Spell check

[kayrharris]

must not be available for whomever types the graphic that is displayed on our screen for news stories. (There has to be a technical term for that, but I don't what it is.)

Anyway, there's a story about a 26 year old man who was kidnapped on April 1. The ransom demand was only $10,000, which the parents complied with right away. Still no sign of their son. I'm afraid it won't be a good outcome.

The graphic on screen while they were on this story had "parents PAYED the ransom". I know a lot of people who say they are just bad spellers, but this is a one syllable, four letter word!!!

Just ranting, as spelling is one of my hot spots. I've worked for my boss for 30 years and he is the worst speller ever! I don't know how he got through college back when there was no spell check. I've always thought his wife did all his papers since she was an English major.

[AlphaDummy]

C-H-E-C-K.

Although some may insist that I am wrong here.

[gsabc]

must not be available for whomever types the graphic that is displayed on our screen for news stories. (There has to be a technical term for that, but I don't what it is.)

I think it's "product of the modern U.S. education system", where self-esteem takes precedence over getting the correct answer.

[dimmzy]

I think it's "product of the modern U.S. education system", where self-esteem takes precedence over getting the correct answer.

In your comment, shouldn't the end quote be OUTSIDE the comma?

--dimmzy, who's looking forward to a rousing comma debate

[AnnieCamaro]

Yoo giys arre so pycky.

/:P\

[peacock2121]

You people make me laugh.

[gsabc]

I think it's "product of the modern U.S. education system", where self-esteem takes precedence over getting the correct answer.

In your comment, shouldn't the end quote be OUTSIDE the comma?

--dimmzy, who's looking forward to a rousing comma debate

I've never been able to figure that one out. Where DOES the punctuation go in an embedded quotation?

BTW, am I the only one who found "Eats Shoots and Leaves" to be a boring and unamusing read? I borrowed it from the library thinking it would be entertaining, fellow pedant that I am, and returned it half unread.

[nitrah55]

I saw the header and instantly thought it was something they do at Hogwarts.

[Ritterskoop]

I'm told young people don't learn spelling because the word processing programs do it for them.

Poorly.

[christie1111]

My kids got stuck in the 'whole language' type program that was the vogue then.

More important to get the thoughts on the paper and not worry about the spelling.

Both of them don't spell nearly as well as I would like. And I have always done well in that area.

Although with my sucky typing, it is hard to tell at times.



ESST lives!

[TheCalvinator24]

I think it's "product of the modern U.S. education system", where self-esteem takes precedence over getting the correct answer.

In your comment, shouldn't the end quote be OUTSIDE the comma?

--dimmzy, who's looking forward to a rousing comma debate

I've never been able to figure that one out. Where DOES the punctuation go in an embedded quotation?

That depends on where you are. In America, we put commas and periods inside the quotation marks. In Britain, they go outside. I agree with the logic of the British system, but I think the American system is better aesthetically.

[silvercamaro]

I'm told young people don't learn spelling because the word processing programs do it for them.

Poorly.

A letter to the editor in today's NY Times states that students don't need to learn facts because they can Google. She thinks the time is better spent making sure the kids learn "critical thinking skills." The kicker is that the letter was written by a teacher of gifted students.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/opini ... rbert.html

I have two major problems with this. First, critical thinking skills may not do much good when the thinker has no information on which to use them, because of laziness in looking up those facts; inability to distinguish good information(i.e. "true" facts) from bad data; or loss of power and/or internet access. Second, perhaps I could accept this approach more easily if applied to students of low intelligence, whose mental capacity to retain facts might be limited. To make such a claim on behalf of "gifted" students is absurd.

I would be outraged if this teacher came anywhere close to my children.

[Bob Juch]

In your comment, shouldn't the end quote be OUTSIDE the comma?

--dimmzy, who's looking forward to a rousing comma debate

I've never been able to figure that one out. Where DOES the punctuation go in an embedded quotation?

That depends on where you are. In America, we put commas and periods inside the quotation marks. In Britain, they go outside. I agree with the logic of the British system, but I think the American system is better aesthetically.

No, that's not correct. The American system always puts commas inside the quotatiom marks, the British system uses common sense as to where to put them.

[Bob Juch]

I'm told young people don't learn spelling because the word processing programs do it for them.

Poorly.

A letter to the editor in today's NY Times states that students don't need to learn facts because they can Google. She thinks the time is better spent making sure the kids learn "critical thinking skills." The kicker is that the letter was written by a teacher of gifted students.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/opini ... rbert.html

I have two major problems with this. First, critical thinking skills may not do much good when the thinker has no information on which to use them, because of laziness in looking up those facts; inability to distinguish good information(i.e. "true" facts) from bad data; or loss of power and/or internet access. Second, perhaps I could accept this approach more easily if applied to students of low intelligence, whose mental capacity to retain facts might be limited. To make such a claim on behalf of "gifted" students is absurd.

I would be outraged if this teacher came anywhere close to my children.

I'm not sure what the author of that letter meant; the letter is too brief to be able to judge.

However, I am against the mindless memorization of "facts", which teach nothing at all. For instance, in 4th grade I was taught this phrase, "In 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue and the Moors were expelled from Spain too." It was many years later than I learned the connection between the two: That Ferdinand and Isabella promised Columbus for a couple of years that when they defeated the Moors that they'd fund his expedition. Why weren't we taught that instead?

There are many people who can name the wives of Henry VII and how they were disposed of, but how many of those know whose daughter Catherine of Aragon was or the relationship between the two wives who were beheaded?

[PlacentiaSoccerMom]

[There are many people who can name the wives of Henry VII and how they were disposed of, but how many of those know whose daughter Catherine of Aragon was or the relationship between the two wives who were beheaded?

Henry VII had one wife, Elizabeth of York.

Henry VIII had six wives.

Catherine of Aragon's daughter was Mary I.

Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard were first cousins. Anne's mother was Catherine's father's sister.

[earendel]

I'm told young people don't learn spelling because the word processing programs do it for them.

Poorly.

Or they are too busy texting each other. I read an article the other day that students were using their "texting spelling" on essays and papers for their classes.

[Bob Juch]

[There are many people who can name the wives of Henry VII and how they were disposed of, but how many of those know whose daughter Catherine of Aragon was or the relationship between the two wives who were beheaded?

Henry VII had one wife, Elizabeth of York.

Henry VIII had six wives.

Catherine of Aragon's daughter was Mary I.

Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard were first cousins. Anne's mother was Catherine's father's sister.

I obviously meant to say "Henry VIII", just as you meant to say who Catherine of Aragon's parents were, not who her daughter was.

[TheConfessor]

The graphic on screen while they were on this story had "parents PAYED the ransom". I know a lot of people who say they are just bad spellers, but this is a one syllable, four letter word!!!

Actually, "PAYED" is a perfectly good word. It just doesn't happen to be the word that was intended in the sentence above. Whoever wrote it might have had spell check, which found nothing wrong with the word "payed." In fact, I have spell check and it thinks payed is just fine. It's a nautical term, referring to letting out rope.

Spell check can be a helpful tool, but it doesn't replace a good education.

If you're also interested in grammar check, the word in the first sentence of your post should be "whoever," not "whomever." It's the subject of a clause, so "whoever" would be the correct word to use in this case.

[peacock2121]

[There are many people who can name the wives of Henry VII and how they were disposed of, but how many of those know whose daughter Catherine of Aragon was or the relationship between the two wives who were beheaded?

Henry VII had one wife, Elizabeth of York.

Henry VIII had six wives.

Catherine of Aragon's daughter was Mary I.

Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard were first cousins. Anne's mother was Catherine's father's sister.

I obviously meant to say "Henry VIII", just as you meant to say who Catherine of Aragon's parents were, not who her daughter was.

obviously

[peacock2121]

The graphic on screen while they were on this story had "parents PAYED the ransom". I know a lot of people who say they are just bad spellers, but this is a one syllable, four letter word!!!

Actually, "PAYED" is a perfectly good word. It just doesn't happen to be the word that was intended in the sentence above. Whoever wrote it might have had spell check, which found nothing wrong with the word "payed." In fact, I have spell check and it thinks payed is just fine. It's a nautical term, referring to letting out rope.

Spell check can be a helpful tool, but it doesn't replace a good education.

If you're also interested in grammar check, the word in the first sentence of your post should be "whoever," not "whomever." It's the subject of a clause, so "whoever" would be the correct word to use in this case.

made me laugh and laugh

I care that what I have to say gets understood and that what you have to say gets understood, whoever you are.

[silvercamaro]

If you're also interested in grammar check, the word in the first sentence of your post should be "whoever," not "whomever." It's the subject of a clause, so "whoever" would be the correct word to use in this case.

I disagree. "Whomever" (and the clause that follows) is the object of the preposition "for."

I will accept Hermillion as the proper authority to settle this dispute, and if I am in error, I will extend a sincere apology.

[TheCalvinator24]

If you're also interested in grammar check, the word in the first sentence of your post should be "whoever," not "whomever." It's the subject of a clause, so "whoever" would be the correct word to use in this case.

I disagree. "Whomever" (and the clause that follows) is the object of the preposition "for."

I will accept Hermillion as the proper authority to settle this dispute, and if I am in error, I will extend a sincere apology.

I agree with TheConfessor. The pertinent part is "whoever type" not "for whomever."

The pronoun is in the Subjective case. It's the Subject of "types."

[TheConfessor]

If you're also interested in grammar check, the word in the first sentence of your post should be "whoever," not "whomever." It's the subject of a clause, so "whoever" would be the correct word to use in this case.

I disagree. "Whomever" (and the clause that follows) is the object of the preposition "for."

I will accept Hermillion as the proper authority to settle this dispute, and if I am in error, I will extend a sincere apology.

It's pretty funny that you'll accept only the grammar standards of a fellow Okie.

There are hundreds of internet sites that explain this rule, so I don't know which one would be most credible to you, but the Cliffs Notes site is pretty clear and explicit:
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Cli ... 28968.html

Pronoun case in subordinate clause

Who, whom, whoever, whomever. In deciding which case of who you should use in a clause, remember this important rule: The case of the pronoun is governed by the role it plays in its own clause, not by its relation to the rest of the sentence. Choosing the right case of pronoun can be especially confusing because the pronoun may appear to have more than one function. Look at the following sentence.

*

They gave the money to whoever presented the winning ticket.

At first, you may be tempted to think whomever rather than whoever should be the pronoun here, on the assumption that it is the object of the preposition to. But in fact the entire clause, not whoever, is the object of the preposition. Refer to the basic rule: The case should be based on the pronoun's role within its own clause. In this clause, whoever is the subject of the verb presented. (A good way to determine the right pronoun case is to forget everything but the clause itself: whoever presented the winning ticket, yes; whomever presented the winning ticket, no.)

The following two sentences show more dramatically how you must focus on the clause rather than the complete sentence in choosing the right pronoun case.

*

We asked whomever we saw for a reaction to the play.
*

We asked whoever called us to call back later.

In each sentence the clause is the direct object of asked. But in the first sentence, whomever is correct because within its clause it is the object of saw, while in the second sentence, whoever is correct because it is the subject of called.

[peacock2121]

You guys are cracking me up.

I so love this place for all of the things about which we can pick nits.

Hows that for not ending a sentence with a preposition?

[JBillyGirl]

As a copyeditor, I've often heard the following admonition: Avoid using "whomever" unless you are 100% certain of the grammar. When in doubt, just use "whoever." See the Chicago Manual of Style (15th ed.), p. 232. So there.