Indeed. It's not difficult!

I do think education has something to do with it.

I was in college in the 90s and was never expressly taught grammar as part of English - English (at least then) was very much a focus on literature, creative writing etc. Doing another language, even to a basic level, was one of the better decisions I've made. I got more out of third form latin than my entire secondary schooling in "English".

I also think that the pace of life has massively increased. Once upon a time, formal communication was largely by letter. You received a letter, thought about it a day or two, then wrote a response. Email = not so much time to think.

Finally, English is a fast evolving language. Our "proper" English grammar today would probably be the worst kind of gutter slang to the Elizabethans. Think, in a hundred years or so you may receive your diploma in "txt spk" (as an interesting aside, text speak has a historical precedent in telegrams which were charged by the letter so brief communications became the norm for a while. Didn't catch on though).

Dingbatt: My favourite at the moment is my teenage son's use of the word "guttering" for something that has caused disappointment. So much so, that I placed a small offcut of some plastic guttering on his desk to remind him of what guttering actually is.

"I'm guttered that I didn't win Lotto on Saturday." I see that (mis) used often.

mdf: English is a fast evolving language.

"Quickly".

Behodar:

 

mdf: English is a fast evolving language.

 

"Quickly".

 

 

What about fast-evolving?

Personally I'd have used "quickly-evolving" with the "dash" (there's a specific word for it but it's not coming to mind)!

A hyphen?

That's the one. I knew it was simple!

I don't think there is anythink wrong with having this discussion. Sigh.

mdf:

(snip)...

I also think that the pace of life has massively increased. Once upon a time, formal communication was largely by letter. You received a letter, thought about it a day or two, then wrote a response. Email = not so much time to think...(snip)
.

mdf:

 

I do think education has something to do with it.

 

I was in college in the 90s and was never expressly taught grammar as part of English - English (at least then) was very much a focus on literature, creative writing etc. Doing another language, even to a basic level, was one of the better decisions I've made. I got more out of third form latin than my entire secondary schooling in "English".

 

I also think that the pace of life has massively increased. Once upon a time, formal communication was largely by letter. You received a letter, thought about it a day or two, then wrote a response. Email = not so much time to think.

 

Finally, English is a fast evolving language. Our "proper" English grammar today would probably be the worst kind of gutter slang to the Elizabethans. Think, in a hundred years or so you may receive your diploma in "txt spk" (as an interesting aside, text speak has a historical precedent in telegrams which were charged by the letter so brief communications became the norm for a while. Didn't catch on though).

 

I entirely agree with you about letters.

I remember the delights of my secretary bringing the morning post, already placed in the relevant files, and putting them in my In Tray.

My replies, written in manuscript or dictated, went in Typing Grids to the typing pool.

24 hrs later they were returned for checking and signature. At this point, one had the opportunity to review and sometimes to reflect that hasty words would be best re-phrased.

As Churchill said, tact is the art of telling someone to go to hell in such a way as he looks forward to the journey.

I think the problem today comes from the demand for immediate response. I've certainly had calls along the lines of "I sent you an email an hour ago and I haven't heard from you yet!".

Geektastic:

mdf:

I do think education has something to do with it.

I was in college in the 90s and was never expressly taught grammar as part of English - English (at least then) was very much a focus on literature, creative writing etc. Doing another language, even to a basic level, was one of the better decisions I've made. I got more out of third form latin than my entire secondary schooling in "English".

I also think that the pace of life has massively increased. Once upon a time, formal communication was largely by letter. You received a letter, thought about it a day or two, then wrote a response. Email = not so much time to think.

Finally, English is a fast evolving language. Our "proper" English grammar today would probably be the worst kind of gutter slang to the Elizabethans. Think, in a hundred years or so you may receive your diploma in "txt spk" (as an interesting aside, text speak has a historical precedent in telegrams which were charged by the letter so brief communications became the norm for a while. Didn't catch on though).

 

I entirely agree with you about letters.

 

I remember the delights of my secretary bringing the morning post, already placed in the relevant files, and putting them in my In Tray.

My replies, written in manuscript or dictated, went in Typing Grids to the typing pool.

24 hrs later they were returned for checking and signature. At this point, one had the opportunity to review and sometimes to reflect that hasty words would be best re-phrased.

As Churchill said, tact is the art of telling someone to go to hell in such a way as he looks forward to the journey.

I think the problem today comes from the demand for immediate response. I've certainly had calls along the lines of "I sent you an email an hour ago and I haven't heard from you yet!".

One of my biggest pet hates is the incorrect use of plurals for Maori words. One very common case of this is the use for those in Wellington is the use of the of the word "Rimutakas" to describe the Rimutaka hill road. Even NZTA ads on the radio right now talk about "roadworks on the Rimutakas".

There was debate last year over Rimutaka actually not meaning anything in Maori (it should be Remutaka) but it doesn't change the fact that people are trying to make a Maori word a plural, something the language doesn't have.

Even in English it makes no sense making it a plural - there is only one hill and one mountain range!

sbiddle:

One of my biggest pet hates is the incorrect use of plurals for Maori words. One very common case of this is the use for those in Wellington is the use of the of the word "Rimutakas" to describe the Rimutaka hill road. Even NZTA ads on the radio right now talk about "roadworks on the Rimutakas".

There was debate last year over Rimutaka actually not meaning anything in Maori (it should be Remutaka) but it doesn't change the fact that people are trying to make a Maori word a plural, something the language doesn't have.

Even in English it makes no sense making it a plural - there is only one hill and one mountain range!

 

 

 

oxnsox: Certainly they didn't have a spell checking tombe in their book shelf... 

tome on [/snerk]