.
Some errors are more noticeable than others too. I can admit to cringing when I see an adult post "would of, could of or should of." Yeesh, that's rough to look at.
That's another one for which there is no logical explanation, Fork. How in the world could the word "have" transform into the word "of"? Not only are the two words totally unrelated and totally different in meaning, they don't even have any letters in common. I can't see for the life of me how such an error even occurred the first time it did, let alone occur repeatedly on the Internet. My record collector friend Dave discovered the culprit when he bought this from one of the record fairs:
Since that error is so glaringly obvious that it stands out like a wishing well in the middle of a desert, I can't see for the life of me what sort of weird, trollish pleasure anyone would get out of deliberately copying it. As it happens, the error only appeared on the vinyl issue. The song was retitled "Musta Got Lost" on CD. Although that is still not grammatically correct, it is better than "Must Of". Believe it or not, the record with that error on the label was released as far back as 1974, long before the Internet existed. I was 12 then and I had never heard of "must of" before, let alone seen it written (the song was not released as a single in the UK, therefore it did not appear in the charts here). All the more reason why it remains a mystery as to why any sane, sensible British person would want to copy it. The mind really boggles.
No, it isn't.
That is one of the very few good-humoured examples of a spelling mistake. Well done, Swirly! Lol:)
I don't really gives a sheet. And I think it's pompous and presumptuous to care about that unless in an academic setting. They meespeller may not have the education, or may be dislecsik. To point it out in a plase like this only hurts feelings and makes the.correcter look like a (add epithets here).
I also see it as the larger kid picking on the smaller kid just because he can.
Ha! We're both right.
When it comes to correct grammar or spelling, how can it be subjective? When I was in school I was educated with the attitude that "there is only one answer, and that is the correct one". How can that be subjective in the case of the English language?
Well, charface, your perception is totally wrong. Far from being a larger kid who picks on a smaller kid, I would actually rather defend the victim than be a bully. None of that has anything to do with the English language.
You obviously get something out of it or you wouldn't do it. Why persist if your not getting some satisfaction from the act?
Ok, I will reword my answer - to the person doing the spelling (misspelling), it is correct, therefore, it is subjective. Therefore, to answer your question, they do not see it as ugly because they do not see it as incorrect (or care if it is).
I am also inflicted by noticing most spelling/grammar errors, and sometimes it hurts my brain, but that's only to me, not to the person who doesn't realise it looks wrong, hence, subjective.
Peoples' brains are different, some are wired to notice, maybe have a photographic memory, or just appreciate words and language. Some don't.
*I say photographic, referring to when you write a word and you know instinctively it's not right, even though you're not sure of the right way and have to look it up. (that's probably not strictly "photographic memory" but I'm sure you know what I mean). People also have differently developed language brains, and that's okay.
I see, you are trying to bait me now, are you, charface? I thought that was trolls did. I didn't imagine you to be a troll.
And now you attack the questioner instead of addressing the question.
I know what you mean by "photographic memory", I just don't see how something is "correct" to the person doing the misspelling, for the plain and simple reason that it wasn't what they were taught in school. I don't know how I can reword that, or even if I can reword it, and still convey the same basic meaning. True, people's brains are different, but basic primary-school education doesn't vary all that much, does it?
OK, charface, if YOU'RE not a troll (which I did say I didn't imagine you to be), then why else did you type "your" instead of "you're", if not to bait me?
The reason I persist is because I don't seem to be getting through to some people. I posted this question at the suggestion of another member who got inexplicably annoyed because I pointed out his spelling error, despite the fact that he went ahead and corrected it himself after I pointed it out. He didn't seem very grateful for having it pointed out. It is that kind of ungratefulness that makes me think I am not getting through to people, therefore I persist with it. I repeat, I do not do it for the purpose of getting satisfaction out of correcting people per se, the only time I could possibly gain any satisfaction from it would be when the other person gracefully and gratefully accepts being corrected. Does that make sense to you, charface?
Some words look quite beautiful spelled differently than they do, spelled the normal way.
For instance
Jamie-normal way.
Jaimee- not incorrect and looks better.
As for general misspellings, some are full of creativity. :)
And sometimes they just need a good spell checker or to steer clear from autocorrect.
JA hasn't assigned you or anyone the duty of getting through to anyone. I don't recall seeing a question asking to correct the spelling of grammar of the question asked. You do it because you enjoy it.
Yes, I think it does vary, a lot, in how engaging a teacher is, what that teacher chooses to prioritise, how they put the information across.. how attentive the pupil is being, how interested they are, do they have any attention deficits, do they have any psychological problems that prevents them from concentrating, do they see it as a priority to learn this stuff.. and more and more distractions on young people these days, it is no wonder things like correct grammar is bypassing them. Many children don't learn everything that's on the curriculum, I certainly didn't learn the whole geography curriculum, or history for that matter, I had no interest at the time, does that bother you? How is your maths?
What I meant was, to the person, it is correct, i.e. they do not realise it is incorrect. As far as they are aware, for whatever reason, it is correct. i.e I was answering your question! That is why they don't see it, it's quite simple really!
Nobody assigned me to do it, charface. I told you, I don't do it because I enjoy it, I do it because it is my natural instinct to make sure everything is correct. It's a duty I was born to carry out, not an errand someone allocated to me when I was 12 or when I was 50.
I gave you the opportunity to present your side of the story by asking why you used "your" instead of "you're" after accepting that you are not a troll (which I have already said twice that I didn't think you were), and you still haven't told me the real reason why you did that. Why did you do it, charface? Was it intended as some kind of joke? Because if it was, it wasn't funny. It was a lot more annoying than anyone who persistently corrects others. If you want me to lighten up about it, fine, but that isn't the way to get me to lighten up, it only serves to make me more uptight about it. Does that make sense to you, charface?
I know a few people called Jamie, spelled the normal way, in fact I know one woman who named her baby son Jamie last year. I have never seen it spelled "Jaimee" before, and I doubt if anyone who does spell it like that has it on his birth certificate spelled like that, it looks like some fanciful or humorous variant. Why do you think it looks better that way, hami? Any particular reason?
As for autocorrect, why doesn't that always work? If I accidentally typed "congratualtions" I would expect it to be autocorrected to "congratulations". I chose that example because there was an old song called "Congratulations" and some issues of the old vinyl single had the misprint "Congratualtions" on the label. After I saw that I went through a phase of deliberately mispronouncing it according to the obviously incorrect spelling just for a laugh. Lol:)
How is my maths? I got 100% in my maths exam in 1974 and I was the only one in my school to achieve it that year. As for history and geography, I only learned what was on the curriculum up to the age of 13, after which I dropped those subjects in favour of others. Had I carried on with those subjects I would have learned beyond the curriculum in 1975.
There were plenty of distractions in the days when I was 12 or 13, yet it didn't distract me enough to not know basic simple spelling. Just because someone doesn't realise it is incorrect, that doesn't make it correct. That applies to everything, not just spelling.
As for the teachers, isn't it their duty to teach kids what is correct and what is not? Yes, there were kids with attention deficits when I was in school and there were special classes for those kids. I'm sure they still have special needs classes in today's schools. If not, why not?
Ah, the culprit! I assumed many used the verbal "could've, would've, should've" for so long they forgot those are contractions.
Yup, I tend to edit myself quite a bit and get antsy if I come across something I wrote in a hurry and screwed up.
My dad was an editor. It's his fault I'm like this. LOL
Andy...that woman isn't trolling. That's what makes it even sadder
Right? That gave me contractions
