funny!SamTheMan:D wrote:
ppl who jst abrevi8 everythin 4 no reasn
Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
Your/You're
Jesus loves mejord wrote:
You know the last 3 times this exact post was made you got the same purposeful bad grammar joke. Expect nothing more.
Habit from English literature essays, I'm afraid...it's wired in now.Lucien wrote:
The way you sometimes jazz up your posts with fancy grammar that isn't needed, Kail.
Pretty much sums it up for me. Apart from the Lego thing being my pet peeve. It annoys me, but there are more irritating grammatical errors out there.Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
Your/You're
Their/There/They're
And my No.1 Pet Peeve:
LEGO. That is the correct spelling. There is no 's' at the end under any circumstance. It's not even meant to be in lower-case (although I tend to ignore that mistake).
Also, it's pronounced "Leg-oh" not "Lay-go".
There's a reason ... if done purposefully, then the reason is to be associated with and accepted by the sub-culture that writes in this manner. So, if I want to be accepted by text-messaging-13-year-old-1337-speakers-who-never-see-sunlight, then this would be the way that I write.SamTheMan:D wrote:
ppl who jst abrevi8 everythin 4 no reasn
American English. Its not color...its colour!kylef wrote:
What annoys you most?
Last edited by Snake (2008-05-27 10:22:32)
Fixed.OrangeHound wrote:
There's a reason ... if done purposefully, then the reason is to be associated with and accepted by the sub-culture that writes in this manner. So, if I want to be accepted by text-messaging-13-year-old-1337-speakers-who-never-see-sunlight, then this would be the way that I write.SamTheMan:D wrote:
ppl who jst abrevi8 everythin 4 no reasn
(Another example: if I want to be accepted by right wing evangelical/political Christians morons, then I would use a phrase like "God's will" when describing the legitimacy of Bush's presidency).
Or ya know... It's just a lot quicker than writing the whole thing out on an inch wide keypad...OrangeHound wrote:
There's a reason ... if done purposefully, then the reason is to be associated with and accepted by the sub-culture that writes in this manner. So, if I want to be accepted by text-messaging-13-year-old-1337-speakers-who-never-see-sunlight, then this would be the way that I write.SamTheMan:D wrote:
ppl who jst abrevi8 everythin 4 no reasn
(Another example: if I want to be accepted by right wing evangelical/political Christians, then I would use a phrase like "God's will" when describing the legitimacy of Bush's presidency).
This is the thing I hate by far the most. It's "should HAVE" for fuck's sake."[...] must of [...]"
could OF
should OF
Depends, if you use 'predictive text' then it's much quicker to spell words out fully.jord wrote:
Or ya know... It's just a lot quicker than writing the whole thing out on an inch wide keypad...OrangeHound wrote:
There's a reason ... if done purposefully, then the reason is to be associated with and accepted by the sub-culture that writes in this manner. So, if I want to be accepted by text-messaging-13-year-old-1337-speakers-who-never-see-sunlight, then this would be the way that I write.SamTheMan:D wrote:
ppl who jst abrevi8 everythin 4 no reasn
(Another example: if I want to be accepted by right wing evangelical/political Christians, then I would use a phrase like "God's will" when describing the legitimacy of Bush's presidency).