Rant about native speakers

[aljensen]

People who use "like" as a conjunction!

[Hofmann]

People who use "like" as a conjunction!

Valley girls?

I use contractions too, and if ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which you will not put, you'll end up sounding like a retard every time you say that (which should be "something with which you will not put up" anyway).

[yonglin]

I feel exactly the same way with people who say "can't". It isn't "can't", it's "cannot" or "can not" depending on the context.

Well, given that some 90% of the English-speaking world usually say "can't", "that's", "it's", etc., I think this is something you may have to put up with. I'd agree that it's bad style (not incorrect) to use contractions in formal writing.

(Note that I finished the first sentence with a preposition: I don't see anything wrong with this.)

[aljensen]

I was making a joke - "Ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put." is a quote ascribed to Winston Churchill, in response to one of his more blue-blooded government ministers complaining about poor grammar in official government dispatches during WWII. At least that's how the story goes, not sure if it's true, but I've heard it a couple times.

Using "like" as a conjunction is from the old "Winston Tastes Good Like a Cigarrette Should" jingle from the 60s. Walter Cronkite refused to read it on air because it was poor grammar - the actual sentence should read "Winston tastes good as a cigarrette should."

Using contractions like "can't" were forbidden in proper English till the 1930s or so. I remember reading an old P.J. O'Rourke story about reading an old Ms. Manner's book he found in his parents house, and citing this rule and other advice from the book (while contrasting it with the realities of growing up in a working class home in the 50s).

All of these things show how accepted grammatical conventions are forgotten as vehemently as they are fought over. This is part of the importance of native speakers - they are the ones who make the language, after all.

[HashiriKata]

accepted grammatical conventions are forgotten as vehemently as they are fought over

"forgotten" does not collocate well with "vehemently", I'm afraid!

[aljensen]

"forgotten" does not collocate well with "vehemently", I'm afraid!

My intention was not to collocate vehemently with forgotten. My meaning was:

accepted grammatical conventions are forgotten as quickly as they were fought over.

I guess my idea was to set up a contrasting sentence, like:

He was as loved in life as he was hated in death.

I suppose I should have written: Accepted grammatical conventions are as soon forgotten as before they were vehemently fought over.

or

Accepted grammatical conventions are as soon forgotten as vehemently as they were fought over in the past. [is this option possible?]

Isn't this a parallel sentence?

Edit:

Or maybe "Accepted grammatical conventions are as soon forgotten as vehemently they were fought over in the past." [is this option possible?]

A as B

A - Accepted grammatical conventions are forgotten

B - Accepted grammatical conventions are fought over (with B prior to A in time)

[wushijiao]

This is part of the importance of native speakers - they are the ones who make the language, after all.

Exactly. I, at least, got the Churchill reference.

You might like the book "the Language Instinct" by Steven Pinker. In that book, he goes after people like William Safire, and other language experts, who give people grammar advice without really understanding grammar from a linguistic or neuroscientific point of view. (That's not to say that I understand all those issues, but people should be clear on what is incorrect grammar, say, "Since yesterday not coffee drink I", and what is improper grammar style-wise (but perfectly correct grammatically), ie. "Me and John went to the store").

[renzhe]

I still don't see how spoken contractions like "can't" are comparable to replacing the verb "have" with the preposition "of".

That is the kind of wrong grammar that is simply wrong.

I don't use "can't" in formal writing either.

[JP Micco]

I still don't see how spoken contractions like "can't" are comparable to replacing the verb "have" with the preposition "of".

That is the kind of wrong grammar that is simply wrong.

Quite simple really. Pronunciation. The sound of the contraction " 've " (eg: in should've) is very close to the sound of the preposition "of". So perhaps some native English speaker who has not been taught the use of contractions (particularly spelling rules) would instead insert "of" because it sounds almost identical to " 've"

Since English is not a phonetic language, these sorts of alternate spellings and "grammar rules" are only bound to appear because the native speakers themselves cannot remember English sound-spelling relationships, so therefore make up their own.

Or didn ya think've dem things?

[renzhe]

I still see them as completely different.

"Can't" sounds very different from "can not". It is a spoken contraction that is easier to pronounce, which made its way into written language. They are written differently because they are pronounced differently.

"Should of" sounds exactly the same as "should've" when spoken fast. They are written differently by some people because they are not good at written language

For me, this falls into the category of mixing up "lose" and "loose" or "to" and "too". Or "its" and "it's". It's ignorance of the grammatical conventions and NOT a natural development of spoken language. There is no development of spoken language here, all those things sound the same.

[muyongshi]

and NOT a natural development of spoken language. There is no development of spoken language here, all those things sound the same.

Which some would argue that this a poor development of a language when you have words that are spelled different and sound the same, spelled the same and sound different, etc.

I'm not arguing that however the schizophrenia that exists in languages is fascinating. How the written and spoken can be so independent of each other, ie "read" and be so close, like the above mentioned contractions.

[Hofmann]

It is true that languages change when a lot of people get something wrong, but when one is learning a language, one should still adopt a version of it that is accepted as correct by educated users of the language.

[GeneKL]

There are plenty of educated speakers in New York City but that is not necessarily the model of choice for most Americans. Similar siuations appear in China where the urban speech of Beijing or other cities although fashionable may not be the most widespread pronunciation.