire. i.e. I want to eat dinner at Tahoe Joe's tonight.

In the UK wont is a shortened "will not" hence i wont clean my room, so no mistake to be made it is the only use for that word.

Want is exactly what it should be "I want to go out" etc

There is a difference between wont and won't.

Yes but those old-worlders have too much caveman in them to understand the distinction.

 

[Ricochet]

Originally posted by: Mermaidman
When you're breaks fail, you loose!

:laugh:

"Lose" vs "Loose" s/b added on the list as well. One is the opposite of winning, the other describes my ex-girlfriend. Well, okay, they both describe my ex.

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: Allanv

Originally posted by: KLin
Wont vs. Want

Wont means accustomed, habit. i.e He was wont to wake up at 6:00 in the morning every day. Want means to feel a need or desire. i.e. I want to eat dinner at Tahoe Joe's tonight.

In the UK wont is a shortened "will not" hence i wont clean my room, so no mistake to be made it is the only use for that word.

Want is exactly what it should be "I want to go out" etc

In this case, "wont" is an entirely different word. No contraction. It actually sounds like "want", if I remember correctly.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: HotChic
I have seen so many resumes where people misspell words and make huge grammar mistakes. My favorite is when they misspell the word "detail" in the ubiquitous "attention to detail" bullet. People who pay no attention when they write in casual circumstances often don't realize they carry those mistakes over into business communication. Better to learn good habits and then not have to think twice no matter where you write.

It is good to know you aren't evaluating their ability to make a profit for your company, their ability to do the work, or their ability to fit in with potential coworkers. I'm glad that spelling is what matters most.

Oh, there are tons of people employed at the places I've worked that can spell at all, so don't worry that anybody is being excluded. However, I've noted that many of these people apply the same dedication and attention they do to professionalism in their business communication to all their work, meaning that other people are constantly cleaning up after them.

Honestly, we were all taught in school how to spell and properly use grammar. It isn't that difficult and it helps put you in the best light you can be. Why wouldn't you make the effort?

 

[Alone]

If you don't care enough to put energy and effort into your resume, why should a potential employer even look twice?

 

[foghorn67]

Grammar Nazi's in an off topic forum isn't needed. Seriously, save your energy for correcting someone's resume, cover letter, thesis, technical documentation, etc.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Alone
If you don't care enough to put energy and effort into your resume, why should a potential employer even look twice?

Good question. Lack of applicants?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: HotChic
Oh, there are tons of people employed at the places I've worked that can spell at all, so don't worry that anybody is being excluded. However, I've noted that many of these people apply the same dedication and attention they do to professionalism in their business communication to all their work, meaning that other people are constantly cleaning up after them.

Honestly, we were all taught in school how to spell and properly use grammar. It isn't that difficult and it helps put you in the best light you can be. Why wouldn't you make the effort?

I'm not trying to attack your methods. I agree, a spelling error/grammar error should put up a red flag. It shouldn't ever exclude someone (otherwise it can turn into a xenophobic / social-economic discrimination). The red flag should signal that you need to focus on (a) was it a fluke or (b) was it a systematic lack of understanding / professionalism / mastery of the language etc. If it was a fluke, the grammar error was meaningless. If it was a systematic problem, don't hire the person.

But in the end, people overemphasize the importance of spelling and grammar. If you can get your point across, you did good enough. Lets argue over more important things on the internet.

I think I type fairly well. I mostly use proper grammar and spelling. But I know I have problems. Grammar nazis need to learn manners and let my mistakes (and other poster's mistakes) slide.

 

[ryan256]

Originally posted by: Alone
If you don't care enough to put energy and effort into your resume, why should a potential employer even look twice?

My favorite is the Ebonics resumes we've had sent in. I'd post a few but HR would have a shzit-fit.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: HotChic

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: HotChic
I have seen so many resumes where people misspell words and make huge grammar mistakes. My favorite is when they misspell the word "detail" in the ubiquitous "attention to detail" bullet. People who pay no attention when they write in casual circumstances often don't realize they carry those mistakes over into business communication. Better to learn good habits and then not have to think twice no matter where you write.

It is good to know you aren't evaluating their ability to make a profit for your company, their ability to do the work, or their ability to fit in with potential coworkers. I'm glad that spelling is what matters most.

Oh, there are tons of people employed at the places I've worked that can spell at all, so don't worry that anybody is being excluded. However, I've noted that many of these people apply the same dedication and attention they do to professionalism in their business communication to all their work, meaning that other people are constantly cleaning up after them.

Honestly, we were all taught in school how to spell and properly use grammar. It isn't that difficult and it helps put you in the best light you can be. Why wouldn't you make the effort?

I've never seen a study that successfully linked behavioural traits in one medium with associated traits in another, though I've read many that tried. Our character traits just aren't that consistent across different activities and situations.

I'd hesitate to put a bad speller in data entry, but that's about it.

As far as dullard's comments though, you can't tell much from a resume other than whether the person has some idea how to write and spell. Even then you don't know if they actually wrote the resume or not.

If you want an interview, and the chance to impress on a more useful level (still, frankly not that useful), make your resume perfect. It's probably 300 words, at the most; not exactly an onerus task!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: HotChic
Oh, there are tons of people employed at the places I've worked that can spell at all, so don't worry that anybody is being excluded. However, I've noted that many of these people apply the same dedication and attention they do to professionalism in their business communication to all their work, meaning that other people are constantly cleaning up after them.

Honestly, we were all taught in school how to spell and properly use grammar. It isn't that difficult and it helps put you in the best light you can be. Why wouldn't you make the effort?

I'm not trying to attack your methods. I agree, a spelling error/grammar error should put up a red flag. It shouldn't ever exclude someone (otherwise it can turn into a xenophobic / social-economic discrimination). The red flag should signal that you need to focus on (a) was it a fluke or (b) was it a systematic lack of understanding / professionalism / mastery of the language etc. If it was a fluke, the grammar error was meaningless. If it was a systematic problem, don't hire the person.

But in the end, people overemphasize the importance of spelling and grammar. If you can get your point across, you did good enough. Lets argue over more important things on the internet.

I think I type fairly well. I mostly use proper grammar and spelling. But I know I have problems. Grammar nazis need to learn manners and let my mistakes (and other poster's mistakes) slide.

The only time even a simple typo shouldn't raise a red-flag is if you know the resume was created in response to a request from you, and you forced a short timeline. The only time a resume of mine got out with a typo, I hand-delivered replacements the next day. I was completely upfront about it (not to mention embarrassed). I don't know if this was the best approach, but I did get one of the jobs.

 

[mugs]

I think it's funny when people get all defensive when people correct their grammar. Hey, we're only trying to help you look more educated! They always say that they're just being "lazy" because it's just an Internet forum. I don't know anyone else, but I can type pretty quickly. I don't have to think about what I'm typing, I just think the words and my hands do the walking. It takes more effort for me to type something incorrectly than to type it correctly (barring unnoticed typos, which the mistakes I see rarely are). That leads me to believe that people type poorly in communications outside of Internet forums as well. In fact I know some people do, because I've read articles to that effect. Unless you're typing on a cell phone keypad, it would be good to get in the habit of using correct grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc. so that those bad habits don't spill over into your professional writings.


(I'm not talking about people like dullard who make occasional mistakes - I do that too. I'm talking about the people who type like they're in an AOL chat room)

 

[allisolm]

As long as people can communicate, who cares if they type "ain't" instead of "are not".

And therein lies the problem. If you write there and mean they're but I read it as their, we're NOT communicating.


HotChic had it right when she said "Better to learn good habits and then not have to think twice no matter where you write."

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
The only time even a simple typo shouldn't raise a red-flag is if you know the resume was created in response to a request from you, and you forced a short timeline. The only time a resume of mine got out with a typo, I hand-delivered replacements the next day. I was completely upfront about it (not to mention embarrassed). I don't know if this was the best approach, but I did get one of the jobs.

Pretty much. Any kind of error in a resume/cover letter implies either:

1) The applicant was too lazy to carefully proofread it.

OR

2) The applicant does not write well and either does not think this is important, or did not ask someone who can write well to proofread it.

Not everyone is a great writer, and a few typos are not going to kill you day-to-day (unless you're doing something like applying for an editing or professional writing job). Being a lousy writer/speller is not fatal if you make some effort to work around it when it matters. If you won't do that, or don't think clear and professional communication is important in a business environment, it's a problem.

Also, as for the OP -- "to" versus "too" versus "two" (although usually it's "to" and "too" that are confused, just like "lose" and "loose").

"to" is an article used to express directionality. "Jane went to the store."

"too" is used like "as well". "John went to the store too." is the same as "John went to the store as well."

"two" is the number after one. "The two of us went to the store too."

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: HotChic

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: HotChic
I have seen so many resumes where people misspell words and make huge grammar mistakes. My favorite is when they misspell the word "detail" in the ubiquitous "attention to detail" bullet. People who pay no attention when they write in casual circumstances often don't realize they carry those mistakes over into business communication. Better to learn good habits and then not have to think twice no matter where you write.

It is good to know you aren't evaluating their ability to make a profit for your company, their ability to do the work, or their ability to fit in with potential coworkers. I'm glad that spelling is what matters most.

Oh, there are tons of people employed at the places I've worked that can spell at all, so don't worry that anybody is being excluded. However, I've noted that many of these people apply the same dedication and attention they do to professionalism in their business communication to all their work, meaning that other people are constantly cleaning up after them.

Honestly, we were all taught in school how to spell and properly use grammar. It isn't that difficult and it helps put you in the best light you can be. Why wouldn't you make the effort?

I've never seen a study that successfully linked behavioural traits in one medium with associated traits in another, though I've read many that tried. Our character traits just aren't that consistent across different activities and situations.

I'd hesitate to put a bad speller in data entry, but that's about it.

As far as dullard's comments though, you can't tell much from a resume other than whether the person has some idea how to write and spell. Even then you don't know if they actually wrote the resume or not.

If you want an interview, and the chance to impress on a more useful level (still, frankly not that useful), make your resume perfect. It's probably 300 words, at the most; not exactly an onerus task!

In response to your bolded statement, it's an overall lack of caring that generates mistakes in both work and communication, in the group of folks I'm talking about.

I have some coworkers with dyslexia who can't spell to save their lives. They do suburb work in their main tasks. However, there is a large population who simply don't care enough to be professional in their communication or their other work.

The question for those that fit into neither category is this: which group do you think people will think you are a part of when they get misspelled and ungrammatical business communication?