Spolling

[Fishsta]

Anybody like Bombay Bad Boy Pot Noodles?

Their spelling's atrocious too.

"You and Who's Army?" is what it says on the packet of hot sauce.

"You and Who is army?"
"You and Who has army?"

It should, of course, be "whose".

 

[Mrs Fruity]

All I can say is definitely!!! (And to prove it I'll say it again - definitely, definitely, definitely!!)

Can't believe I spelt is wrongly in my original post!!??!!

 

[MoominDave]

Anybody like Bombay Bad Boy Pot Noodles?

Their spelling's atrocious too.

"You and Who's Army?" is what it says on the packet of hot sauce.

"You and Who is army?"
"You and Who has army?"

It should, of course, be "whose".

"You and the army that is the property of who?" which of course is usually rendered as "whose", as you say. Another one of those exceptions where the apostrophe failed to force its way in.

I think I can live with this difference of opinion!

Dave

 

[JessopSmythe]

As for the question of so-called "txt-spk" I do find it annoying, but then that's probably my age catching up on me!

I'm a bit younger than you, Peter, but I hate "txt-spk" too. I don't even use it when texting!

 

[Trom41821]

If mispelling is such an issue how feasible is it to add a spell checker to the site?

I'll try and dig this out from work but a linguist somewhere has proven that many people don't actually need the word(s) to be spelt correctly we just see patterns and shapes. It also apeared in the latest "Teacher" magazine.

 

[Trom41821]

Just found this site. Not directly linked to spelling, but more to the misconceptions of the incredibly complicated English language and the lack of some peoples general knowledge.


http://www.funny.co.uk/stuff/art_51-1271-Family-Fortunes-Funny-Answers.html :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Big Twigge]

Alas, I too was one of the people who wasn't taught grammar. Both my spelling and grammar are awful, please can we have a spell checker to sort me out.
**if thats not feasible, if one of the mods would just like to go through all my posts and check them for me it would me most appreciated.

 

[MoominDave]

As a fellow member of the 'lost generation', I may be talking rubbish here, but isn't the whole subject of formal English grammar supposed to be an attempt by tedious 18th century pedants to treat English (messy language with lots of irregularities) as if it were Latin (much more strictly defined - in the written language anyway)? It sounds a particularly foolish enterprise, and one that gave us such gems as 'Never split an infinitive'; in Latin (or so I'm told - it wasn't fashionable to teach us that either), it is impossible to split an infinitive - 'to go', say, is just one word, so the pedants decided that, Latin being the "perfect" language, it should be decreed that "to boldly go" was an invalid construction in English. I think it was because of nonsenses of this type that the teaching of formal grammar in schools fell into decline.

Anyway, enough tangential rubbish.

Dave

 

[floral_dance]

not being disrespectful to all that has been said but I am more interested in what people have to say rather than their spelling :wink:

 

[lynchie]

i've never before known what was meant by splitting an infinitive. I didn't even know what an infinitive was!

 

[PeterBale]

Anybody like Bombay Bad Boy Pot Noodles?
"You and Who's Army?" is what it says on the packet of hot sauce.

"You and Who is army?"
"You and Who has army?"

It should, of course, be "whose".

Of course, if it were Chinese noodles, it could always be "Woo's Army" :wink: :lol: :lol:

 

[PeterBale]

i've never before known what was meant by splitting an infinitive. I didn't even know what an infinitive was!

Isn't it one of those ordinary stamps that just have the queen's head on :?: :wink: :lol: