The Energon Pub

News Credits: 194 · by **RodimusConvoy13** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:57 am

In this day and age of internet message boards, text messages, and Instant Messenger, I think a lot of grammar rules are being overlooked. I have outlined two very import rules below. They're also my pet peeves.

Lesson 1: There, Their and They're

There: in, at, or to that place or position
example: I'm not going in there—it's freezing

Their: belonging to or associated with the people or things previously mentioned or easily identified
example: her taunts had lost their power to touch him.

They're: contraction of They are.
example: they're(they are) going to the store.

Lesson 2: Your vs. You're.

Your: belonging to or associated with the person or people that the speaker is addressing
example: What is your name?

You're: contraction of you are
example: You're(You are) going to the store.

I know we all type fast and many times don't pay attention to our grammar. However, with the above being so rampant these days, I wanted to make sure people know the correct usage of each of those words.

And yes, this written tongue in cheek.

News Credits: 17 · by **JTKranix** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:58 am

Thanks! You're my hero!

News Credits: 1 · by **Jeep?** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:29 pm

I found the poor punctation used in that post to be rather amusing.
I'd also like to add that the apostropher is only used in contractions and in showing possession - never in plurals, ever.
Don't split an infinitive. "To boldly go" would be an example of this.
Don't end a sentence with a preposition.
Avoid redunancy.
Always wear sun-cream.

News Credits: 1 · by **Scatterlung** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 3:22 pm

I love it when they forget the apostrophe in the contraction of 'Who are..'. That can be quite amusing.

News Credits: 3 · by **DISCHARGE** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:11 pm

You missed :

Then
&
Than

Two words that are constantly misused.

by **homelessjunkeon** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 5:53 pm

Also "would of" vs "would have", same for could.
"Would of" is nonsense, I propose immediate suspension for anyone using it as part of their sentences.

News Credits: 1 · by ***Galvatron*** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:23 pm

homelessjunkeon wrote:Also "would of" vs "would have", same for could.
"Would of" is nonsense, I propose immediate suspension for anyone using it as part of their sentences.

By strict interpretation of your statement then you are hereby SUSPENDED from Seibertron.com since that was a part of that particular sentence of yours!

Like Me, Grimlock! on Facebook · by **Me, Grimlock!** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:41 pm

Jeep! wrote:Don't split an infinitive. "To boldly go" would be an example of this.
Don't end a sentence with a preposition.

These rules have been relaxed lately. It's still preferable not to, but it's allowable to.

News Credits: 1 · by **Jeep?** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:15 pm

Me, Grimlock! wrote:
Jeep! wrote:Don't split an infinitive. "To boldly go" would be an example of this.
Don't end a sentence with a preposition.

These rules have been relaxed lately. It's still preferable not to, but it's allowable to.

I shake my fist at you, sir. Many things have been relaxed lately, such as the notion that numbers are not in fact letters.

News Credits: 5 · by **God Magnus** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:45 am

Heck yeah peoples! More learnin of the things that yall don't do none good no more!

Seriously, I hate poor grammar and people who use excuses such as "relaxed rules" are just adding to the problem.

I ain't gots ta worry bout it no more cuz suposably nobody else gotta neether.

Like Me, Grimlock! on Facebook · by **Me, Grimlock!** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:15 pm

God Magnus wrote:Seriously, I hate poor grammar and people who use excuses such as "relaxed rules" are just adding to the problem.

Hey, I agree, relaxed rules lead to poor grammar and more confusion. But I'm just telling it like it is. I wasn't asked when they decided to relax those rules.

News Credits: 1 · by **Jeep?** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 4:15 pm

Me, Grimlock! wrote:
God Magnus wrote:Seriously, I hate poor grammar and people who use excuses such as "relaxed rules" are just adding to the problem.

Hey, I agree, relaxed rules lead to poor grammar and more confusion. But I'm just telling it like it is. I wasn't asked when they decided to relax those rules.

I would like to meet this mysterious "they".

Like Me, Grimlock! on Facebook · by **Me, Grimlock!** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:14 pm

Jeep! wrote:I would like to meet this mysterious "they".

"They" decide a lot of things. They're like a shadowy cabal.

News Credits: 194 · by **RodimusConvoy13** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:39 pm

To quote Deep Throat, "Mr. Mulder, 'They've' been here for a long, long time."

News Credits: 1082 · by **Tigertrack** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:01 pm

homelessjunkeon wrote:Also "would of" vs "would have", same for could.
"Would of" is nonsense, I propose immediate suspension for anyone using it as part of their sentences.

This 'of' for 'have' bothers me A LOT (not alot) too (two, to). My 6th graders use that all the time when they write (right) thinking it is (right). :twisted:

News Credits: 387 · by **Nekoman** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:28 pm

I hate bad grammar to an extent, but I always felt as long as my post can be read and you understand what I’m saying there’s no problem.

Someone corrected my grammar here one time and it makes you feel like a complete and other idiot when your speaking.

Yea, bad grammar is very annoying and hard to get used to, but in my opinion correcting someone can sometimes be even worse, especially when its someone who has otherwise good grammar.

:BOOM:

News Credits: 1 · by **Jeep?** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:37 pm

Nekoman wrote:Someone corrected my grammar here one time and it makes you feel like a complete and other idiot when your speaking.

This is tongue-in-cheek, right?

Like Me, Grimlock! on Facebook · by **Me, Grimlock!** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:43 pm

Jeep! wrote:This is tongue-in-cheek, right?

Isn't that tong-and-chic?

by **Wheelimus Prime** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:00 pm

yous dares mokes mes edumactation :BOOM:

News Credits: 226 · by **Burn** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:08 pm

When you get one then we'll mock you for it WP. :wink:

by **Wheelimus Prime** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 8:10 pm

Burn wrote:When you get one then we'll mock you for it WP.

ies gets a goodest edjamackshun heere

News Credits: 387 · by **Nekoman** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 9:50 pm

Jeep! wrote:
Nekoman wrote:Someone corrected my grammar here one time and it makes you feel like a complete and other idiot when your speaking.

This is tongue-in-cheek, right?

Sigh…