As in, doesn’t matter at all to you.

  • darthelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    My philosophy is that languages are made up to make communication easier and they change all the time anyway. So as long as you are understood, that’s more important than getting the grammar to be perfect. Getting it like 80% right is plenty and that last 20% consists of a bunch of obscure or ambiguous rules that would take up way too much of my processing power to keep track of while communicating, thus hindering the purpose of using language in the first place. Also, English is a stupid mess of a language. I don’t have enough respect for it to follow all of it’s rules.

    That said… what DOES bug me a little is people who make videos who regularly misuse words. Not because I think it’s that big of a deal, but… come on… this is your job and you have complete control over the work at every step of the way and have so many opportunities to correct mistakes. You write the script. You read it. You watch it again while doing editing and could easily re-record bits that are wrong or awkward. Although perhaps this is less about the language specifically and more about leaving mistakes and bloopers in videos in general. That’s what editing is for. We have more advanced editing tools available to the average person than ever before. USE THEM!

  • Soapbox@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    7 days ago

    “Y’all”

    I will die on the hill that it’s more efficient and neutral than the alternatives.

    • gwilikers@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      English has to bend over backwards to make up for the fact that it doesn’t have a natural plural 2nd person form.

      Ye Y’all Youse (Dublin)

    • runner_g@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      “Y’all” and the plural “all y’all” are part of my daily vocabulary. And I’m in no way of southern origin.

    • Pulptastic@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      I recently realized that w’all needs to be shakespeared too. Following the pattern of other languages, y’all and w’all are missing in English.

      Also, I shakespeared the verb shakespeared, in reference to Shakespeare making up new words by following patterns among other words.

      • Soapbox@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        I won’t argue against w’all. I’m fine with it in principle. But it’s not something I think I’ve ever said, or ever heard anyone say.

    • deathbird@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      First we’re all like “Thou is too casual, gotta use the plural second person instead.” Then oh no, turns out number in pronouns is actually useful sometimes, but thou sounds old fashioned now, so we just gotta re-pluralize the second person. And then you get y’all.

      I like y’all, but I almost wish we could just bring thou back.

  • markovs_gun@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 days ago

    Y’all is completely fine to use. It was a mistake for English to lose its distinction between second person singular and plural. Either we accept the word “y’all” or we go back to saying thou and thee, either way we can’t just keep on awkwardly dancing around not having a distinction between second person plural and singular.

  • Jentu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    I will always use “who” because “whom” gives off too much of a Reddit vibe.

  • RoadieRich@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    Putting the punctuation outside the quotes (or parentheses) when the quote is only part of a sentence. I.e. He said “I need to go now”.

  • Meron35@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    My pet peeve is people thinking they are being clever by complaining about the supposed incorrect usage of literally as figuratively.

    People, including famous authors, have been literally (not hyperbole) using the word as an intensifier, and therefore, figuratively, since 1847, e.g. F Scott Fitzgerald, Charles Dickens, and William Thackeray.

    Did we change the definition of ‘literally’? | Merriam-Webster - https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/misuse-of-literally

  • jenesaisquoi@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    I am not in defence of but actually annoyed by:

    Using if instead of whether. For example: “I will check if the window is open”. This means: “if the window is open, I will check”. What people mean to say is “I will check whether the window is open”.

    Also, using was in hypotheticals instead of the correct were. For example: if I were going to check whether the window was open, I wouldn’t be standing here. Not “if I was going to check […]”.

      • jenesaisquoi@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        I do. If it’s countable, it’s fewer. Fewer people, fewer houses. If it’s incountable it’s less. Less rice, less water.

  • agent_nycto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 days ago

    Ending a sentence with a proposition is just fine. Picky people whom I’ve only seen parodies of on the Internet go “oh you ended your sentence with a preposition I have no idea what you mean by ‘He went in’ maybe you could explain what he went into? A jello mold? A ditch? What did go into?”

    You asked if he went into the store and I said he went in, you know what I meant because of CONTEXT CLUES.

    I’ve never met anyone who’s ever been this picky but I’m ready to bite them if I ever find one.

    • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 days ago

      It’s not grammatically incorrect to end a sentence with a preposition. It’s a common misconception that it is a rule, basically because one guy argued in favor of it back in the 1600s and had some support for formal writing in the 1700s. But it’s never been a broad rule, and even in formal contexts it’s not a rule in any current, reputable style or usage guides (so far as I know, at least).

      Some more info on the topic: https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/prepositions-ending-a-sentence-with

      • Jarix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        I only know of this “rule” because of a joke.

        A new student is looking for the library and stops a passing professor to ask, “Excuse me sir, can you please tell me where the library is at?” To which the professor responds, “Here at Harvard, we don’t end our sentences with prepositions.”

        The student without missing a beat says “I’m sorry, can you please tell me where the library is at, asshole?”

        (Not sure if I remember exactly how it should be written it, apologies if I got it wrong)

  • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    Singular they. I’ve had this opinion since long before I even knew about non-binary people. Using “he or she” to refer to a person without specifying gender is clunky as hell.

    • fishsayhelo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 days ago

      but singular they isn’t incorrect in the least. anyone claiming otherwise has some agenda to push in spite of the facts of it’s use for a good long while

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 days ago

        It’s not, but with… Political views as they are, it’s gotten a lot of pushback. People don’t even realize they use it regularly.

        “Someone called for you”

        “What did they want?”

        Bam. Easy. I was stoked when magic the gathering changed card wording from “he or she” to “they” because it cleans up the wording so much.

        • patatahooligan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          Political views as they are, it’s gotten a lot of pushback

          Yeah, the comment above mixed up grammar nazis with actual nazis I guess.

        • Dutczar@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          A good point I heard though is that singular “they” is used when you don’t know the person’s identity. To the extent that it could be multiple people involved, hence the use. Obviously, it’s at slight odds with “someone” in this example, but still.

          Fun fact though, we do actually use “they” in that way in Polish, in old-fashioned military slang, like “Where’s private Kowalski? They were supposed to be here”. (Edit: I think that might be used when addressing them directly, so this might be a bad example, but then there is no version in English since “you” covers all genders and numbers) I don’t know if non-binary people here actually use it.

  • fokker_de_beste@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    In Dutch you’re supposed to write “Volgens mij” (“in my opinion”), but it’s pronounced more like it’s one word. So I feel “volgensmij” flows better

  • IttihadChe@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Most of it, as long as it’s understandable I don’t care. Language is about making yourself understood.

  • simonced@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Edit: I misread the topic, it says “in defence of”, but for some reason I got it backward.
    My answer is about the simple grammar I would lile to see more respected.
    I leave my original answer for context.

    • Anyways instead of Anyway
    • your instead of you’re
    • their instead or they’re and a couple others…
      • simonced@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Thanks for the heads up, I just realize I got the topic backward! That’s embarassing… Hence my message has been downvoted lol, now I can see why.

  • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    I’m perfectly fine with pretty loosey-goosey interpretations of when to use semi-colons. I realize that there is a specific use-case, but in reality it’s just used for the most part as a sort of elongated comma; where the intention in the writing is to have a longer pause than a normal comma would.

    And I’m absolutely fine with that. No one is really clear on the real semi-colon usage anyway. I’m relatively sure that the last sentance in the previous paragraph is the actual correct usage technically, but who knows? And more importantly, who cares?

    • gwilikers@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s not how you use a semi-colon; you use it when you want to show a logical connection between what would otherwise be two separate sentences.

      • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Exactly my point. In my brain, that’s exactly how I used it. The two statements were logically related, but were separate statements. The fact that the second statement didn’t have it’s own subject-object-verb is (in my mind) irrelevant.