common mizzpelled words

abba wrote:

It sure takes the cake when American's think they can teach English.

abba wrote:

<quoted text>
No. Not Yank bashing. If you have a BA in English Lit., and a full minor (minors are under 18 over here)why do you keep needing to check your search engine?

Bill R wrote:

<quoted text>
Slow night, Easy, and I am weary of those who
simply want to trade insults, call one another
names, and toss out reason to flame others with ignorant outbursts...

Cherokee wrote:

Don't forget Burrito...

Aunty Alias wrote:

I struggle with "Who/Whom and Who's/Whoes" I did a search and found an explanation that makes sense to me.
Who/Whom
The distinction between "who" and "whom" is basically simple: "who" is the subject form of this pronoun and "whom" is the object form. "Who was wearing that awful dress at the Academy Awards banquet?" is correct because "who" is the subject of the sentence. "The MC was so startled by the neckline that he forgot to whom he was supposed to give the Oscar" is correct because "whom" is the object of the preposition "to."
WHO'S/WHOSE
This is one of those cases where it is important to remember that possessive pronouns never take apostrophes, even though possessive nouns do (see it's/its). "Who's" always and forever means only "who is," as in "Who's that guy with the droopy moustache?" or " who has," as in "Who's been eating my porridge?" "Whose" is the possessive form of "who" and is used as follows: "Whose dirty socks are these on the breakfast table?"
From: http://www.demeistre.com/jjs56799/en/prog/sub...
or
http://tinyurl.com/yunf7s

John wrote:

<quoted text>
Is "el trucko" Engligh or Spanish?

Rebel wrote:

<quoted text>
Edi, were you educated in the Dade County Florida school system, by chance? Or did you just not get very far in your educational pursuits? Skip too many classes? Come to school drunk or high?
Dictionaries are your friend. Become acquainted with them, learn how to use them, and then use them before posting nonsense and looking like an idiot.
Conversate and irregardless are words. Conversate produces one result in the dictionary and irregardless produces four. Go look them up. Hurry. Have someone help you if you never learned to use a dictionary.
Why would you say they don't exist? Did you ever bother looking them up?

newsgirl wrote:

<quoted text>
Did you bother to read the definition for irregardless? A made up word from the early 1900's does not constitute a true literary term. If that were the case, we could make up any word we want and say it has meaning.

Bill R wrote:

<quoted text>
Perhaps it is a regionalism. For example, it is
not unusual to hear someone in the Northwest
say, "To be more pacific, I think....", rather
than "specific."

Aunty Alias wrote:

<quoted text>
I couldn't agree more. It's easy to pick fights and more difficult to have a true debate. It's easier to insult people rather than respond with thought.
I appreciate the posts that are civil and show that the poster gave thought to their replies.

EDI wrote:

<quoted text>
yeah i cited him on it. he then posted the definition also without reading it. what he posted basically told him not to use it as a word. very ironic.
conversate isn't a word at all. the source he posted for it defined it as "slang"... so I guess if you're the type who uses "a'int" you can use "converse"...
But you ain't gonna be conversating with anyone too important, irregardless of how sarcastic you are...
HAHAHA
damned I'm clever.

EDI wrote:

<quoted text>
yeah i cited him on it. he then posted the definition also without reading it. what he posted basically told him not to use it as a word. very ironic.
conversate isn't a word at all. the source he posted for it defined it as "slang"... so I guess if you're the type who uses "a'int" you can use "converse"...
But you ain't gonna be conversating with anyone too important, irregardless of how sarcastic you are...
HAHAHA
damned I'm clever.

Aunty Alias wrote:

<quoted text>
Short answer: because using the search engine is quicker than typing out the answer from scratch.
Long answer:
English literature's spelling is dicey. Chaucer's work was before the great vowel shift and doesn't even sound like anyones English today, let alone look like something we can read easily.
Shakespeare signed his name with a number of different spellings. Reading old literature is liable to ruin ones spelling rather than improve it.
Why is English such a mess? Why aren't there rules that are hard and fast? Why do we have 5 vowels and 16 vowel sounds? Why is an unaccented vowel always sound like "eh"?
The English language is a patch quilt of Roman Latin, Low German - Anglo/Saxon/Jute, later French.
I mean why do the French call the live and dead animal by the same noun: boeuf, porc, mutton?
In the English language it's cow if alive, beef if it is dead. Pig if it is alive and pork if it is dead. Sheep if it is alive and mutton if it is dead. Who's the cause of that?
Blame William the Conqueror. The English population were the live stock herders and the French saw the meat only after it was slaughtered and prepared. That sort of socio/economic divide effected the English language.
Then once the English language was transplanted into America you can add "colonial lag". There's usage in the USA English and Canada French that are 17Th Century left overs. I'm sure there is "colonial lag" with Australian English when compared to current British English usage.
The English language is evolving in different ways in different countries. Another example is the internal vowel change to signify tense is disappearing here in the States. Sing, Sang, Sung, that sort of thing. We read "He dived into the water." instead of "He dove into the water." It makes me cringe, but a language is defined by usage. Linguistics is more descriptive rather than prescriptive. Therefore, my studies in Linguistics didn't help my spelling because I'm observing different sub-culture's usage.
So when I'm not entirely sure of something I'll do a search to double check. That way what I share in a public forum is not only correct, but also provide a link so anyone can further their studies.
As for a "full minor" that means taking enough classes to have a second Bachelor of Arts
I still feel you were Yank Bashing and you're still not amusing.