Fired for not wearing make-up

[TenPenny]

PS - one thing I've noticed about SJP, is that his lack of proper grammar and punctuation makes it so that he claims he is writing one thing, while if you read his posts, they say something different.

TenPenny, my posts say precisely what I want them to say; there is nothing wrong with my grammar or punctuation.

I read the post that started this discussion on your writing several times. That paragraph reads as if the comment was YOUR comment, not your speculation on what an employer would say.

Your writing is not as clear as you think it is. You need to spend more time on your writing, and you need a good editor.

'Dress or dresses' is a perfect example - you either made a mistake, or were being completely wrong, and yet now you insist your posts say exactly what you want them to. So which is it? Are you going to go back and claim that you now didn't make an error, and that you actually intended to say that Hooters waitresses wear dresses? Is that actually what you wanted to say?

 

[Zzarchov]

roflmao Going by your logic: just because you think you are lucid doesn't mean everyone else does.
Um, lemme splain sumthing to ya, pilgrim; the difrent punkchewashun marks hav difrent purpusses.

If you are an expert than surely you know that English is not like other languages (such as French) and does not have any hard and fast rules on spelling and grammar.

Many attempts in the last century (as high as the office of the president of the United States of America) to revert some or all of the english speaking world to simplified English.

One of the reasons for the dominance of English is that is it functional over an art form. Whenever it has become elevated to an art form (along with other languages) a gutteral form of "bad English" has become the new common tongue. It is just as likely what we think of as Engrish will replace English.

Most of grammar is esoteric knowledge, regardless of what any trendy books on the eating habits of panda's would forward. The number of times misuse of the finer details in grammar and spelling has hindered communication over the amount of time spent "correcting it" shows that it is truly an inefficient waste of time as a medium of communication. In terms of language as an art form, that is another matter.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Well said, Zzarchov. English language varies greatly from place to place, there is no one English language. As Prof. Higgins remarked in My Fair Lady, “Americans haven’t use it (the English language) in years.”

There are obvious spelling mistakes. However, to insist that somebody’s writing must adhere to some rules given in some dusty grammar book (when in practice writers are given a great deal of latitude in grammar and writing style) is petty, petulant and perverse in the extreme.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

'Dress or dresses' is a perfect example - you either made a mistake, or were being completely wrong, and yet now you insist your posts say exactly what you want them to. So which is it?

There are such things as typos, TenPenny. As to ‘dress or dresses’, I still think you were quibbling there. Instead of saying ‘revealing clothes’, I said ‘revealing dress’. I hardly think that is a capital offense, you are just quibbling.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

That was true at the start, but it was getting out of hand.;-)

You may be right Shadowshiv, perhaps it has got out of hand. Anyway, the point was raised and I think I have adequately responded to it. I don’t think I will be responding to any more discussion or any more points raised on the subject.

 

[JLM]

Well said, Zzarchov. English language varies greatly from place to place, there is no one English language. As Prof. Higgins remarked in My Fair Lady, “Americans haven’t use it (the English language) in years.”

There are obvious spelling mistakes. However, to insist that somebody’s writing must adhere to some rules given in some dusty grammar book (when in practice writers are given a great deal of latitude in grammar and writing style) is petty, petulant and perverse in the extreme.

It all depends on how you've been brought up, S.J. I had a teacher who taught us a business course and we had written tests periodically. If we misspelled a word, we got the answer marked "X". Her logic was "if you've misspelled the word you haven't written the word", so your answer is wrong. All that did was make us smarten up our spelling so we could pass the course. I kind of back the old girl, she was against sending illiterates out into the business world and I don't see anythign wrong with that.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Spelling mistakes I can understand, JLM (I even said so in my posts). It is the grammar ‘mistakes’, many of which are really a matter of preference, a matter of taste, that I have a problem with.

 

[Risus]

I looked up on the internet about ‘Hooters’. While waitresses do not go topless (I was wrong there), they do wear revealing dresses, it is requirement for the job.

However, that does not change my argument. If a waitress refuses to dress in the revealing manner as required by Hooters, she will be fired. Employer has a great deal of latitude.

They know what they are getting into when they apply for the job. Anywas their food sucks and their prices suck...

 

[JLM]

Spelling mistakes I can understand, JLM (I even said so in my posts). It is the grammar ‘mistakes’, many of which are really a matter of preference, a matter of taste, that I have a problem with.

Yeah, I'm not much of a stickler on grammar however there is one common one that I find really grates on my nerves- "Just between you and I"- we were taught in grade 3 the difference between a subject and an object.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Yeah, I'm not much of a stickler on grammar however there is one common one that I find really grates on my nerves- "Just between you and I"- we were taught in grade 3 the difference between a subject and an object.

JLM, how many people do you think know that ‘just between you and I’ is a wrong grammar? I would say probably half the people use ‘between you and I’, other half use ‘between you and me’.

Eventually both become accepted usages, that is how language evolves. Another example I can think of is ‘if I was you, I wouldn’t do it’. The correct usage is of course, ‘if I were you, I wouldn’t do it’. But these days both are accepted, and both must be regarded as correct usages.

English is not a static language, it is continuously evolving. That is why it has lasted so long and is used to widely, because of its adaptability.

 

[Cannuck]

If you are an expert than surely you know that English is not like other languages (such as French) and does not have any hard and fast rules on spelling and grammar.

European Union commissioners have announced that agreement has been reached to adopt English as the preferred language for European communications, rather than German, which was the other possibility.
As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty''s Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a five year phase plan for what will be known as EuroEnglish (Euro for short).


In the first year, "s" will be used instead of the soft "c". Sertainly, sivill servants will resieve this news with joy. Also the hard "c" will be replaced with "k". Not only will this klear up konfusion, but typwriters kan have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced by "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20 per sent shorter.
In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Government will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling.
Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of silent "e"''s in the languag is disgrasful, and they would go.
By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" by "z" and "w" by "v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.
After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivon vil find it ezi tu understand ech ozer. Ze drem vil finali kum tru.

All kidding aside. SJP needs to understand that words like "a", "an" and "the" exist for a reason.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

They know what they are getting into when they apply for the job. Anywas their food sucks and their prices suck...

Risus, I have never been to Hooters, but I understand they are doing very well, I assume because of the revealing costumes by the waiters and the waitresses. I expect people go there to look at the staff, not to eat the food.

 

[JLM]

JLM, how many people do you think know that ‘just between you and I’ is a wrong grammar? I would say probably half the people use ‘between you and I’, other half use ‘between you and me’.

Eventually both become accepted usages, that is how language evolves. Another example I can think of is ‘if I was you, I wouldn’t do it’. The correct usage is of course, ‘if I were you, I wouldn’t do it’. But these days both are accepted, and both must be regarded as correct usages.

English is not a static language, it is continuously evolving. That is why it has lasted so long and is used to widely, because of its adaptability.

Sorry, S.J. that won't fly. Saying "between you and I" is just as ridiculous as saying "Me is going to correct your grammar". YOu just can't go breaking the rules of grammar otherwise you get the lid off a can of worms that you can't get back on. The only way it could be done is to change the whole structure and make thousands of changes like verb forms and things like tenses and voices and then there's gerunds and participles and all this stuff has a role to play, so what is colloquially accepted will probably never gain official status. You hear all kinds of people saying "brother in laws", but that does not make sense, "brothers in law" does.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

so what is colloquially accepted will probably never gain official status.

I don’t know about official status, JLM. While grammar books may not include the colloquial expressions, they are widely used in both spoken and written English.

While purists may blanche, all kinds of colloquialisms are used by both common people and by columnists, writers etc. Eventually colloquialism become part of the language.

The only way it could be done is to change the whole structure and make thousands of changes like verb forms and things like tenses and voices and then there's gerunds and participles and all this stuff has a role to play,

Nothing of the sort. A colloquialism changes only that one structure, nothing else. If that introduces inconsistencies, big deal. Only purists, theoreticians may be bothered by such inconsistencies, nobody else is.

 

[Cannuck]

SJP is probably a proponent of ebonics courses in schools. At least for those "as dark as they come"

Ebonics to English Rap Lyrics Translation

 

[L Gilbert]

If you are an expert than surely you know that English is not like other languages (such as French) and does not have any hard and fast rules on spelling and grammar.

Many attempts in the last century (as high as the office of the president of the United States of America) to revert some or all of the english speaking world to simplified English.

One of the reasons for the dominance of English is that is it functional over an art form. Whenever it has become elevated to an art form (along with other languages) a gutteral form of "bad English" has become the new common tongue. It is just as likely what we think of as Engrish will replace English.

Most of grammar is esoteric knowledge, regardless of what any trendy books on the eating habits of panda's would forward. The number of times misuse of the finer details in grammar and spelling has hindered communication over the amount of time spent "correcting it" shows that it is truly an inefficient waste of time as a medium of communication. In terms of language as an art form, that is another matter.

Sorry, Z, I do copyediting for a friend when she gets snowed under with work. Although, there is a little latitude about punctuation and grammar in the English language, pretty much any book on copyediting will tell you that each mark has a distinct use. Otherwise it wouldn't matter if one stuck a comma where an exlamation mark would normally go, a - where a period would normally go, etc.
Anyway, my point was that Joe's comment that there is nothing wrong with his writing is his own personal opinion and not fact.

Fourteen Punctuation Marks

How To Use Punctuation

English Punctuation

 

[L Gilbert]

I agree that English evolves much like any other language. But, basically what Joe's saying is that the language that Ronny Rapper uses is just as much properly used English as that used by Eddie English Professor. He's wrong.

 

[karrie]

Do they still use whale fat in the make up? I thought they stopped that a long time ago. And anyway, why would an animal fat be bad for you (heavy metals I can understand), if you smear it on your skin?

where do the heavy metals an animal ingests go? Where do the other toxins they ingest go?

there's a reason that we don't generally eat other animals at the 'top' of the food chain, and part of that is disease and toxin consumption.

 

[karrie]

just because you think you are lucid doesn't mean everyone else does.

Right you are, Gilbert. I think I am lucid, articulate and can put my point across properly. If some others don’t think that, that is just too bad.

lol. I'm sorry, but I can't help but laugh at this. As Cannuck so eloquently points out, the fact that you equate 'dark skinned' with 'as dark as they come' proves that you have no clue about the nuances about speech.

Grammar aside, MEANING seems lost upon you Jo.

 

[L Gilbert]

where do the heavy metals an animal ingests go? Where do the other toxins they ingest go?

there's a reason that we don't generally eat other animals at the 'top' of the food chain, and part of that is disease and toxin consumption.

Quite right, toxins travel UP the food chain and normal metabolisms can't get rid of a disturbingly high amount of them..