"Alot" is not a word. Neither is "alright".

[Guest]

[s]Wong wrote on 22:46, 26th Jul 2004:
As long as you know it's "Nonstandard" and that you "See the Usage Note at [i]all right."

[hr]No tree has branches so foolish as to fight among themselves
[/i]

Pedantry abounds. I'm fairly sure lsq isn't hard of sight or has trouble reading. All she said was that it is in the dictionary.

Just because it is nonstandard does not mean it is not a word.

[Steveo]

Hewjamaflips isn't a word, but by jingo i'll still use it to its full potential.

[hr][s]What a beautiful world this will be .... what a glorious time to be free[/s]

[mossop]

[s]Unregisted User lurking graduate wrote on 21:03, 26th Jul 2004:
yeah, and "it needed saying" is a total grammatical no-no as well.

Why?

[hr]
IMAGE:www.stuord.demon.co.uk/justlarge.gif

[Kibet]

So we have established they are words, whether or not they are nonstandard, they are words.

"all right" in the scots language is "awricht" maybe thats where it all started.

[LC]

I find this thread informative, innit.

[quarterstaff]

what about "okay"

O.K. was originally a humourous abbreviation of "all correct" spelled "Oll Korrect", so it became O.K., then ok, then okay.

which is acceptable and which is not?

and on the subject - is it spelt or spelled; and is it dreamed or dreampt?

*the mystery!*

[Eliot Wilson]

There is no Scots language. It's a dialect of English. Don't start.

[hr]Bill and Ted beat the Grim Reaper at Twister

Bill: "You played very well, Death, especially with your totally heavy Death robes."

Death: "Don't patronise me."

[Queeg]

When does a dialect become a language in its own right? Is there some kind of cut-off? I mean, English isn't considered a dialect of cave-man grunting (except maybe in Auchtermuchty and some areas of Manchester), is it? Any ideas?

[Al]

There is no English language. It's a dialect of Anglo-Saxon (with a bit of the Scandinavian languages thrown in). Don't start.

[hr]Life is too important to be taken seriously.

[Midget]

Its like the difference between different species and sub species of a species. Different sub species of the smae species can breed, but different species can't breed with each other. A dog can't breed with a cat but a corgi can breed with a St Bernhard.

That doesn't really help, however a better way of thinking about it is that as you go north through say Scotland you can see English gradually changing, but there's no gradual change across the Channel is there?

[garage red]

[s]Eliot Wilson wrote on 10:51, 28th Jul 2004:[i]
There is no Scots language. It's a dialect of English. Don't start.

Excuse me! Get your facts right before making such statements. There is, most certainly, a Scots language which in itself has dialects.

I suppose you also consider English to be but a dialect of High German!

[Guest]

I think "alright" is correct in America yet not here.

[noviu]

[s]quarterstaff wrote on 23:43, 27th Jul 2004:
what about "okay"

O.K. was originally a humourous abbreviation of "all correct" spelled "Oll Korrect", so it became O.K., then ok, then okay.

which is acceptable and which is not?

and on the subject - is it spelt or spelled; and is it dreamed or dreampt?

*the mystery!*




That's the fourth (and completely new to me) explanation of OK I've seen.

[Oh my...]

My word - you are all so clever. I wish I knew all about the intricies of the english language. At least when you finally land the job at McDonalds (where all good arts students go) - you'll be able to ask for the customers order in perfect english.

Seriously, what kind of a person actually cares about the use of slang or made up words? Meaning is more important - you miss it if you keep looking for these petty mistakes.

Thoughts?

[exnihilo]

Thoughts? Yes meaning is more important than perfection, but if you can express yourself correctly you should. Just like if you can make a cake properly, you ought to do so, not just throw it together any which way.

So, while you're mocking Arts students - and many of the people posting here are no such thing - for being able to communicate clearly, perhaps you should reread your own post and amend the many errors therein.

Being illiterate isn't clever, and it's not someting to be proud of. Why do so many people these days think it is clever to mock people who are good at anything and to revel in their own ignornace. Are you sure University was the right choice for you?


[hr]The world is full of stupid people. I say we get rid of all the warning labels and let the problem take care of itself.

[Bonnie]

[s]Unregisted User Oh my... wrote on 12:04, 28th Jul 2004:
Seriously, what kind of a person actually cares about the use of slang or made up words? Meaning is more important - you miss it if you keep looking for these petty mistakes.

Thoughts?


found on another thread written by that randypandysomeone SCANDALO DES IN YOUR PANTES AL A LACK OF ACCHEEVEMENTO ALL ROOOND POPULAR COCK BOY POOF LOVERTE


Oh, so you mean that the actual words we use, how we use them, and in what format might have something to do with conveying that meaning? Yes, the meaning is what counts, and words and syntax are the tools by which we communicate that meaning. Otherwise, how am I to decipher the meaning from this guy's ramblings? Maybe this guy is trying to tell us he's an annoying twunt. However, if you want to communicate that you are educated and your ideas are worthy of respect, using proper grammer and syntax will flag that to the reader. The meaning of what is written has two layers, what the writer implies and what the reader infers after "decoding" the words. You'd want to make sure we we're all using the same "code", right?

[benedict]

'Being illiterate isn't clever, and it's not someting to be proud of.'

debatable. to some extent you could be proud of your illiteracy in that you were proud of your upbringing. proud of your roots & where you came from. if you have no need to change why change. be proud of your imperfections perhaps like being proud of a disfigurement because it's who you are. i'm aware i'm taking the quote above perhaps out of context, so this isn't intended to be a contradiction to the above necessarily.

'is it dreamed or dreampt?'

certainly not dreampt. maybe dreamt.

[Guest]

[s]Unregisted User Oh my... wrote on 12:04, 28th Jul 2004:
My word - you are all so clever. I wish I knew all about the intricies of the english language. At least when you finally land the job at McDonalds (where all good arts students go) - you'll be able to ask for the customers order in perfect english.


Haha, very good Don't forget that they'l also be snobby to the customers - after all the only annoying art students are the ones like the one below your post - ie the one who belittle others due to them being deluded about their own intelligence and/or social skills (or lack of more like).

[lurking graduate]

[s]mossop wrote on 18:40, 27th Jul 2004:

Why?



Because, "it needs saying" is idiom: it doesn't make any internal sense.. A better construction would have been "I needed to say this", because even "it needed to be said" isn't right - how can something need to be said?

Anyway, who gives a monkey's. The sun is shining and I have a tan to maintain.

[Mr Comedy]

[s]Greebo wrote on 03:19, 27th Jul 2004:
And 'what' isn't a punctuation mark used to end random sentences, what?


I agree. But the right to use 'eh?' at the end of a sentence ought to be inshrined in law, eh?

[hr]
"[I am] a hardened and shameless tea drinker, who for twenty years diluted his meals with only the infusion of the fascinating plant; who with tea amused the evening, with tea solaced the midnight, and with tea welcomed the morning.
-Samuel Johnson