The English language conspiracy

winnar
To make a contraction you replace one letter with an apostrophe, for the most part. There are exceptions.

eg... do not contracted becomes don't


Five characters become contracted to 5 characters. WHAT?

This saves no one time. We have all been duped.

Like I said earlier there are exceptions, for instance cannot becomes can't. Saving of one character. However were contractions to be what they are actually supposed to be you'd save 2 characters and the equivalent time. A DOUBLING of efficiency.

Im calling for a grammatical revolution. No longer will we be duped into not actually saving time and effort.

HELL NO APOSTROPHES MUST GO!

Do not say you can't. You cant.

Do not say you don't. You dont.

Do not say you won't! BECAUSE its wont and you WILL.

We are the 99%.

No longer will we be invisibly taxed for our time and effort by having to use more time and
expend more effort on something that makes no sense at all. Every one of us knows what is and what is not a contraction. We already know what letter(s) has been taken out. There is no need to mark it down. One does not simply make up contractions anyway. They ALL already exist. If there was a free for all of contraction making I might understand having to annotate the missing letter or letters with a mark. But there isnt.

YALL FEEL ME? We must stand as one on this issue or the schools and grammatical laws that grow up around this inanity will rob us of our freedom, time and effort for eons.

No, no one "feels" you because you're completely wrong. Contractions weren't made to save you time writing as much as they save you time reading and speaking them. However, you are forgetting about the invisible character that is omitted by contractions. The space. That's right, technically, there are 6 spaces in "do not" and only 5 in "don't". Well it looks like 4.5 spaces really, but the truth is it does save time when not having to remove the pen from paper and make a space to start a new word. Writing "don't" in cursive, for example, is quicker and more fluent than writing "do", lifting the pen and moving it down a little bit, and then reapplying the pen to the paper and writing "not". When you write "don't" you're saving significant time because you're not making unnecessary spaces. And as I said earlier, it is much quicker to read and speak contractions rather than their longer counterparts. Please think twice before you post some ridiculous time wasting BS. This whole post should be contracted to an apostrophe.

thesaneone
reply to post by winnar

 

The English language like many others is constantly changing.

Correct. Its a living language. Apostrophes are killing it.

winnar
The relative speed at which someone talks makes no difference. They will talk at the same relative speed whether saying do not or dont. You are creating strawmen again,

I don't know who told you that it is the same speed to speak one word as it is to speak two words. It takes twice as long to speak two words than it does to speak one word. It becomes more noticeable when you speak three words and two words. Use a chronograph on yourself when speaking with and without contractions. You'll notice a considerable difference, whether you want to admit it or not.

There are no strawmen here. Only facts.


And apostrophes will never go away due to words like "its / it's" and "your / you're".

Nostrenominon

No, no one "feels" you because you're completely wrong. Contractions weren't made to save you time writing as much as they save you time reading and speaking them.

Completely backwards as I have already shown and been told 'correct' by the person who first brought it up. Infinitely more time is saved in writing contractions than either speaking or reading.

Try harder.


Also try reading the rest of the thread before replying as the rest of your points were already brought up and consequently shot down.

winnar
To make a contraction you replace one letter with an apostrophe, for the most part. There are exceptions.

eg... do not contracted becomes don't


Five characters become contracted to 5 characters. WHAT?

This saves no one time. We have all been duped.

Like I said earlier there are exceptions, for instance cannot becomes can't. Saving of one character. However were contractions to be what they are actually supposed to be you'd save 2 characters and the equivalent time. A DOUBLING of efficiency.

Im calling for a grammatical revolution. No longer will we be duped into not actually saving time and effort.

HELL NO APOSTROPHES MUST GO!

Do not say you can't. You cant.

Do not say you don't. You dont.

Do not say you won't! BECAUSE its wont and you WILL.

We are the 99%.

No longer will we be invisibly taxed for our time and effort by having to use more time and
expend more effort on something that makes no sense at all. Every one of us knows what is and what is not a contraction. We already know what letter(s) has been taken out. There is no need to mark it down. One does not simply make up contractions anyway. They ALL already exist. If there was a free for all of contraction making I might understand having to annotate the missing letter or letters with a mark. But there isnt.

YALL FEEL ME? We must stand as one on this issue or the schools and grammatical laws that grow up around this inanity will rob us of our freedom, time and effort for eons.

All I see is illiterate redneck noise. Do you really think any well-educated person will take this crap seriously?

Another rant thread ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

reply to post by winnar


Gave you a star and stuff because you made me realize that apostrophes don't really save much time but... I like them.

I like all of English's funny little rules. I don't agree with them and I think they are mostly nonsensical but, when somebody corrects me on my grammar, I actually enjoy it because it's like learning some obscure rule in a game you've been playing for years.

English would be rather boring without all of the useless rules. Not to mention that many of these rules give us the possibility of making cool little word games and poetic puns and crazy conventions.

In short, our lame language is only fun because of the lameness.

winnar
Perhaps stop replying from English class and pay attention.

Trust me, I'm paying attention. I got "A's" in English in high school and college.

winnar
Also try reading the rest of the thread before replying as the rest of your points were already brought up and consequently shot down.

You haven't shot anything down. It's an absolute fact that speaking less words is noticeably quicker than speaking more words. It's very easily proven when timing yourself with a chronograph.

Saying otherwise is deliberately creating false information: a hoax.


I'm bowing out of this thread now as I see where it's going.....

_BoneZ_
I don't know who told you that it is the same speed to speak one word as it is to speak two words. It takes twice as long to speak two words than it does to speak one word. It becomes more noticeable when you speak three words and two words. Use a chronograph on yourself when speaking with and without contractions. You'll notice a considerable difference, whether you want to admit it or not.

Wrong. Say a long polysyllabic word...like 'antidisestablishmentarianism' and then try 'it and a'

Your ego is having a hard time letting go of the belief that you have to use apostrophes which was pounded into your head for 12 years, assuming you are out of HS or its equivalent, which I have my doubts about.

no strawmen

I quite clearly pointed it out.

And apostrophes will never go away due to words like "its / it's" and "your / you're".

Your and youre. Are you really missing why this doesnt even matter. Or as I explained earlier why its doesnt either? Here let me help...

HOMOGRAPHS are words that are spelled the same but have different meanings. CONTEXT as I said earlier is used to define which word a person is using. Take LEAD. Look it up. No apostrophe even in it, yet people use context to tell the meaning. Does it mean the metal? Does it mean the person taking point? CONTEXT tells you.

Here you sit arguing about something I have already successfully exposed as illogical.

If you wont evolve you will be left behind to go extinct.

By the way has ANYBODY had a hard time reading my lack of apostrophized contractions yet? Obviously not since you keep replying to the exact context I used...even if your replies are illogical and nonsensical. It just proves how much these "laws" of language have confused you.

If anyone really feels like you need apostrophes to tell its from its or your from youre (???

_BoneZ_

Trust me, I'm paying attention. I got "A's" in English in high school and college.

Got A's and cant tell your from youre without the apostrophe. You do know there is an extra letter in one of them dont you?

How do you tell its and its from each other in speech, or your and youre from each other in speech?

Tell me more about these A's you received. Were they earned, or did they just not want to leave a child behind?

Cheat much?

reply to post by winnar


Would you please stop with your attacks on people, Many people here are not from the U.S so the English language will not be used the way you want it to be nor should it.

winnar
... or your and youre from each other in speech?

Your and you're sound completely different when spoken.

Hey while we're at it, don't you think it's just so difficult learning four whole new words to describe the seasons? It's so difficult, why don't we make life easier and just name one of the seasons after an already common verb that describes what happens to the leaves at this time of year?

reply to post by thesaneone


By the way, this thread has relevance to your signature

reply to post by winnar

eg... do not contracted becomes don't


Five characters become contracted to 5 characters. WHAT?

This saves no one time. We have all been duped.

Uh... Spoken language *facepalm

It contracts a syllable. Remember that spoken word affects English as much as written.

HELL NO APOSTROPHES MUST GO!

Do not say you can't. You cant.

Do not say you don't. You dont.

Do not say you won't! BECAUSE its wont and you WILL.

The apostrophe shows a contraction, without it you are essentially hiding the root word.

thesaneone
reply to post by winnar

 

Would you please stop with your attacks on people, Many people here are not from the U.S so the English language will not be used the way you want it to be nor should it.

I attacked no one. And if English isnt their forte perhaps they should stay out of a thread specifically about ENGLISH?

Or would that make too much sense?

The_Modulus

Your and you're sound completely different when spoken.

Maybe in French? You cant be serious.

Hey while we're at it, don't you think it's just so difficult learning four whole new words to describe the seasons? It's so difficult, why don't we make life easier and just name one of the seasons after an already common verb that describes what happens to the leaves at this time of year?

Obviously youre just insane.

boncho


*facepalm

Do this harder then go back and read ALL the posts. Maybe then points will be gotten.

winnar

The_Modulus

Your and you're sound completely different when spoken.

Maybe in French? You cant be serious.

The ending of the word 'your' is pronounced as you would say 'or', 'floor', 'door', 'more', whereas the ending of 'you're' rhymes with 'velour', 'demure', 'procure'.

winnar

The_Modulus
Hey while we're at it, don't you think it's just so difficult learning four whole new words to describe the seasons? It's so difficult, why don't we make life easier and just name one of the seasons after an already common verb that describes what happens to the leaves at this time of year?

Obviously youre just insane.

Yes, that would be insane, we should probably just stick to calling it Autumn, as it should be.

The_Modulus


The ending of the word 'your' is pronounced as you would say 'or', 'floor', 'door', 'more', whereas the ending of 'you're' rhymes with 'velour', 'demure', 'procure'.

This is hoax material. All those words rhyme.

I know, that would be insane.

Then why compare apples to oranges? The seasons arent contractions. The comparison you made is simply stupid.