Hmm...which one is right grammer? Alot of dimes or A Lot of Dimes?
Punkrock546
ID:191462
 Sep 19 2002, 4:07 pm
|
|
Eggzactley? My English teacher would chop my nuts off and eat them for breakfast for spelling that on my spelling test! LOL
Punkrock546 | |
It is "a lot". My teacher actually had a lecture about it today :-P
| |
Punkrock546 wrote:
Eggzactley? My English teacher would chop my nuts off and eat them for breakfast for spelling that on my spelling test! LOL did he mean Exactly? | |
Punkrock546 wrote:
Eggzactley? My English teacher would chop my nuts off and eat them for breakfast for spelling that on my spelling test! LOL What is the world coming to? | |
What is the world coming to? Bah! In my day we didn't even have Z's! And when we wanted to say "Hello", we had to type out 15 characters! | |
That is one interesting article...
My ellipse habit has yet to invade my written speech, or any formal writing I need to do... But I find myself often wanting to add "lol" to things (like written notes to others that contain jokes)... But I instead usually use "heh heh" or the like because I'm not always sure that the recipient will know what "lol" even is... I'm going to sit on the fence on this issue... On one hand, I agree with the old-school (lol) teachers that want to keep their students using formal English... I believe that it's the correct way to do things... At least in formal writing... But on the other hand, I don't really have much of a problem with it... That whole "evolution of the language" agrument makes a lot of sense... And I believe I've been involved in discussions around here before about this... I feel that if something becomes universal enough that enough people understand it, then it has essentially become a part of the language... Regardless of what the "rules" tell you... And once all of the netspeak illiterates die and the world is run by this generation, this type of shorthand will effectively be universal enough to be acceptable and accepted... So it's not necessarily a good thing, but it's not a bad thing, either... | |
First flawed belief about evolution: "Evolution is the process of getting better."
On realizing that, the next flawed belief taken up: "Evolution is the process of becoming more complicated." Neither of these is true. There are many instances where creatures have evolved, either as a whole or (actually quite often) in part, to a simpler state. Nor is simpler a trait that's especially desireable for languages; quick chat shorthand works for quick chats. It does not work for serious discussion or serious literature, or at least not when heavily applied. | |
Who says that it doesn't work for serious discussion or literature?
Words are arbitrary... Place holders for ideas and bits of ideas... The content of those words can be whatever everyone agrees on (or at least enough people agree on that the message is still effective in enough cases) What's the difference between using "you" or "u" as long as all parties involved know what it means? There is none... If the ones responsible for "inventing" our words had decided that a simple "u" was fine for that use, then we'd be using it today no differently than we use "you"... It only sounds and looks silly because we were all taught to use "you"... That's the "proper" way to do it, so anything different is seen as improper... Give it enough time, and "u" might very well replace "you"... And we'd be no worse off for it... We wouldn't necessarily be better for it... But there wouldn't be any negative effects... Because in all essence, nothing has changed, besides the spelling... No biggie there... Now, if the language were being pared down and words were being tossed away without an equivalent replacement, then we'd suffer... Because then we'd be less able to express the range of ideas that a large vocabulary allows... But some lazy shortcuts don't really hurt anyone... Again, I personally don't use "u" "r" and the like...and I get annoyed when reading others using them, but it's not a large enough problem to care about... | |
We're not the worse off because of substitutions made due to laziness? When people cut corners and substitute cheap replacements for quality parts, accidents happen. Someone who uses 'u' or 'r' to represent 'you' or 'are' is not choosing words with care, and is more likely to end up causing an accident and/or hurting someone than someone who takes the time to select the right tool for the right job.
| |
Good point... But the same substitution can be chalked up to "efficiency"... Why spend the time and energy to type or write out two more letters when a simple letter will get the same idea across?
"U" is not a cheap replacement for "you"... They are in all sense and purpose the same part... One just happens to be a bit easier to type... Yes, that can be chalked up to laziness, and that laziness probably extends to other areas of the person's writing skills, meaning that they're probably not very good at writing in general... But in the situation where the writer is otherwise competent but just trying to save some time and effort, it's not causing any harm... | |
Punkrock546 wrote:
Hmm...which one is right grammer? Alot of dimes or A Lot of Dimes? It's "a lot". This is similar to "all right", whereas "alright" isn't really a word. We're just so used to saying these two together quickly that some people automatically assume it's one word when they go to write it. Lummox JR | |
Lummox JR wrote:
Punkrock546 wrote: You could also say "allot some dimes," but that has a different meaning all together. (Boy was I tempted to write "alltogether!)" Seperating words can be just as bad as smooshing them together. How many times have you heard someone say "a whole nother" to emphasize the word "another." This one has infected our language so deeply that the American Heritage Dictionary (for one) has now accepted it as a word, explaining: "Usually used in the phrase a whole nother." Barbarians all. | |
Skysaw wrote:
You could also say "allot some dimes," but that has a different meaning all together. (Boy was I tempted to write "alltogether!)" I chalk this up with a dictionary putting in "alright" as merely nonstandard usage. It's partly the job of a dictionary to lend the language some stability, and this kind of crap doesn't help. When I use a phrase like that, I say "a whole other". Lummox JR | |
Lummox JR wrote:
When I use a phrase like that, I say "a whole other". A use "a whole different," or "a completely different." Glad to know I'm not in a club of one. :-) | |
You could also say "allot some dimes," but that has a different meaning all together. (Boy was I tempted to write "alltogether!)" Actually, "altogether" (with one L) is a perfectly cromulent word. | |
Gughunter wrote:
You could also say "allot some dimes," but that has a different meaning all together. (Boy was I tempted to write "alltogether!)" Altogether's been a standard word for quite a long time, as far as I know. Decades, at least. Lummox JR | |
Punkrock546