Spelling Corrections

Moderator

Moderator
NES Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
16,511
Likes
1,710
Location
⚀ ⚂ ⚀ ⚂
Feedback: 38 / 0 / 0
Are you sick of the Spelling Nazi's constantly chastising you on your spelling? Then download ieSpell - A Spell Checker for Internet Explorer. It's free, safe and easy to use. Give it a try. You and the Spelling Nazi's will be glad you did.
 
I am using Firefox and it has some sort of spell check. I don't remember if I downloaded it after or if it came with the current version as I have a lot of add-ons. I would also like to thank TYPEO (kind of ironic?) for providing a link for everyone. I am one of the spelling Nazi's but only say something if its really bad and it doesn't make sense...yes it has happened more than a few times.
 
I just sit and snicker at the idiots who don't know the difference between "there", "their" and "they're".

Also "then" and "than", "your" and "you're", "looser" (instead of loser), and my all time favorite - "rediculous".

As in:

That's rediculous, you should know better then that. Your a looser.
 
I have an add-on to firefox that works pretty well. It doesn't have a great dictionary, but all I really need is to catch the typo which it does well.

The hard part is remembering to look back for the red underline before clicking "send".

I don't know about many of you, but I've been using a keyboard for a lot more than a pen. I actually have trouble writing words at times that I'd have no issue on a keyboard. The word to me isn't a series of letters or pen strokes, but a series of keystrokes. It's weird, but I've read that a lot of people growing up with computers have similar issues with words they learn and use after elementary school if most of their writing is done on a computer.
 
Oh, yeah... the other egregious error that really makes me grind my teeth is "would of". WTF does that mean??? It's a contraction for "would have", so it should be "would've", NOT "would of". How did these people graduate high school?
 
Oh, yeah... the other egregious error that really makes me grind my teeth is "would of". WTF does that mean??? It's a contraction for "would have", so it should be "would've", NOT "would of". How did these people graduate high school?

Not everybody is as smart as you Ross. We are merely just trying to get by in life. The last thing I need is some uppity liberal getting his panties in a wad on NES over some typos.
 
I never see you make those errors, Derek...

Who are you calling a liberal, anyway? (and why are you worried about my panties? [wink])
 
Oh, yeah... the other egregious error that really makes me grind my teeth is "would of". WTF does that mean??? It's a contraction for "would have", so it should be "would've", NOT "would of". How did these people graduate high school?

The root of the problem is that "would've" is pronounced exactly like "would of". This naturally raises the question of whether it's bad grammar or bad spelling. I remember my grandmother used to give me a hard time whenever I said "would've", assuming that I had said "would of". While I was always thinking "honi soit qui mal y pense", I never would have dared to open my mouth to her.

Ken
 
To be even more grammatically correct, when using quotation marks around words, the comma (or period if it were the end of a sentence) belongs inside the quotation marks.

Example:

Dwarven1 said:
The other egregious error that really makes me grind my teeth is "would of". WTF does that mean??? It's a contraction for "would have", so it should be "would've", NOT "would of". How did these people graduate high school?


...should actually look like:

The other egregious error that really makes me grind my teeth is "would of." WTF does that mean??? It's a contraction for "would have," so it should be "would've," NOT "would of." How did these people graduate high school?


+1 rep point to Ross for the word egregious.
 
To be even more grammatically correct, when using quotation marks around words, the comma (or period if it were the end of a sentence) belongs inside the quotation marks.

That is actually not as cut and dry as you make it out. Traditionally American English has used what you describe above, which is known as typesetter's quotation, while modern British English most often places most periods and commas outside the marks, known as logical quotation. Technical and scientific documentation also tends to use logical quotation to avoid confusions such as, "Type 'run,' and press the enter key."
 
I mix it up - using typesetter's quotations when typing/writing dialog, and logical quotations for everything else.
 
Constantly mistaking Cocks and Glocks?

Bad news if either goes off.

(^_^)

Seriously, this 'shorthand' used in modern text communications is for the birds. I thought l33t speak was bad, but this is nuts. The real problem is - as shown in the post linked above - when these people enter a place where clear communications is required, they fail to be able to do so.

One wonders what the upcoming generation will be like entering the job market. I'm not looking forward to reading these resumes.
 
I kant beleve ther's a threed deadicated 2 gramer.

Although I think some may need to atleast try to take the time to review before posting.
I'll stick with getting my lashes from the grammer nazi's.
 
Last edited:
I like to correct people that laugh at people that correct people.

You will never penetrate my circular logic,it's flawless.

andy.gif
 
I've been fortunate that I've had the opportunity and desire to get a decent education. Not everyone is so lucky. I can say however that spelling is not my forte. We are diverse group on this forum and I do my best not to bash people for their weakness. However I'm much less likely to tolerate utter disrespect.

Heck some of us might be bad spellers and still be great welders, accountants, LEO, or wow.. maybe even shooters! [wink]
 
I've been fortunate that I've had the opportunity and desire to get a decent education. Not everyone is so lucky. I can say however that spelling is not my forte. We are diverse group on this forum and I do my best not to bash people for their weakness. However I'm much less likely to tolerate utter disrespect.

Heck some of us might be bad spellers and still be great welders, accountants, LEO, or wow.. maybe even shooters! [wink]

+1, I'd give you 2 rep points if I could.
 
Back
Top Bottom