Grammar snobs are patronising, pretentious and just plain wrong
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2016/apr/20/grammar-snobs-are-patronising-pretentious-and-just-plain-wrong-video
>>7976471
Grammar promotes clarity.
It also serves as a social class marker, and I'm a class snob so I don't feel at all ashamed of being a grammar snob as well.
>>7976471
Stop making these /pol/-/r9k/-tier threads where you just post a shitty "controversial" article.
This board is for the discussion of books.
>>7976471
lol she ended her talk with a preposition
>>7976471
>the guardian is full of retarded liberal descriptivists
who would have thought
>>7976471
>people who can't manage to use clear accepted grammar have credibility
This whole egalitarian thing has gone too far.
>>7976500
this!
this is the work of liberal SJW marxists who are intent to destroy Western civilization.
We need to redpill the brainwashed sheeple
>>7976506
Fuck off.
If someone wants to reach an audience outside of their immediate circles and have any credibility, they should at least bother to learn how that audience will most readily receive their message.
>>7976517
lol what are you even talking about moron
>>7976487
>It also serves as a social class marker
This is the problem.
Clarity is great but also rules are training wheels that can be put down at times when done with purpose.
>>7976487
People trying to use markers to feel better than someone else or even to judge weather they should take someone seriously is the problem.
Falling for the prescriptivism / descriptivism dichotomy
>>7976543
>weather
>The Guardian
Its basically Buzzfeed but more purposely inflammatory now
>>7976471
>The Guardian actively promoting the destruction of language and culture
What else is new. It's just another day in the long, slouching decline of Western civilization
>>7976487
>Clarity
We should just start using Lojban.
>>7976607
deus vult my white brother of non-degeneracy!
>>7976679
How confusing. You seem to think that, "moronic proles," are the grammar snobs.
It's okay to ignore grammar, but it isn't okay to be ignorant of it. People don't leave the womb with command of language. Unless you command language, it controls you in ways you aren't aware of :^)
But if we're going to talk about the woman, what an obnoxious hypocrite, taking a patronizing and pretentious tone to address patronage and pretense.
>>7976471
they showed a pic of an angry white dude as the grammar snob but in my experience the most obnoxious grammar snobs are mostly women
>>7976815
This is aimed pretty effectively at tumblr-type women, i.e. the main culprits of grammar snobbery and #oxfordcomma. Painting that behavior as something aggressive white guys do is the perfect way to make them perceive it negatively.
>>7976669
lol dude keep em coming, your sarcastic posts are totally funny and we all appreciate them
>>7976825
I hope this wasn't intentional.
>>7976487
Oooh ooh oh ooh fuckin KEK
didn't put a comma before your second coordinating conjunction you little warthog
F A N B O Y S
A
N
B
O
Y
S
>>7977489
The difference is that I actually acknowledge that as a mistake.
>>7976471
This thread is patronizing and pretentious, you hypocrite.
>>7976471
racism of lowered expectations
you can ignore grammatical rules only if you do it in a clear ironic sense.
>>7978377
They not lower they just different cracka
Oh just fucking KILL ME ALREADY GUYS
EXTREME DESCRIPTIVISM IS A POX ON THIS GREAT LANGUAGE
>using strict technical grammar
Wew lads I bet you stir your tea before you put milk in
To me, it depends on context. If I'm talking to a friend, or listening to someone speak on the radio or on TV, I don't care too much. If I'm reading a book, however, that changes. With writing a book comes the implication that you at least understand the medium you are using to communicate. Part of it is also about aesthetics. It just looks nice when I'm reading from someone who seems to know how to write.
It should also be noted that you can understand the 'rules' and still break them. Some of the greatest artists of the last century were later recognized as pioneers for doing exactly that. The problem comes when you don't understand the rules and break them out of ignorance that they even exist.
You're a retard if you waste time on uneducated people in regards to grammar and the like. People through messages find it 'funny' that I type in proper sentences; I'm just used to it through reading and writing but to call the average person out on their lack of grammar or puntuation just makes you annoying and wastes time.
As long as it's something unimportant I'll not stress it's presentation so long as I can understand it.
You may say your calling people out is for their own good but most people have no desire to improve on their writing.
>>7978409
>calls people retarded
>distinguishes himself from "uneducated people"
>it's presentation
Holy fuck there is an unbearable amount of pseuds here.
>>7976488
The article isn't controversial though, or at least shouldn't be
Anyone who has read even the first page of the introduction to an academic text on linguistics knows prescriptivism in casual speech and an authoritarian treatment of grammar is futile and, as she says, 'patronizing'
Moreover, anybody with a brain cell knows that if you are writing something like a formal essay you will stick with the current conventions of formal writing.
>>7976498
>>7976607
Hey there reddit!
The Guardian defending their piss-poor writing as usual. The English really should have more pride in their mother tongue. Guardianfags just mad they don't write for the Economist.
>>7978443
it really isn't, though. the guardian have a fairly decent style guide that contains a lot of sensible directives.
what this is, is a whiny dullard bitching on about something she really knows little about. i am from a fairly harsh working class background and i value good grammar as a means of levelling the playing field a little
>>7978409
Wow, that deliberate semicolon.
>>7976694
>grossly incorrect use of commata
REEEEEEEEEE
>>7976471
The lack of the Oxford comma in this title is a tad triggering.
But, in general, people vote with their feet on issues of grammar. If the grammar is clear or stylistically coherent in a written work then it's probably not detracting anything. If it's genuinely hard to interpret, in a case where better grammar would solve the problem, then yeah you should work to improve your grammar.
But I give 0 fucks if people find grammar police patronizing. This Whingy pleb shit is annoying. This is what you get when the riff raff pretend at reading and writing.
>>7977505
Perfect reply.
>>7978536
>reee muh sekrit club
kill self please
>>7978536
>4chan is a bastion of progressive thought and tolerance
wew lad
>>7978594
i didn't imply this, I implied that if you want to get angry at mythical leftists destroying white civilization with ""improper"" language you might find reddit suits you best
>>7976506
Learn the language? Lol. Who does that? Just string random thoughts together!
This is what women and their progressive ilk do, they don't actually have the ability to create 'actual' work, but they still want do be in the limelight and be praised. So they argue about innocuous shit and create problems where there are none.
I'm not really familiar with muh literature, but within my own field (concept art) or my brothers field (coding) you see plenty of this nonsense: homos arguing about muh master/slave terminology usage in code or in art muh decolonization of oriental art. at no point do these people actually contribute code or art, they simply are angry that there are people that get more attention then them so they react in the only way they know how: destroy things, that way they get attention for 5 minutes and when the destruction is complete - no one gets any attention - and true equality is achieved.
>>7978630
tldr
>>7978619
Nah son, you're memeing wrong. That's /pol/ behavior, not Reddit. Common mistake.
Now go, keep memeing and never stop!
>>7976471
>just plain wrong
This is not proper English.
I should be.
>The are quite incorrect in their assumptions.
>>7978654
this wasn't that long and actually said something
>>7978665
It's too long. Go to r/books to see how to write clear and easy to understand posts. You could learn something.
>>7978673
>r/books
>learn something
>>7978673
progressive; upvoted
>>7978658
don't you correct me I'm a reddit expert I study those animals I know everything about them
Language is practical, it's function is communication. Good grammar is conducive to good communication and should be encouraged, but is also potentially inhibitive. Context is everything.
Grammar snobbery is conducive to not being invited to parties.
>She says grammar snobbery is often used to silence those who have less of a voice in society
lol. anyone who isn't an idiot can learn how formal language works. you can talk during everyday conversations the way local colloquial language dictates as ordinary but if you're writing something formal or serious you should adhere to formal grammar rules because if you don't the person reading it might come to the completely valid conclusion that the reason you're not writing correctly is because you're too dumb.
>>7979397
Not to mention that dedicated men from marginalized groups, like the Nation is Islam and Black Panthers, were famous for speaking flawless queen's English at all times.
>>7976488
R9k has absolutely nothing to do with this article. Stop shitting up the board with your imbecile kneejerking
>It was once considered incorrect to start a sentence with words like 'and' or 'but'.
I really hope that people won't actually destroy this rule.
>>7979418
But it wasn't actually ever a "rule." You won't find any usage guide from any point in history that says not to start a sentence with and or but. It's just something grade school teachers tell their pupils so they don't write a subordinate clause as its own sentence (e.g., "The boy went to the store. And bought a soda.").
