rc42 wrote:If you turn off the spell checker completely it will never grab you by anything important so all spelling is whatever you want it to be.
Plus, as an added bonus, the things you write will be far more entertaining for anyone that reads them.
cz515 wrote:For a while mine was auto correcting "have" to "jane"
NTSOG wrote:DJ: "It makes the mind boggle how so many people these days manage to get a job,,,,, let alone keep one."
What is forgotten is that someone writing a letter or a report in industry or even government service is still required to be literate and use clear, precise English.
Jim
Die Judicii wrote:How ridiculous is our English when you have situations like this ?,,,,,,,,,,,
If you type the word "havent" spell check grabs you by the short and curlies saying your wrong.
But,,,, if you type "haven't" it's perfectly ok.
One single key strike between correct and in correct,,,,,,,,,,, so you may as well have typed "have not" in the first instance and be done with.
Die Judicii wrote:How ridiculous is our English when you have situations like this ?,,,,,,,,,,,
If you type the word "havent" spell check grabs you by the short and curlies saying your wrong.
But,,,, if you type "haven't" it's perfectly ok.
One single key strike between correct and in correct,,,,,,,,,,, so you may as well have typed "have not" in the first instance and be done with.
NTSOG wrote:G'day Lsfan,
I reckon apostrophes cause more grief than just about any other element of grammar, though the words there and their confuse some people. 'Would've ...' [short for 'would have...'] is another usage that confuses and often is written as 'would of ...' based on how the words are pronounced.
When I was teaching English Expression there were times when I saw so many incorrect grammatical constructions and spelling mistakes from my students that I began to doubt my own sanity and ability to read and write English!
Jim
Lsfan wrote:Die Judicii wrote:How ridiculous is our English when you have situations like this ?,,,,,,,,,,,
If you type the word "havent" spell check grabs you by the short and curlies saying your wrong.
But,,,, if you type "haven't" it's perfectly ok.
One single key strike between correct and in correct,,,,,,,,,,, so you may as well have typed "have not" in the first instance and be done with.
When you say "your wrong" I think you mean "you're wrong".
Sorry couldn't help myself!
NTSOG wrote:G'day Lsfan,
I reckon apostrophes cause more grief than just about any other element of grammar, though the words there and their confuse some people. 'Would've ...' [short for 'would have...'] is another usage that confuses and often is written as 'would of ...' based on how the words are pronounced.
When I was teaching English Expression there were times when I saw so many incorrect grammatical constructions and spelling mistakes from my students that I began to doubt my own sanity and ability to read and write English!
Jim
Die Judicii wrote:Lsfan wrote:Die Judicii wrote:How ridiculous is our English when you have situations like this ?,,,,,,,,,,,
If you type the word "havent" spell check grabs you by the short and curlies saying your wrong.
But,,,, if you type "haven't" it's perfectly ok.
One single key strike between correct and in correct,,,,,,,,,,, so you may as well have typed "have not" in the first instance and be done with.
When you say "your wrong" I think you mean "you're wrong".
Sorry couldn't help myself!
on_one_wheel wrote:Even when the spelling, grammar and punctuation is spot on, English is pretty a stupid hotchpotch of languages strung together with silent letters and words that aren't spelt as they sound.
English is considered to hold some kind of noble high ground by many that speak / write "the Queens English" especially by all the spelling, grammar and punctuation Nazis out there.
Fancy having so many words that while being spelt the same, mean completely different things. (homonyms) There's hundreds of them.
That's light.
There's no light.
Punctuation, miss one little comma and your sentence takes on a whole new meaning turning you in to a cannibal.
Let's eat, grandma
Let's eat grandma
NTSOG wrote:on_one_wheel:
"Let's eat, grandma
Let's eat grandma."
I like it!
One thing to remember is that some people are primarily 'audiles' and others are 'visiles'. I am a 'visile' meaning I understand written language better than spoken language, especially when spoken language is 'casual' meaning using abbreviations and slang. Sentences with double negatives cause me some strife too! Audiles are comfortable and able with spoken language.
Jim
on_one_wheel wrote:Their not called the Central Intelligence Agency for nothing
Their, they're, there
stupid English