Non-native English Perfectionist:
A proponent of proper usage of English, who themselves are not a native English-speaker.

Who I am:
I'm not a native English speaker. No, sir. I haven't even ever been to England or America or Australia or anywhere which English descended from England.

What this is:
This is an extremely pedantic rant made by someone with no authority whatsoever in the subject.

Why I made this:
Because I'm bored and have nothing to do. Also, like they say: haters gonna hate, ranters gonna rant.

The rant:

Welcome to English Course 101 made by yours truly.

This is a bunch of irresponsible tips to make sure you, and people you speak/write to, both have a nice, good English experience. Not the best, not even perfect, but good enough.

Disclaimer:
This post was made with a smartphone on mobile forums. As such, there is bound to be typos, wrong word choices, etc etc etc. Grammar Nazis are welcome to point out problems, fellow Nazis are always welcome. Just remember: no guarantee on repairs.


1) Learn your homonyms
We humans were speakers first, writers later. With the exception of mute people, we usually communicate verbally. As English improves, so does its collection of homonyms: words that SOUND similar, but have entirely different meanings

A recent example I encountered is confusing 'peek' with 'peak'. The former is "taking a look", while the latter is "the top-most, the apex". Making sure that you don't confuse the two, especially if either has a specific context in their usage, ensures nobody gets confused and everybody have a great time

2) Get your "you're" right
Do you see what I did there?

Many a forum I have joined, and many a poor sod I have witnessed confusing the two. What the reason is I don't know, because this time both are not homonyms of each other. Not strictly anyway.

'Your' is what you use when you want to refer something as the possession of someone
"You're" is actually a compound of TWO words: 'you are', which is what you say when you want to cast someone as having a certain trait

3) It's a university
And NOT 'an' university.
Many people use the simple rule: "if it's before either 'a' or 'i' or 'u' or 'e' or 'o', then it's an 'an'".

No, it's not. The correct rule is "if it's before something that you pronounce without consonant, use 'an', otherwise use 'a'"

The most common problem is the fact that 'u' is considered a vowel, so it stands to reason that it follows the same rule other vowels have: use 'an'. In practice, there is no 'University', but rather, 'Youniversity'

You pronounce 'u' as 'you', which starts with consonant 'y' (which starts with consonant 'w', but that's for another pedantic rant, if I'm willing). So, you don't use 'an', but use 'a'.

So, it's an apple
But it's not an university
It's a university, a uniform, a usage manual.

That is all I have for now. Now that I think about it, it should be "English Course 3" because I certainly don't have 101 rants in this, but I'm too lazy to edit it out relative to typing this paragraph

I rarely use the You're thing. And well my grammar is bad,But people understand me,And where are you from OP? When i read your username i say Rastl?s P or it reminds me of it,From sweden like me?

and i havent been outside scandinavia,Havent really talked to an english speaking person irl,well i have in online games and such but..

http://www.allproudamericans.com/why-english-is-hard-to-learn.jpg

It would make more sense if you used the term "English fascist," as the ideology better applies to this context than does National Socialism, or even more appropriate: "English conservative." The Nazi's burned books on the liberal arts, for example, and the fascists didn't much care about them either. As orderly as the Nazi soldiers were in parade, the party structure and leadership was chaotic at best, so I just don't get the relevance. Seems more like a derogatory than anything else.

To, too, and two are also annoying when they aren't used correctly.

This "rule" also has its exceptions, most notably with words beginning with "h". For instance, all of the following are acceptable: "an hypothesis / a hypothesis", "an historic(al) occasion / a historic(al) occasion", "a habitual smoker / an habitual smoker", etc. Of course the acceptability varies among speakers and regions (for instance, I think "an" before words beginning with "h" tends to be more acceptable among American English rather than British English).

In general: linguistic prescriptivism and the notion of "proper English" has a very bad track record. It is not taken seriously by linguists. Linguists are in the purely descriptive business of systematising the conventions of a language and its use. This is quite different from a misguided normative project of setting out the "rules for proper usage".

That wasn't nearly as anti-semitic as I was expecting.

Besides, with all of the exceptions to every rule in the english language you'd think people would realise they aren't actually laws of nature. They're made up and change with popularity. For example, I'm sure grammar fascists of the past had greaat fun telling everyone it was actually a napron, not an apron.

Use an umbrella.

Certain things are are not 'proper', but perfectly acceptable. An example is the Oxford comma. "I like Marmite, Vegemite, and supermarket home brand yeast extract." This is perfectly acceptable if you are American, but the proper English omits the last comma: "I like, Marmite, Vegemite and supermarket home brand yeast extract." Is the former incorrect? That entirely depends on where you are or come from. To further confuse the issue, an extra clause allows a comma before the last 'and' to be proper even in England's stuffiest circles. " I like Marmite, Vegemite, which is my personal favourite, and supermarket home brand yeast extract."Though even here it may be 'more proper' to follow the final 'and' with 'also'.

That's just a comma. Are you confused yet? Next week: colons, semi-colons and other intricacies, all designed to confound; perhaps, if you aren't confused yet, you soon will be.

[Grammar police at their finest: it is 'Nazis', not 'Nazi's', who burned books. If referring to one Nazi, you may say "the Nazi's subordinates burned books." If referring to the party as a whole, it should be "the Nazis' subordinates burned books."]

There's also the matter of quoted text and punctuation: Americans seem to like putting the closing punctuation inside the quotes regardless, whereas in Britain it only goes inside if it's actually part of the quote (I think.) Which reminds me of another thing, as a habitual user of brackets, I never did figure out if the full stop should go inside or outside when the brackets close at the end of a sentence: I seem to prefer inside at the moment, but I tend to be a bit random and capricious with my preferences. Then there's the matter of quote marks themselves, I think the double-quotes are more of an Americanism whereas in Britain I believe they're reserved for, er, something else, but I prefer the look of double-quotes so I tend to use them in general.

I'm not sure about where this "101" instead of "introductory" arose, though.

Random peeve of the day: the use of "alternate" instead of "alternative".

Very.
And randomly replacing 'a's with 'e's in words. Though that's propably usually just a honest typo.

And this is propably not against conventions but my personal issue, but it annoys me when people list only two things and use a comma instead of "and".

You know what's really hell is all the intentional misspellings and terrible grammar companies use to appeal to young audiences that makes me second guess myself

It goes almost all the way to the top (thankfully The Times and The Guardian have standards). The Daily Mail online, used only because it is free, is a veritable cesspit of incorrect grammar and spelling mistakes. Even that bastion of British conservatism, with a small 'c' intentionally, has let it's standards of journalism slip. I mean journalism with no reference to their editorial agenda, that is a matter of opinion (mine cannot be expressed without the coarsest of slang terms), merely in regard to the ability to write an informative article well.

[Note: 'in regard to' and 'regarding' are correct, whereas 'in regards to' is not.]

http://www.hep.wisc.edu/~jnb/charivarius.html

The OP is obviously ranting because he's tired of seeing stuff like that Skyrim General, where he frequents. Become a modder, and all you get to see is the CK and Mod forums where there is a little more tact with grammar .

@Stordrage:
Me? I'm Indonesian. I learned English from video games, whatever literature/movie I happen to find interesting, and foreign forums. My English is a complete mess of British English, American English and localized Japanese English mashup, complete with their slurs, swears, writing style, pronunciation and spelling.

I've seen lots (and I do mean lots) of instances where people use 'your' while meaning "you're". It drives me mad. I'm not the kind of person that fusses over 'color' and 'colour', but I'm the kind of person that wants to understand things clearly, and 'improper' English taxes my brain in translating the mess (messy English > proper English > my native language), adding additional work and makes me throw a fit.

I, too, am not perfect (especially regarding plural forms and grammar, I'm not good at grammar) - and I think I induced heart attack to quite a few grammar nazis back in my early days of trolling foreign forums, but I have a personal standard in error tolerance: using 'is' instead of 'are' is one thing (they are still a 'be' at the basic level), mistaking 'your' with "you're" is entirely different

@Dagger:
I personally don't know much about those philosophical stuff. I just took a cue from the phrase 'grammar nazi'

@Stormwinds:
Another excellent example! I've seen those quite a few times recently, confused the heck out of me

@srk:
I've seen 'an hemorrhage' before and thought it's a case of brain fart, and quite recently attribute it to people pronouncing the word omitting the first 'h' (of course, it's just a theory off the top of my head), because I pronounce it as 'h? - more - age'.

Also, up until this point, when I actually Google what hemorrhage is, I thought hemorrhage is a condition where your muscle grows because of blood piling up under your skin since the blood vessel broke. Now I know it's the fancy word for bleeding. The more I know.

@Jagar:
How anti-semitic did you expect it would be?

@Terribilis:
'Umbrella' is covered by the rule

@Zen:
For that usage, it's better to use hypens instead, because it's meant to be an explanation. Commas are used for short pauses in the proverbial verbal communication. This knowledge - in case you're wondering - I got from Harry Potter novels. And if I'm using it wrong, do tell, because I'm also a bit confused as hypens are a bit unsightly when used too many times. And while we're at it, I'm still confused as to when should I use a comma or when should I use a period for pauses that are not too short to use a comma but also not too long that I'd use period without thinking.

@vometia:
I personally put the punctuations outside if the sentence in the brackets is not meant to have it.

I usually put the punctuation outside (looks better for me, like this one).

But when the sentence warrants a punctuation - such as if the sentence is actually a question - I put the punctuation inside (do you see what I did there?).

But I always put the period outside

@Tojka:
I agree wholeheartedly with you. I personally feel there's a nagging feeling when someone mentions multiple subjects and not use 'and'

@Bluesnacks:
There exists a professional company that intentionally misspell words??? Have this world gone mad?

@Jerhicco and Steampunk:
Great example of how ridiculous English is still my choice of language tho

@Terra:
Even when I make a mod, I rarely visit CK and Mods forums, my mods are usually not covered by those forums, and I go to creationkit.com instead

I would use commas. 'This knowledge, in case you're wondering, I got from Harry Potter novels.' Dashes are more emphatic. 'This knowledge, in case you're wondering, I got from-- and I am sure you will be amazed-- Harry Potter novels.'

If you have two compete clauses but don't want to start a new sentence, use a semicolon; however they are considered intellectual for the sake of being intellectual by some.

If there is one example after a colon, you may substitute a dash. 'And the winning ticket is-- seventeen, and that's a blue ticket.'

If there is a list, use a colon. 'And the winners are ticket with the following numbers: twelve, fourty and seventeen.'

[Still awaiting the grammar police to pick up the deliberate mistake in my first post.]

It makes sense, a lot of English words were borrowed from French where 'h' is silent. But in all three words you mentioned the first syllable is unstressed. Do 'an habit' and 'an history' sound equally natural? Is there any pattern or am I just trying to find rules where there are none?

We have a mobile network called Nju Mobile and I always think nju is an acronym when it's really just polonized new. It's awful.

I think I may adopt the same rules I follow vaguely when it comes to quoted text. I said I was random and capricious.


I like semicolons, perhaps because I'm a programmer: they seem to be a popular feature of programming languages. It doesn't mean I use them correctly, but they help me to write long and rambling sentences. I also like colons and intestines in general. Well, my own intestines at any rate, because they help me to digest.

Edited to add:


But not "herb"! I dunno why, but hearing it pronounced "erb" with a really deliberate-sounding dropped "h" sounds awful to me.

I would say such individuals border on boorishness by insisting that an entirely correct use of grammatical style is useless because it could be replaced by a comma and/or a period - some people like to have a little flair.

Boxen! Methren sounds like something you'd call a Pokemon.

your going an bit overboard

At the end of the day, they're only symbols meant to represent sounds. Many of the rules regularly broken in English are done so due to the phonetic disconnect. Since you've never been to, and more to the point don't live in, an English speaking country, your exposure is at a minimum. Where I live, hardly anyone says "an", and I've been called out for using it a few times -- not in a bad way, just an "oh yeah that thing." Your and you're, homonyms, same deal.

Are you trying to say you know better English than people from English-origin countries, and have decided to make a rant on how these people need to step it up, hence calling yourself a Nazi? (As in Grammar Nazi.)

Pfft.

Precisely! You need to use agreed standards to make sure everybody everywhere gets the same meaning you intended. It's like talking about nuclear research: if either one of the party doesn't get the meaning intended by the other, the whole conversation could be moot, or even worse, lead to entirely different conclusion. Well, English is not that serious, but you get my meaning. No?

"Your" and "you're" do not actually sound the same, despite their similarity. Not to the degree of "peek" and "peak", at least. "Your" is "yor", "you're" is... well... "you are", only a bit faster in pronunciation. I haven't been to Britain or America, but I've watched their TV shows, and I suppose they're... well... they're as legit as any native speaker I'd encounter :/