We all know grammar Nazis. What incorrect grammar are you completely in defence of?
-
There's a pretty trivial rule for getting this right. Phrase your sentence using who/whom as a question. Respond with he/him. If your response contains a "he", your initial statement should be "who"; if it contains a "him" then you're looking at a "whom" use.
- ex: "To who/whom should the gold be given?" -> "To him" -> "whom"
- ex: "Who/whom wants the gold?" -> "He wants the gold" -> "who"
- ex: "Who/whom did you see at the party?" -> "I saw him" -> "whom"
- ex: "The man who/whom called earlier is here" -> "Who/whom called?" -> "he called" -> "who"
I tell people this and say, “Follow the M.”
-
As in, doesn't matter at all to you.
I'm really fond of using "I'mma" and "gonna".
I obviously wouldn't use these words in a professional document, but everywhere else I'mma use "gonna" and "I'mma" whenever I feel like it.
-
End a sentence with a preposition if you want to. And start one with a conjunction.
I like ending my sentences with and.
-
As in, doesn't matter at all to you.
I’ve started using “used to could” instead of “used to be able to”, and I will not stop.
-
who/whom.
Maybe it's because that English is not my first language but I always find it confusing.
wrote last edited by [email protected]If you can replace the word with “he”, you always use who. If you can replace the word with “him”, you can use whom if you want to.
Whom did you lead into battle?
I led him into battle.
Who ate all the cake?
He ate all the cake.
The key takeaway is you can always use who and it will be correct, because who is both a subject and an object. So, if you don’t want to bother with the rule, just stick to who and you can’t go wrong.
-
As in, doesn't matter at all to you.
I don’t care if people say “chomping at the bit”, because it basically means the same thing as “champing at the bit”, and nobody uses the word champing anymore anyway.
-
As in, doesn't matter at all to you.
Compression of the sentence “are you going to be there” into “y’gon be de’” is better than most compression algorithms can do.
-
If I am clearly referring to myself (as in a text), I shouldn't have to inlude myself in the sentence. Ex: "just grabbing food" vs "I'm just grabbing food".
wrote last edited by [email protected]In Spanish, the conjugation of the verb lets you drop the subject, which is eloquent.
“¿Qué haces?”
“Estoy
llegandollevando comida.” -
The one thing I will insist on is the use of is/are. It's pretty simple, if referring to a countable set, use "are". E.g. there are four turtles in my sewer. You would not say "there are too much shit on this webpage", because that shit is uncountable.
There are too many shit on this webpage.
-
I like y'all're
wrote last edited by [email protected]Y'all'd've (YAWL-duh if your drawl is heavy enough): You all would have
-
In Spanish, the conjugation of the verb lets you drop the subject, which is eloquent.
“¿Qué haces?”
“Estoy
llegandollevando comida.”I'm not sure "I'm arriving food" is the best spanish out there
-
I'm not sure "I'm arriving food" is the best spanish out there
Whoops, that should be llevando, not llegando.
-
As in, doesn't matter at all to you.
Even if someone says "irregardless" or "I could care less", I don't say anything because I still understand what they mean.
-
"And" isn't necessary when listing.
Example: "cats, dogs and mice"
Vs "cats, dogs, mice"
Haven't heard an argument beyond "it's just convention" and I'm lazy enough to not bother with three letters and one syllable.
I think it also can be a little clearer in some situations where the word "and" is included in the list.
Example: "I like jazz, rock and roll and classical"
Vs: "I like jazz, rock and roll, classical"
An “and” before the last item tells you it’s an inclusive list. An “or” before the last item tells you it’s a pick one. A “nor” tells you it wasn’t any of those. It’s word to wait to the last item to know what the list was, but English is a screwed up language.
-
As in, doesn't matter at all to you.
Nobody actually knows how to use "it begs the question" anyway. Even the ones who think they do.
-
If you can replace the word with “he”, you always use who. If you can replace the word with “him”, you can use whom if you want to.
Whom did you lead into battle?
I led him into battle.
Who ate all the cake?
He ate all the cake.
The key takeaway is you can always use who and it will be correct, because who is both a subject and an object. So, if you don’t want to bother with the rule, just stick to who and you can’t go wrong.
Ah it's kind of like Jeopardy! You've gotta visualize the answer to know how to phrase the question.
-
It is perfectly cromulent to use "less" in place of "fewer".
The fact I understand all the vocabulary you used embiggens me.
-
"And" isn't necessary when listing.
Example: "cats, dogs and mice"
Vs "cats, dogs, mice"
Haven't heard an argument beyond "it's just convention" and I'm lazy enough to not bother with three letters and one syllable.
I think it also can be a little clearer in some situations where the word "and" is included in the list.
Example: "I like jazz, rock and roll and classical"
Vs: "I like jazz, rock and roll, classical"
You call yourself a grammar nazi, and don't use the oxford comma?
-
Mooses and gooses
Regularisation goes brrrr.
-
who/whom.
Maybe it's because that English is not my first language but I always find it confusing.
wrote last edited by [email protected]It's pretty much a dead language feature anyway, at least in my area. Whom sounds pretentious as hell if you actually say it. Like, you'd get away about as well with thee or thou.
