Ped.antics.

[Clark_Kent]

Your = belonging to you.
You're = a contraction of you are.

Example: You're making me dizzy with your careless use of English.

Its = belonging to a definite article
It's = a contraction of it is.

Example: It's fucking me off that English and its misuse is widespread amongst people whom would otherwise garner my respect.

(Um. These could even be incorrect for all I know. Please tell me if they are. I'm not an English major. Yet.)

Well. Just funning. I just crawled on home after a three hour mock English scholarship exam....writing several seven page essays is fun. Seriously. :D
I know, the Interweb is no place to expect scholastic excellence. I am not without my share of typos and general run on sentences and lapses of syntax and such nonsense. But people go around without knowing some of the basics. C'mon, let us spread our collective genius and educate the proletariat.

Alternatively, we could stage an intervention and bring in SaundSpel. I was introduced to it through a University researcher's experiment I participated in when I was younger. Ian Ascott, but you've probably never heard of him. I'm a little rusty, but can still understand that:
46 sq nq, hj bp hq a greit taim = Though saying nothing, he was having a great time. Hurrah for odd twisting and phonetics.

But I digress. One cannot expect the English language to remain static, and thus far in its genesis it has been somewhat of a "majority rules" governance on what the current vogue in correct usage is. (Bill Bryson's "The Mother Tongue" is an actual humorous book on the subject. Shock horror. Read it). Given the rise of the information age, and many of these malapropisms and generic nonsense being preserved in the annals of the interweb for posterity, do we want history to judge this era as being inhabited by tards? Or will English naturally metamorphosis to the point wherein even Shakespeare will be translated as "2b or not 2b: dats da ?"

Ack, and a digression from whence I digressed. Please clarify some other misnomers and the such that irk you. Or come and bash me for being an antiquated rambling fool. Or pass me some of that tasty broccoli.

[cabbit]

I've had enough schooling so I know how to use my words. I don't get pissed seeing it since I do customer service emails for my company and you would not believe the horrible spelling and bad grammer everyone has. Not saying that I'm perfect, but compared to probably 90% of the customers...

That SaundSpel is horrible. How the hell is anyone suppose to read that? I already tried sounding it out but no go. It just doesn't work out for me.

[Pierrot le Fou]

I've had enough schooling so I know how to use my words. I don't get pissed seeing it since I do customer service emails for my company and you would not believe the horrible spelling and bad grammer everyone has. Not saying that I'm perfect, but compared to probably 90% of the customers...

That SaundSpel is horrible. How the hell is anyone suppose to read that? I already tried sounding it out but no go. It just doesn't work out for me.
I've had enough schooling, so I know how to use my not needed words. I don't get pissed seeing it since because I do customer service emails for my company and you would not believe the horrible spelling and bad grammer grammar that everyone has. Not saying that I'm perfect, but compared to probably 90% of the customers...

That SaundSpel is horrible. How the hell is anyone suppose to read that? I already tried sounding it out, but no go. It just doesn't work out for me.

[bUs]

i is always speaking english which is gooder, than most ppl.








Sorry couldn't resist. :D

[nice gaijin]

ba-zing, cue the cries of "grammar nazi" ;)

as a graphic designer, there are a ton of common practices I see--even in professionally designed pieces--that make me cringe.

My top 3 are:
3. misuse of hyphens, en dashes and em dashes
2. misuse of primes where quotes should be
1. double spacing after periods

Then again, all of this is unavoidable in an online forum. Even Microsoft Word has only recently begun to incorporate smartquotes instead of primes. I don't pay too much attention to spelling and grammar, so long as the point is clear and concise. That isn't to say that it doesn't bother me, I just don't waste my time trying to correct people much anymore.

[Pierrot le Fou]

Save that on phpBB I'm pretty sure that double-spaces after quotes don't register correctly (though I could be wrong).

And I'm pretty sure my grammar is relatively crappy in comparison to what the rules state it should be. It just doesn't bug me. And I'm almost entirely sure that I misuse primes versus quotes, as well as en and em dashes. Not that I really care. The meaning is the same for the reader unless, like you, they are a graphic designer grammar-nazi.

[Roxie]

I'm pretty good at ignoring this stuff, but the misuse of their, there, they're really gets to me sometimes. But I just don't take it seriously.

as you can see ;) :p

[Kass]

ba-zing, cue the cries of "grammar nazi" ;)

as a graphic designer, there are a ton of common practices I see--even in professionally designed pieces--that make me cringe.

My top 3 are:
3. misuse of hyphens, en dashes and em dashes
2. misuse of primes where quotes should be
1. double spacing after periods

Then again, all of this is unavoidable in an online forum. Even Microsoft Word has only recently begun to incorporate smartquotes instead of primes. I don't pay too much attention to spelling and grammar, so long as the point is clear and concise. That isn't to say that it doesn't bother me, I just don't waste my time trying to correct people much anymore.

A few notes:
3. The misuse of hyphens is aggravated by computers. Only word processing programs allow for actual em dashes and as such, en dashes must substitute for the em dashes. People frequently mess up the spacing associated with the use of em and en dashes.
2. The misuse of primes where quotes should be is another example of computers throwing a wrench into the grammar system. Again, only word processing programs and a few limited design tools accommodate actual quote marks. Smartquotes has been an option in MS Word for many years; however it is normally turned off because quote marks are unrecognized formatting in programming tools, mark up languages, ascii and most internet applications. Most BBS software does not recognize quotes and will insert an error into text. Smartquotes is typically turned on when the users’ end products will only be used as Word documents, pdfs or printed.
1. Double spacing after periods is proper punctuation. It is still taught in schools. It is not used on the web because HTML never accommodated it and neither do subsequent mark up languages. Using only a single space between sentences is incorrect, though unavoidable on the internet.

Yes, language is evolutionary and it will never remain static, however spelling and grammar rules exist to facilitate communication. If no one spells a word the same way, you can’t be assured that it is even the same word or that it means what you think it means.

Proper punctuation also facilitates communication. Everyone has seen how hard it is to read a passage without capitalization or punctuation.

so i was reding and then i got upset bcuse i couldnt understool a werd enywone was sing beuse it wuz two deficut to figer out whut thay meant punchuation is their for a rezon adn it maks tyring to figer out whut is sed much ezier the mined reconizes the pawses and brakes adn can moor ezaly interpet infermentation u cant always tell were cluses and setneces end in a runon unpunktuated peragrap becuss werds can seam to begin and end setneces wit out thim teh werds run togutter we ken avoyd this wit a few pierrots and commas and nun of us will him or age form our iye ballz trying to figer out whut the heck sumewon is tiring to say

Yes, I did hurt myself writing that paragraph.

I do have a few pet peeves of my own, but I generally ignore them on the internet because trying to encourage people not to use brutally butchered English is a futile task. A few of them follow:

1. Using a colon after any conjugation of the verb “to be.” “To be” and the colon serve exactly the same function when preceding a list of items. It tells you the list follows;
2. The phrase “often times.” The definition of often is “many times; frequently. When a person says “Often times it happens” they are saying, “Many times times it happens;”
3. Any word coined by a sportscaster when he can’t think of the word he really meant to say; and
4. Anything resembling that paragraph sans punctuation above.

I resubmitted the message because my screen froze and I didn't know if it processed.

[Kustom]

Could one of you native speakers explain me what's the deal with 's, just ' or when it's ok to drop it altogether? I know it's supposed to be singular + 's and plural + ', but what do I do if I wanna say Descartes's? How the hell would I pronounce that anyway? And when is it ok not to put any apostrophe (Like, why do I say language class and not language's class)?

And why on earth do you say "North Korea", but "Nothern Ireland"?

[Kass]

An apostrophe s (‘s) is used to show possession or a contraction. The dog belongs to Kate. It is Kate’s dog. If the name ends in an “s,” it is acceptable to drop the second “s.” It is Thomas’ book. I am going to work. I’m working.

Simply adding an “s” to a word makes it plural unless it is one of those words that has an alternate plural form all together. Do not use an apostrophe in this case. Those are Kate’s dogs. Those are Thomas’ books. A wolf is a wild animal. Wolves are wild animals. Words that end in soft sounds like “s,” “sh” and “ess” take an “es” at the end. There are 10 sashes. She owns 15 dresses.

You say “language class” because language is an adjective that describes what type of class you are attending. Language does not possess the class.

The most confusing exception to these rules is the “its” exception. “It’s” is a contraction of “it is.” It is cold inside. It’s hot outside. “Its” is the possessive form of the word. The book was returned to its owner. The owner possesses “it.”

We say North Korea and Northern Ireland because those are names of the countries. That is just how it worked out. If Northern Ireland had set its name to North Ireland, that is what it would be called. Normally, when referring to regions, we say northern or southern. I live in northern Virginia, but North Carolina is a state.

[Monkey]

And why on earth do you say "North Korea", but "Nothern Ireland"?

I'm guessing it's just an unconscious thing. It does sound wrong to my ears, saying northern Korea or North Ireland. Maybe it's trying to match length of words so that it sounds right?

Also there is a country called Ireland, you could confuse north (of) Ireland with Northern Ireland (the country). You wouldn't get the same confusion with Korea however as You'd say north of South Korea and couldn't get it confused with North Korea.



Since when has using a double space after a full-stop (period to you americans) been wrong? I've heard the explanation that's it's just a throwback from typewriter days when you had to double space, but that doesn't cut it with me. I was taught to write like that when I was a kid, double space after a full-stop, single space after a comma. I don't get why people say it is wrong...

[Kass]

Talk to North Korea and Northern Ireland about their confusing names. We didn't set them.

Using a double space after a full stop is correct. Using a single space after a full stop is wrong. The spacing indicates the duration of the natural pause when speaking. People intuitively pause longer after a complete sentence than they do after a break in the sentence for a clause or phrase.

It appears wrong to many who only read on the internet because HTML and other mark up languages only recognize one space between characters. It simply doesn't read the second space. To space a paragraph correctly on the internet, you actually have to insert the HTML code to force a space.

[Tungtvann]

me english is well good. i don't need you're help. i got the best grades in english when i was at school.


i forgotten it tho.....

[Roxie]

but what do I do if I wanna say Descartes's? How the hell would I pronounce that anyway?
When a word ends in S, this goes for proper nouns too, you don't need the 's, b/c the S is already there.

So, you would say "That is Carlos' bike" which would sound like "carloses". When speaking the sound is the same as if you wrote "Carlos's", it's just when written.

[koku]

Why you would take OTHER PEOPLE'S grammar to heart to the point where it effects your day I'll never understand. It's pointless; it's a forum and it should be taken lightheartedly.

You're entitled to your own opinion but why worry about it? Work on improving yours or making your life better; don't get wrapped up in others.

:P Pierro, check me ^^ Did I make any mistakes sensei?

P.S. i'm implying this in a good tone :)

[Praetorian]

C'mon, let us spread our collective genius and educate the proletariat.



I like your choice of words. ;D


And yes, I do agree. Especially for you native English speakers I'm really surprised. If I, a western European whose first language is not English can do it, so can you. I know I make my fair share of mistakes, but at least I try to come over as intelligent as possible.

[ruaidhri]

Kass, I’m guilty. I often use “oftentimes” in sentences. You’re correct; that’s like saying pizza pie. It’s redundant. It’s sufficient to say “often” and “pizza”. Following many years of this bad habit, I’ll try to stop.

I learned long ago that most people don’t take the time to write properly. The problem is not restricted to the Internet. Years ago corporate managers all had secretaries. These secretaries were knowledgeable about English, proper sentence structure, spelling and punctuation. Correspondence made sense because the secretaries edited what their managers scribbled or dictated.

Today, business is “lean and mean”. Word Processors have replaced the secretary. A personal computer and printer sits on each manager’s desk. Only the highest level Directors, Vice Presidents and senior executives warrant a secretary. Other managers must type and distribute their own correspondence. What amazes me is how these people actually passed Freshman English without learning how to organize their thoughts and write a coherent communication.

Actually, I believe much of the grammar used on the Internet is more understandable than what is common in business. After many years of scratching my head, I’ve decided that I don’t care how it’s written so long as I understand what the person is attempting to say. I will say, however, that individuals that can organize their thoughts and can communicate those thoughts generally hold higher positions and are better paid. So, for anyone that believes using proper grammar is a waste of time, consider that it opens doors otherwise closed. It creates a better impression of the writer.

[Wysen]

When a word ends in S, this goes for proper nouns too, you don't need the 's, b/c the S is already there.

So, you would say "That is Carlos' bike" which would sound like "carloses". When speaking the sound is the same as if you wrote "Carlos's", it's just when written.
I thought this was wrong, because I have a name that ends in S and I was told a long time ago that I would have to write 's after my name, so I looked it up. Turns out, I was correct. The rules get a little rough for proper nouns that end in S.

From grammerbook.com (http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp)

To show singular possession with proper nouns ending in s or an s sound, let the pronunciation guide you. If a new syllable is required to say the name in possessive form, then add an apostrophe plus s.
- Examples -
Ms. Jones's office is next to Ms. Straus's.
Texas's weather in summer can vary greatly.
Mr. Hastings' hat blew off in the storm.
The possessive form of Hastings does not require an extra syllable.
- Example -
Mrs. Lees' hair showed dark roots; it was time for an appointment with her hairdresser.
The name of this person is Mrs. Lees.
So you would actually write, "That's Carlos's bike." because you would say it like "Carloses".

[Roxie]

I thought this was wrong, because I have a name that ends in S and I was told a long time ago that I would have to write 's after my name, so I looked it up. Turns out, I was correct. The rules get a little rough for proper nouns that end in S.

From grammerbook.com (http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp)

So you would actually write, "That's Carlos's bike." because you would say it like "Carloses".
according to what you posted, it WOULD be "Carlos' bike" b/c it is possesive.

[ruaidhri]

Wysen, that's interesting. Again, I've learned something new on the Internet. The rule makes sense.

[hapacheese]

Actually, both rules are correct. And technically, if her name *was* Ms. Lees (Leez or Lease or however you pronounce it), it should be pronounced as Leezes or Leases when done in the possessive form (as it would imply that her name was Ms. Lee otherwise).

Ah, the ambiguities of the English language :D

[sgt. pepper]

Pedophile antics? Alrigh then...

What kind of file do you need to turn a 15mm hole into a 40mm hole?

[nice gaijin]

Double spacing after a period is a throwback to monospace fonts; it is not typographically correct. Double spacing after periods create rivers of empty space in blocks of text, or what Robert Bringhurst refers to as "white acne." The concept that it is necessary to add an extra space after a period to separate the sentences is obsolete in properly set fonts.

[Kass]

No, you are wrong. Grammatically and for proper punctuation, a double space after a period/full stop is correct. I realize this is not used in newspapers in magazines for typographical purposes (I was a journalism major), however that does not make it proper punctuation. Robert Bringhurst's opinion notwithstanding of course.

If, at some point, the language rules evolve and that space is dropped, then that happens. Currently, that is not the case.

[sgt. pepper]

Does anyone know the answer? Come on, i've already given it away!

The answer is: A pedophile

Oh my god, i'm so funny. Do you get it, do you? A pedoPHILE! Bwahahahahahahaha! Oh man, i'm killing myself.

[Trump]

I'm way way way too lazy to have perfect grammar on the internet. As long as people can easily read what I write, that's good enough for me.

[Monkey]

Double spacing after a period is a throwback to monospace fonts; it is not typographically correct. Double spacing after periods create rivers of empty space in blocks of text, or what Robert Bringhurst refers to as "white acne." The concept that it is necessary to add an extra space after a period to separate the sentences is obsolete in properly set fonts.


I'm fairly certain that the rules of writing/grammar were around a loooong time before the invention of monospaced fonts....

[ellie]

The commonly misused grammatical thing I hate the most is when people don't use "good" and "well" correctly. "Good" is for nouns, "well" is for verbs. "I am doing well today." "This cake is really good." Thank you.

[Pierrot le Fou]

I'm fairly certain that the rules of writing/grammar were around a loooong time before the invention of monospaced fonts....
Ever read the Declaration of Independence? Because that was written less than 250 years ago, well after the printing press and the first font-setters, and they most certainly had not created accepted standards for capitalization...

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/images/charters_exhibit_zoom_images/declaration_of_independence_630.jpg (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration_transcript.html)

Click it to get a nice transcription, Complete with arbitrary and oddball Capitalization at your own Will.

[nice gaijin]

Found the passage:

from Bringhurst's The Elements of Typographic Style
"In the nineteenth century, which was a dark and inflationary age in typography and type design, many compositors were encouraged to stuff extra space between sentences. Generations of twentieth-century typists were taught to do the same, by hitting the spacebar twice after every period. Your typing as well as your typesetting will benefit from unlearning this quaint Victorian habit. As a general rule, no more than a single space is required after a period, a colon or any other mark of punctuation. Large spaces (e.g. en spaces) are themselves punctuation.

The rule is usually altered, however, when setting classical Latin and Greek, romanized Sanskrit, phonetics or other kinds of texts in wich sentences begin with lowercase letters. In absence of a capital, a full en space between sentences will generally be welcome."

Upon asking, one of my professors said "I expect if your friends talk to any working professional editor in the field of writing (I live with one), they will find double spacing is considered a mistake."

I would very much be interested in finding any literature pre-dating the 19th century where typesetters were encouraged to used two whole spacesets between sentences, or where double spaces are actually used.

[Kass]

You still are confusing the issue. Proper type setting is NOT proper grammar. They are two entirely different entities. The Associated Press has an entire book dedicated to how media English is different from grammatically correct English.

In grammatically correct English, it is improper to abbreviate "versus" in a sentence, however in legal writings and media English, abbreviation is correct. The examples go on endlessly.

[Monkey]

Upon asking, one of my professors said "I expect if your friends talk to any working professional editor in the field of writing (I live with one), they will find double spacing is considered a mistake."

I would very much be interested in finding any literature pre-dating the 19th century where typesetters were encouraged to used two whole spacesets between sentences, or where double spaces are actually used.


You are missing the point. I was tuaght how to write before I'd even seen a computer or a typewriter. As were my parents and grandparents before me. I was taught to leave a larger space after a full-stop than after a comma.

It has nothing to do with typesetting, computers, printing presses or typewriters. It is to do with the proper rules of grammar.

[hanacker]

Double spacing after a period is a throwback to monospace fonts; it is not typographically correct. Double spacing after periods create rivers of empty space in blocks of text, or what Robert Bringhurst refers to as "white acne." The concept that it is necessary to add an extra space after a period to separate the sentences is obsolete in properly set fonts.

We double space after a period for all our reports at work.

[nice gaijin]

I'm sorry but double spacing after a period is unnecessary and excessive unless you are using monospaced fonts; just because you were taught this in school or told to do it by your boss does not make it right. Hey, I was taught to do it in grade school and high school as well, but I'm not going to stick to any claims that the things I was taught in primary education are correct. If I did that, I would probably still assert that Christopher Columbus discovered America, and was just a humble explorer looking to expand the glory of the Spanish empire.

Back to the topic on hand: a simple search for "double spaces after period" brings up a number of interesting responses:

from the typography | Punctuation category in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_stop),
In typewritten texts and other documents printed in uniform-width fonts, there is a convention among laymen that two spaces are placed after the full stop (along with the other sentence enders: question mark and exclamation mark), as opposed to the single space used after other punctuation symbols.

In modern American English typographical usage, debate has arisen around the proper number of trailing spaces after a full stop to separate sentences within a paragraph. Whereas two spaces are still regarded by many outside the publishing industry to be the better usage for monospace typefaces, the awkwardness that most keyboards and word-processing software have in representing correctly the 1.5 spaces that had previously become standard for typographically proportional (non-monospace) fonts has led to some confusion about how to render the space between sentences using only word-processing tools. Many descriptivists support the notion that a single space after a full stop should be considered standard because it has been the norm in mainstream publishing for many decades. Many prescriptivists, meanwhile, adhere to the earlier, and in some ways more practically useful, use of two spaces to make the separation of sentences more salient than separation of elements within sentences. Some, however, accept that in modern word-processing the single space is better because two spaces may stretch inordinately when full justification is applied. Additionally, many computer typefaces are designed proportionately to alleviate the need for the double space. Most modern typesetters, designers, and desktop publishers use only one space after a period as do all mainstream publishers of books and journals.
From the Chicago Manual of Style Q&A (http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/cmosfaq/cmosfaq.OneSpaceorTwo.html)
A. The view at CMS is that there is no reason for two spaces after a period in published work. Some people, however—my colleagues included—prefer it, relegating this preference to their personal correspondence and notes. I’ve noticed in old American books printed in the few decades before and after the turn of the last century (ca. 1870–1930 at least) that there seemed to be a trend in publishing to use extra space (sometimes quite a bit of it) after periods. And many people were taught to use that extra space in typing class (I was). But introducing two spaces after the period causes problems: (1) it is inefficient, requiring an extra keystroke for every sentence; (2) even if a program is set to automatically put an extra space after a period, such automation is never foolproof; (3) there is no proof that an extra space actually improves readability—as your comment suggests, it’s probably just a matter of familiarity (Who knows? perhaps it’s actually more efficient to read with less regard for sentences as individual units of thought—many centuries ago, for example in ancient Greece, there were no spaces even between words, and no punctuation); (4) two spaces are harder to control for than one in electronic documents (I find that the earmark of a document that imposes a two-space rule is a smattering of instances of both three spaces and one space after a period, and two spaces in the middle of sentences); and (5) two spaces can cause problems with line breaks in certain programs.

So, in our efficient, modern world, I think there is no room for two spaces after a period. In the opinion of this particular copyeditor, this is a good thing.
From the Get it Write Online Writing Guide: (http://www.getitwriteonline.com/archive/011803.htm)
(A) Use one space after all punctuation, including periods, question marks, exclamation points, and colons. Putting two spaces after these marks of punctuation is a convention that evolved because typewriters were equipped only with monospaced fonts, which made it difficult to see where sentences ended. Professional typographers have always used only one space because they use proportionally spaced fonts, which do not require the extra spaces in order for a series of sentences to be readable. Because most of the fonts in today's word processing software programs are proportional, in other words, we do not need to put an additional space after end punctuation or colons when we use our computers to compose.
A quote from , currently a copy editor for the Washington Post, and author of such books as "Lapsing Into a Comma" (Contemporary Books, 2000) and "The Elephants of Style" (McGraw-Hill, 2004).
A. "Remember that you're not using a typewriter." Two spaces after end-of-sentence punctuation while typewriting is 100% correct. It's 100% incorrect on computers. Other examples of changes in typewriting format include: two hyphens make a dash (no, a dash makes a dash), book titles are underlined (now italicized), and quotes and tick marks are the same (be smart and use "smart" quotes).

C. Thin spaces are used in two instances only: to separate three periods in an ellipsis and to separate a the punctuation of a quote within a quote. ("Marie Antoinette was an idiot," Napoleon complained. "Could you believe she said, 'Let them eat cake?'[thin space]")
a video of Bill Hill (]Bill Walsh[/url), one of the developers of cleartype and an expert of on-screen type, discussing double spacing and other remaining issues from typewriter-era writing.

And the aforementioned editor that my professor spoke of has been in the business for 15+ years and has not met one professional who would claim that two spaces are correct--he asked.

other links that cover this topic:
[url]http://www.typophile.com/forums/messages/30/27993.html?1078892522
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_archive_(spaces_aft er_a_full_stop/period)]Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style archive
http://desktoppub.about.com/cs/typespacing/a/onetwospaces.htm
http://www.webword.com/reports/period.html
http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/marks/period.htm

[Trump]

I really dislike full justification. It makes documents many times harder to read.

[Kass]

NO WHERE did I say that in professional publishing it is incorrect. I said it WAS. Grammatically it is incorrect. I don't use it professionally, though I grasp the concept of style differentiations between publishing and proper written and spoken English, neither of which is used nor taught in the US.

You need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills. Published/media and grammatically correct English are NOT the same things, for the third time around.

In case you haven’t noticed, type a few paragraphs in MS Word. Use single spacing in some and double in some. It flags neither as incorrect and Word is rigid in its grammar corrections because of its programming. It cannot distinguish between rules and acceptable stylistic variations so it is only programmed with rules that rarely vary.

From the MLA website: ( http://www.mla.org/style_faq3)
"Because it is increasingly common for papers and manuscripts to be prepared with a single space after all punctuation marks, this spacing is shown in the examples in the MLA Handbook and the MLA Style Manual. As a practical matter, however, there is nothing wrong with using two spaces after concluding punctuation marks unless an instructor or editor requests that you do otherwise."

The traditional rule, quoted here by Jack Lynch, also explains that the difference in spacing considerations after a period is a matter of house style as opposed to the rule. Please note the difference: rule and style. One is correct and the other is an acceptable variation of the rule. Lynch is a professor at Rutgers University and has written several books and articles. His CV is here. (http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/CV.pdf)


Punctuation and Spaces.
The traditional rule, and one especially suited to the monospaced fonts common in typescripts (as opposed to desktop publishing): put one space after a comma or semicolon; put two spaces after a (sentence-ending) period, exclamation point, or question mark. Colons have been known to go either way. For spaces after quotation marks, base your choice on the punctuation inside the quotation. Publishers often (but not always) use standard word spacing between sentences (it's a matter of house style), and it seems to be gaining ground among typists today, perhaps through the influence of desktop publishing. In any case, it's nothing to fret about.

Though his second comment on the matter really is pretty accurate and I think at this point I’ll let it go because he is right.

I get a ridiculous amount of mail about this one point — at least one (often heated) message a week, more than on all the other topics in this guide put together. I wish I understood this strange passion. My only advice to those who want to quarrel about it is that your time would be better spent worrying about other things.

[nice gaijin]

I was actually addressing some of the lesser developed statements that their writing style was the only right way because that is what was taught to them. I did not confuse professional applications and proper grammar, I was citing the origins of what is considered by many to be proper grammar. I'd be interested in seeing how far back the "traditional rule" Jack Lynch is quoting; if my sources are any indication, it's not as far as some might think.

I'll concede (as it is stated in many of my sources) that in personal style it is not considered incorrect to put two spaces after a full stop, but nowhere have I seen that a single space is wrong. If you consider it necessary in modern computerized fonts to continue carrying on like this you aren't incorrect, but I for one prefer to avoid the unnecessary practice.

[Kass]

Grammar rules, when compared to history and widespread communication (advent of the Gutenburg printing press), are very new. Most seemed to have evolved following the advent of widespread primary education. That is truly is 200 or less years old.

For most of history, education was the purview of the ruling class. It then expanded to the ruling and merchant class and finally to all classes in some form or another, though typically only to males.

In truth, Gutenburg's removable type printing press is partly responsible for the expansion of education. It became cheaper and easier to access the Bible, the only book distributed widely at the time. The middle and lower classes didn't just want a Bible to sit on their shelves; they wanted to read it too. The ruling and wealthier classes opposed that movement, as did most of the clergy who believed only they were worthy/entitled to communicate with God and everyone else had to go through them.

I have a page of the Bible printed off of the Gutenburg printing press in Mainz. I bought it when I was living in Germany. It is really very beautiful work.

[ruaidhri]

I really understand both sides of this discussion. I tend to side with Kass because those are the rules that I learned. I’m comfortable with them and will continue to put two spaces following end of sentences, colons and question marks. I do it without thinking. This doesn’t mean I disagree with those favoring a single space. They can do what they want and I’ll do what I want.

When I worked most of my writing was for business. If the recipient didn’t read my correspondence, I considered my time wasted. My style was to increase, not reduce, white space. I favored large margins, short sentences and paragraphs, simple words and up front conclusions. I rarely went beyond a single page. If necessary, I used attachments to support my arguments. I spent time crafting my correspondence so its recipient didn’t have to spend time reading and understanding its content.

I’ve always believed that writing, if its purpose is to communicate, should be for the reader, not the creator.

[Kash]

Irregardless is not a word. I hate seeing that one.

And (don't begin sentences with a preposition) could you go over that use of ":" again? Also, I'm want to use sentences like the following.

I have several animals, their names are;
Knight, my number one dog.
Mocha, my number two pointer. She's Knight's daughter.
Coco the cat.

Is using a semicolon in a structure like that acceptable?

[Monkey]

Irregardless is not a word. I hate seeing that one.

And (don't begin sentences with a preposition) could you go over that use of ":" again? Also, I'm want to use sentences like the following.

I have several animals, their names are;
Knight, my number one dog.
Mocha, my number two pointer. She's Knight's daughter.
Coco the cat.

Is using a semicolon in a structure like that acceptable?

I would say no. You've separated your sentence onto several different lines, I tend to use a colon if you have to arrange it like that. However having said that, I'm not exactly the best person to consult on grammar.


Back to double spacing after full-stops. The earlier statement only said that double-spacing was wrong and that was what I was responding to. Sure it may be wrong in publishing where they actually know what monospaced fonts are, but for the majority of people who write and type, it is not the correct rule. Most rules are majority rule, it really doesn't matter if it's the publishing rule to single space, it is correct for them. However, as the majority write and type using double space, that is the correct rule. It is what is taught in schools. Surely if we were making such a gross mistake all over the (romanised) world, someone would have corrected it by now?


Publishing dogma using single space is the exception not the rule.

[nice gaijin]

let see, I said that "it is not typographically correct," "obsolete in properly set fonts," and "unnecessary and excessive unless you are using monospaced fonts." I don't recall ever saying it was wrong; in fact I even agreed that people still use it in their personal writing and it is not considered incorrect. If you consider double spacing after a period as correct and single spacing as dogmatic, then by all means, use it. I'm done beating up that poor horse.

~~
in response to kash:

semi colons are used to separate two independant clauses that could technically stand on their own as sentences, but are linked together. You could also use a semi colon when connecting two independant clauses with a transition word (however, therefore, otherwise etc).

When you list items you should use a colon, and separate your listed items with commas; it is not necessary to break your list into separate lines unless you are creating a numbered or bulleted list, or if your list is excessively long. This is really a matter of readability, as it is much easier to separate a huge list of items when they are each given their own line as opposed to a huge block of text separated with commas.

another use for the colon in a sentence would be one long explanatory clause, such as in this example:
The strategies of corporatist industrial unionism have proven ineffective: compromises and concessions have left labor in a weakened position in the new "flexible" economy.

Personally I would probably structure my statement differently, but if I had to I might rewrite your statement like this:

I have several animals: my first dog Knight, Mocha (Knight's daughter), and Coco the cat.

by simplifying your clauses you can avoid using extra commas in your clauses, which means that readers can easily separate the listed items from each other. I've seen semi-colons used to separate complex clauses in lists, but I'm not sure if it's considered proper usage; I've done enough research on grammar and punctuation for this week.

[Roxie]

Irregardless is not a word. I hate seeing that one.

from worldwideword.com

[Q] From Randall E Larson in Tucson: “I have more than once seen the corruption irregardless used in some standard writings and with a straight face. Has it become acceptable?”

[A] The word is thoroughly and consistently condemned in all American references I can find. But it’s also surprisingly common. It’s formed from regardless by adding the negative prefix ir-; as regardless is already negative, the word is considered a logical absurdity.

It’s been around a while: the Oxford English Dictionary quotes a citation from Indiana that appeared in Harold Wentworth’s American Dialect Dictionary of 1912. And it turns up even in the better newspapers from time to time: as here from the New York Times of 8 February 1993: “Irregardless of the benefit to children from what he calls his ‘crusade to rescue American education,’ his own political miscalculations and sometimes deliberate artlessness have greatly contributed to his present difficulties”.

But, as I say, it’s still generally regarded by people with an informed opinion on the matter as unacceptable. The Third Edition of The American Heritage Dictionary states firmly that “the label ‘nonstandard’ does not begin to do justice to the status of this word” and “it has no legitimate antecedents in either standard or nonstandard varieties of English”. Some writers even try to turn it into a non-word, virtually denying its existence, which is pretty hard to do in the face of the evidence. The level of abuse hurled at the poor thing is astonishingly high, almost as great as that once directed at hopefully. It seems to have become something of a linguistic shibboleth.

That’s strange because, as Professor Laurence Horn of Yale University points out, the duplication of negative affixes is actually quite common in English. Few users query words such as debone and unravel because they are so familiar. In earlier times there were even more such words, many recorded from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: unboundless, undauntless, uneffectless, unfathomless and many others.

Grammarians of the eighteenth century and after—who had a greater sense of logic than feel for the language—did much to stamp them out. They argued that, in language as in mathematics, two negatives make a positive: putting two negatives together cancels them out. This has been the basis for condemnation of statements like “I never said nothing to nobody”, which aren’t standard British or American English. But in many other languages—and in some local or dialectal forms of English both today and in earlier times—multiple negatives are intensifiers, adding emphasis.

Irregardless has a fine flow about it, with a stronger negative feel than regardless that some people obviously find attractive. Indeed, the stress pattern of the word probably influenced the addition of the prefix, as the stress in regardless is on gar, which makes it sound insufficiently negative, despite the -less suffix.

So the precedents are all on the side of irregardless and—despite the opinions of the experts—I suspect that the word will become even more popular in the US in the future. For the moment, though, it is best avoided in formal writing.

[Monkey]

ba-zing, cue the cries of "grammar nazi" ;)

as a graphic designer, there are a ton of common practices I see--even in professionally designed pieces--that make me cringe.

My top 3 are:
3. misuse of hyphens, en dashes and em dashes
2. misuse of primes where quotes should be
1. double spacing after periods

Then again, all of this is unavoidable in an online forum. Even Microsoft Word has only recently begun to incorporate smartquotes instead of primes. I don't pay too much attention to spelling and grammar, so long as the point is clear and concise. That isn't to say that it doesn't bother me, I just don't waste my time trying to correct people much anymore.


That is what you said. I don't know about you but most people would consider that you think double spacing is wrong...

Now enough with this silly argument, it got boring a long time ago.

[Kash]

Thanks NG. That's a very workable explanation I can use. I agree with you that the example I provided was trite; perhaps I should have used one out of my actual work rather than constructing a demonstrative one that proved lacking.

One question that seems to plague me though; it seems to me that, even in your excellent explanation, there is little distinction between a semi colon and a full colon when joining what could be separate sentences. Aside from the numbered or bulleted list rule, which I believe I understand; and in the past was wrong in using the semicolon.

Additionally, for those that cheated their way though their grammar school spelling classes (like someone I know) there is an excellent tool for post on forums and such. It's called IEspell and can be found at IEspell.com. (What the hell is the proper punctuation for ending a sentence when it's a URL?) This is a seemless plug in that allows you to spell check data entry windows such as are on forums.

[cmaccall]

There is a great book called "Eats, Shoots and Leaves." Please read it.

[Anders]

That joke was terrible. I pity you.

[Jon885]

I understand their they're and there. I understand to and too. I get your and you're. But I'm not sure about other grammar and don't understand punctuation that well. I was going to get that book "Eats, Shoots and Leaves"

[ruaidhri]

Hmmm, let’s get back to Kash’s dislike of the word, “irregardless and the worldwideword.com comment that “regardless” just doesn’t sound negative enough. I have a solution. Instead of saying regardless, which means exactly what it says, to regard less, or not at all, everyone, if they really want to get fancy, should say "disirregardless".

Consider that if the definition for both “disregard” and “regardless” is to not regard then “disregardless” and “irregardless” mean to not regard less but to actually regard. Worldwideword suggests that the problem is the stress on “gar”, which makes the word sound insufficiently negative. So, following this line of reasoning, then using three negatives as in “disirregardless” must again mean to disregard or not regard.

Certainly, when a person uses the word “irregardless” we know what they mean. We know they are not using a fancy way of suggesting that we should regard something. Because of familiarity, the word communicates the intent of the speaker or writer despite being grammatically incorrect. At worst, using grammatically incorrect words could prejudice the listener or reader against the speaker or author. The point is many people have negative impressions of people that use “irregardless”. It’s sort of akin to wearing shorts with a suit; it’s not proper.