Pet Dislikes In The Use Of English In Forums

[JosephGavon]

Hasn't anyone yet mentioned these loathsome two?

WHO'S instead of WHOSE

and especially

IT'S instead of ITS, as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

the latter being so common that I start seeing it in reputable newspapers too.

And it would be nice to see WHOM a little more often, but I understand I'm asking too much.

[coxhoedave]

I fnid wehn poelpe cnnaot sepll porerply I tned to bcemoe agrny

[eek]

Hasn't anyone yet mentioned these loathsome two?

WHO'S instead of WHOSE

and especially

IT'S instead of ITS, as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

the latter being so common that I start seeing it in reputable newspapers too.

And it would be nice to see WHOM a little more often, but I understand I'm asking too much.

"The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

Embarrassed, but in order to understand better, I admit I don't understand what is wrong with those sentences. I know my grammar is lacking. Any chance of an explanation? (An explanation of the sentences, not as to why my grammar is lacking )

[endure]

A good way of figuring out where most apostrophes need to go is that they replace a letter. If you expand "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic" you get ""The plan is good; its only flaw is that IT IS too optimistic". The apostrophe replaces the 'I' in 'IT IS'

[BugJackBaron]

Hasn't anyone yet mentioned these loathsome two?

WHO'S instead of WHOSE

and especially

IT'S instead of ITS, as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

the latter being so common that I start seeing it in reputable newspapers too.

And it would be nice to see WHOM a little more often, but I understand I'm asking too much.

"The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

Embarrassed, but in order to understand better, I admit I don't understand what is wrong with those sentences. I know my grammar is lacking. Any chance of an explanation? (An explanation of the sentences, not as to why my grammar is lacking )

It is not clear to me the OP meant those sentences to be examples of bad grammar. They are both

correct.

[dave9988]

thai visa is the last place on earth to be if bad grammar and English bothers you. the average tv user is not very intelligent. its like going to the beach and complaining that you got a suntan.

[bonobo]

I have no problem when non-native speakers do not use correct English grammar or even spelling. However, when I read anything written by a native-speaker with huge mistakes, I do tend to discount what is written, and that includes here in TV.

As a former graduate professor, I never graded off on any test for grammar, spelling, or punctuation. If I could understand the point, the student got full credit. However, as I was teaching MBA or doctoral candidate in business, I demanded "clean" papers, native speaker or not. I advised all students to get proof-readers to read over their papers before turning them in. My reasoning was that companies do pay attention to proposals or other forms of communications, so students need to learn how to get it right.

[loong]

as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

JosephGavon, please explain what is wrong with these sentences, they seem fine to me!

[eek]

Hasn't anyone yet mentioned these loathsome two?

WHO'S instead of WHOSE

and especially

IT'S instead of ITS, as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

the latter being so common that I start seeing it in reputable newspapers too.

And it would be nice to see WHOM a little more often, but I understand I'm asking too much.

"The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

Embarrassed, but in order to understand better, I admit I don't understand what is wrong with those sentences. I know my grammar is lacking. Any chance of an explanation? (An explanation of the sentences, not as to why my grammar is lacking )

It is not clear to me the OP meant those sentences to be examples of bad grammar. They are both

correct.

Thanks.

I had gathered he was illustrating examples of the misuse of "it's" and "its" from the wording of the sentence, but i couldn't fathom as to why they were incorrect. Well, glad that one is cleared up!

[Artisi]

English and Internet are always capitalized!

As we are speaking English, capitalise it the correct spelling.

[scottyd]

as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

JosephGavon, please explain what is wrong with these sentences, they seem fine to me!

These sentences are correct, he was explaining the difference between "its" and "it's".

[Moonrakers]

Definately:............... For sooooo long I have been spelling this word as such.

It was actually from TV that I learned, not so long ago, that all these years I have been mis-spelling it and the correct spelling is: Definitely

[Hanimal]

Even one Bangkok Post IT writer used loose instead of lose in his weekly column once. He didnt feel peeved when I asked him why he did it, but promised he wouldn't do it again. Bad boy.

[Thanh-BKK]

Hi.

You want to know what goes on MY nerves when reading from/participating in forums?

People that have nothing better to do than complaining about other people's use of English.

We are a bunch of American, French, German, Indian, Chinese, Thai, Turkish, Russian, Vietnamese, Italian, Brazilian, African, Swedish, Austrian, Dutch, Malay, Finnish, Cambodian etc etc etc people, and the odd English thrown in for good measures.

Isn't it a GREAT thing that we can communicate at all..?????

Or am i the ONLY one here who understands all sorts of English, be that the Thai style, Singaporean, Filipino, SMS-style or even Australian??

At least i don't see a reason to complain.

Regards, n gud PM m8s....

Thanh

Edited February 24, 2009 by Thanh-BKK

[twschw]

For those of you who missed this little bit in the rules section:

USE OF OUR FORUMS

Considering the real-time nature of this bulletin board, it is not feasible for us to review messages or confirm the validity of information posted. Please remember that we can not actively monitor the contents of, and are not responsible for, any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of thaivisa.com or any entity associated with thaivisa.com. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by e-mail. We do have the ability to remove objectionable messages and will make every effort to do so if we determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process so please realize we may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. Misspellings and grammar errors are considered bad netiquette, please proof read your post by clicking on preview before posting. When a message is placed in any forum on thaivisa, you are granting a soft license to Thaivisa.com to use it.

[scottyd]

I iz creatin bad inflooence for da forumz? 2 bad lulz!!!11eleven!one11!!!

[twschw]

I iz creatin bad inflooence for da forumz? 2 bad lulz!!!11eleven!one11!!!

[jellymeister]

I actually like the many differences in English, whether it be from non-native speakers, correct/incorrect etc.

What is really objectionable is pedantic and pecksniffian popinjays who turn their nose up at anything less than shakespeare(whose english btw would have been impossible to understand for most types reading this forum)

Besides how could I ever sing along with my favorite hiphop dog if I wasn't culturally atttuned(pun intended)

Viva la difference or shall I say defiance

[F1fanatic]

as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

JosephGavon, please explain what is wrong with these sentences, they seem fine to me!

These sentences are correct, he was explaining the difference between "its" and "it's".

It's been many years since I was at school learning grammar but, I though an apostophe would be appropriate in "The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants" to express possession?

If I'm wrong I'm v happy to be corrected.

[ballpoint]

as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

JosephGavon, please explain what is wrong with these sentences, they seem fine to me!

These sentences are correct, he was explaining the difference between "its" and "it's".

It's been many years since I was at school learning grammar but, I though an apostophe would be appropriate in "The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants" to express possession?

If I'm wrong I'm v happy to be corrected.

The easiest way to check is to write it out the long way. "It's" is short for it is. You wouldn't write "The Kingdom of Thailand and it is inhabitants" (I hope). Therefore "its" is correct. Same for their and they're. "They are going" = "they're going". "It is they are car" doesn't work, "it is their car".

[F1fanatic]

as in "The Kingdom of Thailand and its inhabitants" or "The plan is good; its only flaw is that it's too optimistic"

JosephGavon, please explain what is wrong with these sentences, they seem fine to me!

These sentences are correct, he was explaining the difference between "its" and "it's".

It's been many years since I was at school learning grammar but, I though an apostophe would be appropriate in "The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants" to express possession?

If I'm wrong I'm v happy to be corrected.

The easiest way to check is to write it out the long way. "It's" is short for it is. You wouldn't write "The Kingdom of Thailand and it is inhabitants" (I hope). Therefore "its" is correct. Same for their and they're. "They are going" = "they're going". "It is they are car" doesn't work, "it is their car".

Yes, it's obvious that an apostrophe is used to replace missing letters, but I also thought it was used to express possession as in 'The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants'.

Am I wrong?

[F1fanatic]

Sorry, just thought. In the same way I seem to recall that the possession apostrophe was used at the end of the word if it was a multiple. e.g. The childrens' dog was badly behaved.

Edited February 24, 2009 by F1fanatic

[Birdman]

This thread is a tense rebuke in a matter, which is absolute unimportant. If words are said or written, only their statement counts, nothing else.

[F1fanatic]

This thread is a tense rebuke in a matter, which is absolute unimportant. If words are said or written, only their statement counts, nothing else.

I agree entirely and would never dream of correcting someone's grammar! Especially knowing that for many posters English is not their first language.

BUT, I would genuinely appreciate learning whether my recollection of the possessive apostrophe is correct or not.

[Gerontion]

Yes, it's obvious that an apostrophe is used to replace missing letters, but I also thought it was used to express possession as in 'The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants'.

Am I wrong?

In the case of its, yes but in general, no.

It should be '...its inhabitants' or '...the Kingdom of Thailand's inhabitants.'

[ballpoint]

Yes, it's obvious that an apostrophe is used to replace missing letters, but I also thought it was used to express possession as in 'The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants'.

Am I wrong?

In the case of its, yes but in general, no.

It should be '...its inhabitants' or '...the Kingdom of Thailand's inhabitants.'

That's correct. "Its" is a word in its own right, meaning belonging to it. No apostrophe is needed. Doing so would be changing it to the shortened form of it is.

[Birdman]

Yes, it's obvious that an apostrophe is used to replace missing letters, but I also thought it was used to express possession as in 'The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants'.

Am I wrong?

In the case of its, yes but in general, no.

It should be '...its inhabitants' or '...the Kingdom of Thailand's inhabitants.'

That's correct. "Its" is a word in its own right, meaning belonging to it. No apostrophe is needed. Doing so would be changing it to the shortened form of it is.

thank''s for the explanation's

[ballpoint]

This thread is a tense rebuke in a matter, which is absolute unimportant. If words are said or written, only their statement counts, nothing else.

Okay, if proper English is not important then please tell me what you mean by the following, posted by you in another thread? I'm not "rebuking" you, I think I know what you are saying, it's just not very clear and I wouldn't want to misunderstand.

"Replying to You Know You Are In Thailand When....

...reflexes the insufficiency to understand, let alone, living the Thai Ways."

[F1fanatic]

Yes, it's obvious that an apostrophe is used to replace missing letters, but I also thought it was used to express possession as in 'The Kingdom of Thailand and it's inhabitants'.

Am I wrong?

In the case of its, yes but in general, no.

It should be '...its inhabitants' or '...the Kingdom of Thailand's inhabitants.'

That's correct. "Its" is a word in its own right, meaning belonging to it. No apostrophe is needed. Doing so would be changing it to the shortened form of it is.

Sorry, being v slow here. So is the rule that if a 'possessive' word could be construed as having 'missing letters' if an apostrophe were inserted, then the apostrophe should not be used?

[Petesear]

The misuse of apostrophes is the one that bugs me the most.

I just found this in a current post, different topic:

"Their talking about you."

I guess the poster meant "They're talking about you."

Your all to sensitive.. We cant all be budding english teacher's