Page 5 of 9

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 12:15
by psichonaut
thank you mates.....at the end of this thread i think i'll have learnt to write english well enough ;D
...i know you are doing it just for me :innocent: :innocent:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 12:35
by paint it black
this thread is funny as f**k a rant about illiteracy that starts with an error and 'nearly' ends with an error. in fact, having reread it again :lol: :!: :!: :!:

sorry, ....

otherwise

...stfu 'till you can write proper :lol: :lol:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 12:42
by Pista
paint it black wrote:this thread is funny as f**k a rant about illiteracy that starts with an error
You noticed that too?
I smirked a bit when I saw it . :lol:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 12:49
by paint it black
the use of number notation in a 'proper' sentence. For example: '6 year old' as opposed to 'six year old'

the use of a hyphen just to be safe. for example: 'ink-well', or 'spell-check' as opposed to inkwell, or spell check

..as i wrote [not said]

But then who gives a f**k :innocent:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 12:58
by Pista
The non use of CAPITAL LETTERS when the word requires.

English for example, not english

& doesn't goddam have an "n" on the end of it usually?

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 13:06
by paint it black
Pista wrote:The non use of CAPITAL LETTERS when the word requires.

English for example, not english

& doesn't goddam have an "n" on the end of it usually?
good point; that gets right on me tit's - see also, the lack of comprehesion surrounding the appropriation or not, of the usage of 2 simple words- namley - 'affect' and 'effect' ffs :evil:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 13:07
by Obviousman
Pista wrote:& doesn't goddam have an "n" on the end of it usually?
Perhaps not if it's a dam in the Bible Belt somewhere? :lol:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 13:34
by Almiche V
paint it black wrote:...stfu 'till you can write proper :lol: :lol:
You mean " 'til " don't you :wink:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 14:46
by paint it black
…and you probably meant past tense? :wink:

I probably meant properly, but then, I don’t joke :innocent:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 15:51
by stufarq
Use of "unique" for things that aren't.

eg this in a listing from eil today: "ELVIS COSTELLO Imperial Bedroom (2006 Japanese
CD album; .... unique 'vinyl look' disc!)"

Not only are all copies presumably the same "unique" disc, but it's hardly the first time it's been done.

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 15:57
by Pista
The way people say "try and" when it should be "try to".

& the misuse of the word "literally"
eg.
"I literally laughed my head off."

Really? Well they did a fcuking good job of re-attaching it :?

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 15:59
by Quiff Boy
Pista wrote:The way people say "try and" when it should be "try to".

& the misuse of the word "literally"
eg.
"I literally laughed my head off."

Really? Well they did a fcuking good job of re-attaching it :?
what about 'quite literally'? ;D

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 16:15
by Izzy HaveMercy
stufarq wrote:Use of "unique" for things that aren't.

eg this in a listing from eil today: "ELVIS COSTELLO Imperial Bedroom (2006 Japanese
CD album; .... unique 'vinyl look' disc!)"

Not only are all copies presumably the same "unique" disc, but it's hardly the first time it's been done.
The only thing unique about Costello is that I never heard another entertainer with such a boring voice.

Oh, wait... there's Morrissey.. :twisted:

IZ.

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 19:18
by Dark
I will be honest though, I can't see the point of "its" not having an apostrophe. :?

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 19:52
by 6FeetOver
Dark wrote:I will be honest though, I can't see the point of "its" not having an apostrophe. :?
It doesn't have an apostrophe when it's not a contraction. ;) :P :kiss:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 19:53
by 6FeetOver
paint it black wrote:...see also, the lack of comprehesion surrounding the appropriation or not, of the usage of 2 simple words- namley - 'affect' and 'effect' ffs :evil:
That's another good point...grrrrrr. :evil: :urff:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 19:57
by James Blast
Image

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 20:05
by 6FeetOver
paint it black wrote:the use of number notation in a 'proper' sentence. For example: '6 year old' as opposed to 'six year old'

the use of a hyphen just to be safe. for example: 'ink-well', or 'spell-check' as opposed to inkwell, or spell check

..as i wrote [not said]

But then who gives a f**k :innocent:

1. It seems consistency is the only hard-and-fast rule with numbers; see this for more info.

b. Fun with hyphens can be found here. For your "inkwell" example, see this; "spell-check" is hyphenated, according to this.

These seem to be grammar problems, rather than indicators of illiteracy...

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 20:09
by 6FeetOver
paint it black wrote:...stfu 'till you can write proper :lol: :lol:

That's "properly." ;) :kiss:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 20:18
by 6FeetOver
From Merriam-Webster Online:

Main Entry:
il·lit·er·ate
Pronunciation:
\(ˌ)i(l)-ˈli-t(ə-)rət\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Middle English, from Latin illiteratus, from in- + litteratus literate
Date:
15th century

1: having little or no education; especially : unable to read or write <an illiterate population>2 a: showing or marked by a lack of familiarity with language and literature <an illiterate magazine> b: violating approved patterns of speaking or writing3: showing or marked by a lack of acquaintance with the fundamentals of a particular field of knowledge <musically illiterate>
synonyms see ignorant
— illiterate noun
— il·lit·er·ate·ly adverb
— il·lit·er·ate·ness noun


Folks who are literate (especially authors and other artists) often "play" with language as they see fit, and aren't really deserving of accusations that they're illiterate or ignorant. It's called:

poetic license
–noun
license or liberty taken by a poet, prose writer, or other artist in deviating from rule, conventional form, logic, or fact, in order to produce a desired effect.
[Origin: 1780–90]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.


:von:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 20:25
by James Blast
Not the Plain English Guide wrote: The best strategy is to be consistent.
PEG sticks to one through (or thru) nine, then 10, 11 etc. It also says that 14pt type is the minimal size for the 'reading impaired' audience. What it fails to address is 'leading' - this aids legibility and ease on the eyes, so 10pt in a well chosen face on 12pt leading is just as easy to read. It is in fact easier on the eye when reading long tracts.

as a professional designer, I come up against this 'brick wall', if not weekly then definitely monthly :|

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 20:28
by 6FeetOver
Typeface has nothing to do with the issue of illiteracy, Mr. Blast.

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 20:41
by paint it black
from the properly dictionary's

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define. ... &dict=CALD

inkwell Show phonetics
noun [C]
a container for ink, used in the past, which fitted into a hole in a table

spell check noun [C]
It's always a good idea to run a spell check once you've finished writing.

http://www.askoxford.com/results/?view= ... type=exact

inkwell

• noun a container for ink, normally housed in a hole in a desk.




that's the danger with shoddy online s**t, no idea of historical context

:?

if i were to include numbers in a Board paper, then i would be f**ked over bigtime, guess that's consistency :lol:

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 20:43
by James Blast
ok (or is it okay - I gotta be careful here), I was merely talking about 'readability', so the choice of typeface and spacing is very important - unless you happen to work for Parched Art or Sheer Faith ;D

Posted: 19 Mar 2008, 21:00
by Almiche V
Posts on this thread will be examined and marked accordingly :lol:
:eek: