Wow...and they say English/American is a hard language to learn!!! (Howe: schools, shop)

[10scoachrick]

OK, y'all. I can be a colloquial as the next guy; but, this is driving me crazy!

IN PRINT...in a Statesman self-promotion piece received in today's mail was the following sentence(in REALLY LARGE type):

"Not as big of a jerk as he makes out to be" Refers to Kelso, who may or may not be 'as big of a jerk', YMMV. Some guy who writes columns.

Now, I understand ATX(don't care for it--see other thread), I understand 'supposably'(yes, it's a word, just misused 99% of the time) in place of 'supposedly', I understand 'ain't' and 'y'all'. What I don't understand is why and when American print and television adopted 'as ... of a ...' as a proper phrase to describe ANYTHING! "He's not that big of a jerk" or "She's not that good of a cheerleader" or "That's not that bad of a traffic jam" "That's not as red of a color as her lipstick" !!! Are you kidding me!?! Can anybody diagram that sentence?!?(Do they do that any more?)

No doubt, with IMs and texting(along with spellcheck without grammarcheck) and messageboard 'styles' of writing, proper use of sentence structure is headed out the window. However, we can do a lot better than "that coachrick guy is not that good of a writer hisownself" can't we?

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by 10scoachrick

OK, y'all. I can be a colloquial as the next guy; but, this is driving me crazy!

IN PRINT...in a Statesman self-promotion piece received in today's mail was the following sentence(in REALLY LARGE type):

"Not as big of a jerk as he makes out to be" Refers to Kelso, who may or may not be 'as big of a jerk', YMMV. Some guy who writes columns.

Now, I understand ATX(don't care for it--see other thread), I understand 'supposably'(yes, it's a word, just misused 99% of the time) in place of 'supposedly', I understand 'ain't' and 'y'all'. What I don't understand is why and when American print and television adopted 'as ... of a ...' as a proper phrase to describe ANYTHING! "He's not that big of a jerk" or "She's not that good of a cheerleader" or "That's not that bad of a traffic jam" "That's not as red of a color as her lipstick" !!! Are you kidding me!?! Can anybody diagram that sentence?!?(Do they do that any more?)

No doubt, with IMs and texting(along with spellcheck without grammarcheck) and messageboard 'styles' of writing, proper use of sentence structure is headed out the window. However, we can do a lot better than "that coachrick guy is not that good of a writer hisownself" can't we?

LOL, I understand your frustration. I hate it when people type "loose" instead of "lose". It can be akward when people are asking me about my sister's volleyball game and go "hey, did your sister loose?".

You make a good point though about spellcheckers. Most people don't spell incorrectly anymore because of spell checkers. However, spell checkers don't correct homynyms, or remove extraneous words (such as "of" in your example). As such, we might be the best spellers in the world, but syntax has gone all to hell.

[jobert]

Originally Posted by JayBrown80

LOL, I understand your frustration. I hate it when people type "loose", instead of "lose". It can be awkward when people are asking me about my sister's volleyball game and go "hey, did your sister loose?".
.................................................. . (space)
You make a good point though, about spell^checkers. Most people don't spell incorrectly anymore because of spell checkers. However, spell checkers don't correct homonyms, or remove extraneous words (such as "of" in your example). As such, we might be the best spellers in the world, but syntax has gone all to hell.

..

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by jobert

..

Hey! I never said I was a good speller!!! I am one of those that rely on spellcheck! Look at all my post edits, they often say "I am such a terrible speller".

[capcat]

Originally Posted by JayBrown80

Hey! I never said I was a good speller!!! I am one of those that rely on spellcheck! Look at all my post edits, they often say "I am such a terrible speller".

You are not that good of a speller?

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by capcat

You are not that good of a speller?

Unfortunately no. I know a lot of big words, but the spelling throws me every time. Some words I habitually misspell, such as business, which usually spells to buisness with me.

That's why I never criticize someones spelling. But I do gleefully jump all over incorrect word/term usage. *hangs head in shame*

[10scoachrick]

Originally Posted by capcat

You are not that good of a speller?

As good of a zinger as I've seen in a while!

[G Grasshopper]

I hear you! Spelling missed by spell-check doesn't bother so much, but I have seen some "words" used on this board that would make you weep. How about "prolly" instead of "probably"? And the grammar! I frequently have the urge to comment, but grammar isn't the topic at hand, so I restrain myself. The one that bothers me the most is the use of "less" in the place of "fewer". "Less" should be used with a singular (less milk), and "fewer" with a plural (fewer eggs). Just think of how many times we have to endure people talking about "less calories"! I don't know if schools have just stopped teaching correct usage, or if people are just getting lazier. But even though it really bothers me, I do try to keep in mind that it isn't life or death. It's just a shame to see this country slipping into illiteracy.

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by G Grasshopper

I hear you! Spelling missed by spell-check doesn't bother so much, but I have seen some "words" used on this board that would make you weep. How about "prolly" instead of "probably"? And the grammar! I frequently have the urge to comment, but grammar isn't the topic at hand, so I restrain myself. The one that bothers me the most is the use of "less" in the place of "fewer". "Less" should be used with a singular (less milk), and "fewer" with a plural (fewer eggs). Just think of how many times we have to endure people talking about "less calories"! I don't know if schools have just stopped teaching correct usage, or if people are just getting lazier. But even though it really bothers me, I do try to keep in mind that it isn't life or death. It's just a shame to see this country slipping into illiteracy.

I use prolly all the time. Prolly by the way is accepted slang for probably. I also use b/c for because. Wasn't there another thread where people were complaining about slang? People complaining about not doing full paragraph texts and the such? Sighing about people using slang terms and tut-tutting them when they were probably saying "far out" and "righteous" when they were younger back in the 60s?

I was always under the impression "illiteracy" meant unable to read or write. How is the country slipping into illiteracy if they are misspelling words WHILE reading and writing posts online?

[G Grasshopper]

Originally Posted by JayBrown80

I use prolly all the time. Prolly by the way is accepted slang for probably. I also use b/c for because. Wasn't there another thread where people were complaining about slang? People complaining about not doing full paragraph texts and the such? Sighing about people using slang terms and tut-tutting them when they were probably saying "far out" and "righteous" when they were younger back in the 60s?

I was always under the impression "illiteracy" meant unable to read or write. How is the country slipping into illiteracy if they are misspelling words WHILE reading and writing posts online?

I have no objection to slang, (how awful that would be - to get bent out of shape when anyone uses slang) but I actually had never heard of "prolly" before your post. I'm sure I use as much slang as anyone else when talking, but I use much less when writing. But that's just me. There are no laws against writing with slang. And I didn't say that the country was illiterate, but was trying to say that, by degrees, we seem to be less and less able to use the language. Read how beautifully people wrote many years ago, and you can see it. In addition, people seem to be reading at a lower grade level than they used to. But people still communicate, and that is the purpose of language. It is a conundrum for lovers of language; on the one hand, it seems petty and stuck in the past to always be correcting people, but on the other hand, it does seem that the English language is something that should be protected, somehow.

In one of the other threads, you asserted that "I pool is meant to be swam in" is correct. I agree that it is hard to find a reference on this usage. When I looked it up, I could find all the perfect forms, but not that one. But I still think it is an error. If you put that sentance into a Word document and do a spell and grammar check, it will say that "swum" is the right form. But I couldn't find a deffinitive source. So I guess we will have to call it a draw.