Quote:
Originally posted by Zeke
I make mistakes and I try to catch them. Sometimes I don't. Your response is well written, save for a couple of commas.
What bugs me is the obvious confusion between the 3 "theres." Or 4, if you cound the contraction, "there's." This is not an oversight or a spelling error. This is ignorance of the language. Another one is the use of your for you're. Some might be doing this on purpose as a form of shorthand. That's being charitable.
Are you guys telling me that the schools/parnets are not differentiating on these grammarical rules?
I hate to sound pedantic, but I'm afraid that's how this is turning out.
|
their there zeke. . .dont u fret, four you dont sound pedantic, but rather pathetic. perhaps people post purposely poised precarious punctuation purported purposely to piss-off the pedantic-paranoid.
Geeze-man . . .know-won is getting paid for there post hear. [sic] let it go.
I'll make you a deal; you back-off the "charitable" gramatical criticism, and I'll back-off on my "charitable" comments about mental-conditions.
