Hopefully, the following does not apply to my fellow Blogcritics writers and editors, because we are the all-knowing sinister cabal, after all. But it seems to me that we're losing the language in many English-speaking countries.
A form of grammatical atrophy has set in, whereby people cannot seem to tell the difference betwen "your" and "you're" (indeed, one wonders if this contraction is even known anymore). Even intelligent people have started writing "your" for "you're." Your is second person possessive. You're is simply a contraction of "you are."
Then there's the famous "its" versus "it's." A fundamental difference between the two words that should have been forever drilled into one's brain during elementary school is something else a lot of the populace has forgotten or become very confused over. Its is the possessive form for the third impersonal object - we don't employ an apostrophe for yours, his or hers so it follows that its does not have one. It's, like "your," is simply a contraction for "it is" or "it has." I have seen articles of MSN.com, ESPN, and other on-line magazines/news sources where the writer or copy editor (or both) did not use the correct form of the word.
Speaking of apostrophes, how many times have we come across written statements like "I'm going to take the dog's for a walk." An apostrophe is used only with s for possessives - "Stephen's," "the dogs' bones," "the people's candidate," "the men's changing room," etc. - or for contractions - "you've," "he's," "didn't," etc.
Lastly, there is the issue of "could of." Could of is completely nonsensical. Because the contraction "'ve" and the word "of" are so similar in sound, most people erroneously believe that "could of" is the correct form. But it's always could've, would've and should've. Think about it, does "I should of done that" make any sense? (What you should've done was pay better attention during your English classes!)
Article comments
1 - Alisha Karabinus
Would you like me to go fix your typos, or would you care to tinker with your own statement on why we should be as proper as possible? :)
-Lisha, giggling
2 - JR
A society that cares about how it uses its language is one that's strong.
Like the French?
3 - Mark Saleski
zing!!
4 - Mark Saleski
i do agree with mark though...screwups like your/you're and the like drive me crazy.
5 - bhw
The your/you're and its/it's problem are one and the same. They're not two separate problems, just the same mistake (possessive vs. contraction) repeated with different words.
While some people don't know the difference, most people just miss the distinction when typing and proofing. We live in a fast-paced world. I've made the mistake myself, especially with its/it's, in emails and other hastily written docs. A grammar checker helps if you're [hey, I got it right!] anal about casual communication.
A fundamental difference between the two words that should have been forever drilled into one's brain during elementary school is something else a lot of the populace has forgotten or become very confused over.
Actually, long sentences based on anemic verbs like "is" (and that end in prepositions, no less!) weaken the language more than any misplaced apostrophe ever could.
In other words, style counts, too.
;-)
6 - Alisha Karabinus
And then there are words like "anymore" and "hopefully" which were not used as they were in the above article until quite recently. Prior to that, they were considered just as uncouth and incorrect as we currently consider "your" when speaking about what "you are" doing.
Or so I've read. ;) I like this game!
7 - JR
screwups like your/you're and the like drive me crazy.
I make the mistake all the time; I have to catch it in proofreading. The funny thing is, I only started making the mistake since I learn to type quickly - I never made the mistake when I was hunting and pecking - and I am completely familiar with the proper usage.
For me, the problem seems to be that the words sound the same, since I make the same mistake with other homonyms like two/too/to. That tells me something surprising about how my brain is working (or trying to work), because I wouldn't have thought that the sound of a word matters when I'm putting ideas down in writing.
8 - Baronius
I had assumed that the first word of this article was a jest. But Alisha's comment has me wondering, was it sincere?
"Hopefully" is an adverb which refers to something being in a hopeful state. "Hopefully the following does not apply" means that what follows does not apply, and has a spirit of hope while it does so. It does not mean "I hope that the following does not apply".
Mark, were you being satirical, or is my hope misplaced?
9 - bhw
Hopefully, he was being satirical.
10 - Mark Edward Manning
"Mark, were you being satirical [about the word hopefully?]"
Spot on, peeps. I was being satirical. I'm glad that this was caught and taken for the joke it was.
I'm not pretending I'm perfect. I screw up too. But I do know my spelling, punctuation and grammar 95% of the time.
I've thought of another easily confused trio of words: "They're," "their" and "there."
And how about "to" and "too"?
The list, I fear, is endless
11 - S L Cunningham
I've had a few situations where the copy-editor became confused by changing you're to your or it's to its. Unfortunately when the article is printed, you're the one who looks like the idiot. Another pet peeve I have is with, "can't help but." Even though it is now considered standard use, it still sounds awkward. I still prefer "can't help thinking," etc., and use that form in my writing.
12 - Baronius
Mark, I figured you were kidding, but ever since I noticed that my father-in-law abbreviates et cetera as "ect" I trust no one.
13 - Anthony Grande
I motion that we re-name our official language from "English" to "American".
14 - Aaman
With grammatical errors like the ones in your last comment(re-name??, I motion?), please do so - the English-speaking world will be quite pleased:)
Just kidding, Anthony - don't mean to pick on you:)
15 - Anthony Grande
Thanks Aaman, I need, that every, now and, then
16 - visualsimplicity
Anyways, you guys are definately being loosers poking fun of peoples grammer. Supposably, this is suppose to be a free country rite? Take it easy. Than again, I'm an idiot.
17 - Mark Edward Manning
LOL, Visual.