Forums login grammar

[Moem]

On this forum, my posts are frequently auto-corrected and that is because it uses US English and I communicate in Australian English, not that it causes any hardship.

Your web browser allows you to pick (if it isn't for some reason set correctly to begin with, or for other purposes) the language you want to use, and this includes the various iterations of English.

I want to highlight this because I've quite recently come across the same idea: that the forum has a built-in spell checker. It does not, but most browsers do. Any spell-checking or autocorrection that happens is a feature of your browser or your device but not the forum.

[dman]

I appreciate the pointer to the phpBB developers. I'll try to go do that.

While personally I'm not bothered by the login button, because, as stated, I find it's easily understood as a noun. However, phpBB has numerous references to "login" as a verb (the login page alone says "In order to login" but there are many more occurrences) and that has always irked me a little. So if you submit a bug report do mention that it's a general issue with their English resource files.

If you feel like proof reading the whole thing, the files are here: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb/tree/mas ... anguage/en

Thank you. I hope I can get to this in the next while. Most appreciated.

/dr

[kyphi]

Any spell-checking or autocorrection that happens is a feature of your browser or your device but not the forum.

Thank you for that information. So it is browser-dependent. Firefox offers a wide selection of languages including Australian English. Waterfox offers only three versions of English - British, US and South African. I mostly use Waterfox set to English (British) and still get prompts questioning my spelling, e.g. -ise vs -ize. It does not auto-correct but suggests by showing a red wavy underline.

So, let me see if I understand you. You're saying non-native speakers are at an advantage because they can make mistakes and claim they're just not as constrained as those of us who are native speakers?

I did not mention "non-native speakers" nor did I make any claims for the supposed advantages you cited. First language does not infer native language and in-depth study of anything provides a more comprehensive understanding of the studied topic.
I studied several languages and my first language was not my native language.

Does that mean that I can now make mistakes and get away with it or do I first have to apologise that English is not my first language to foster a bit of tolerance

[lsemmens]

The problem being, not so much the use of a verb, where a noun is most appropriate, or vice versa, but one of spelling.

Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

A checker is a bless sing,
It freeze yew lodes of thyme.
It helps me right awl stiles two reed,
And aides me when aye rime.

Each frays come posed up on my screen,
Eye trussed two bee a joule;
The checker pours o'er every wyrd,
To cheque sum spelling rule.

Be fore a veiling chequers
Hour spelling mite decline,
And if were lacks or have a laps,
We wood bee maid to wine.

Butt now bee cause my spelling
Is checked with such grate flare,
Their are know faults with in my cite,
Off nun eye am a wear.

Now spelling does knot phase me,
It does knot bring a tier.
My pay purrs awl due glad den
With wrapped words fare as hear.

To rite with care is quite a feet
Of witch won should be proud.
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew floors are knot aloud.

Eye strike a quay and type a word
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee four two long
And eye can putt the error rite
Its rarely ever wrong.

Sow ewe can sea why aye dew prays
Such soft ware four pea seas.
And why eye brake in two averse
By righting want too pleas.

Eye half run this poem threw it
Eye am shore your pleased two no
Its let her perfect in it's weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.

credit: https://www.learnenglish.de/jokes/jokes ... ecker.html

Seriously, what gets me is those who use LOOSE when, in reality they mean LOSE.

[gm10]

Seriously, what gets me is those who use LOOSE when, in reality they mean LOSE.

Really? I can easily forgive that one because the pronunciation isn't exactly regular. Many people write as they hear. Compare choose/chose and loose/lose and you can easily see why they would write loose when the mean lose.

Strangely I have a harder time accepting the common mix-ups with they're/their/there though. I guess we all have our different pet peeves.

[catweazel]

The language is not static. It's a fluid thing that nobody actually "controls," certainly not I.

Well, that's sorted the issue.

[dman]

According to the OED both are correct and both can be used.

I'll need you to show me a cite. The one here does not say what you've said.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/login

Here's what's there:


That's only a noun (i.e., person, place, thing or idea). I've expanded the eight example sentences. As expected, they're all nouns. There are many more example sentences under noun definition 1.1 at the bottom of my screen capture. I didn't expand those, but they're all nouns too.

The English language is fluid and always changing, thanks to common usage. This change is accelerating in what is known as "The Digital Age". Login can be used as a noun and adjective.

It seems you didn't read other entries in this long thread. It would have been helpful to have done so, as this ground has been covered and recovered. It's here, and here, from me:

viewtopic.php?p=1503869#p1503869
viewtopic.php?p=1503882#p1503882

And there are of course all the other posts and follow-ups to see. I also did mention in there somewhere that essentially any noun can double as an adjective. (But not all adjectives are nouns.)

Where log in is always a noun.

Now you've simply erred, I'm afraid. The two-word item is only a verb. It's never a noun. The OED confirms this: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... in_(or_on)

It's only a phrasal verb, which I discussed in the previous posts referenced above. I teach a course in phrasal verbs.

I have to get over the fact that it is now correct to use one space after a full stop not two as I was taught.

On this one thing, I agree with you. I hunkered down and did the switch about eight years ago, after several years of being active on Twitter and more years fighting with autocorrections. I've read several full-length articles on the change, but I don't have one at hand to recommend now.

/dr

[dman]

The language is not static. It's a fluid thing that nobody actually "controls," certainly not I.

Well, that's sorted the issue.

Sarcasm aside, nobody controls it, but we all seem to be able to comment on it — some with better persuasion and logic than others.

That's as with everything in the world, I'm sure.

/dr

[gm10]

The language is not static. It's a fluid thing that nobody actually "controls," certainly not I.

Well, that's sorted the issue.

Sarcasm aside, nobody controls it,

Are you sure? Since you said you were living in Germany: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_or ... rm_of_1996

[dman]

Sarcasm aside, nobody controls it,

Are you sure? Since you said you were living in Germany: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_or ... rm_of_1996

Yup, the French also have their Académie française. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A ... %C3%A7aise

Nevertheless, nobody controls it. Lots of people try.

/dr

[catweazel]

Sarcasm aside, nobody controls it, but we all seem to be able to comment on it — some with better persuasion and logic than others.

Tut! Tut! Tut! Sarcasm aside, you say.

The point, which you completely missed, is that you complain about noun-verb confusion in English yet admit that language is fluid. The fact is, English is driven by popular usage. As for log in or login, I was in IT before you were born, and anybody who knows IT doesn't really give a hoot, let alone two, if people use the verb or the noun form. The bald truth is, it doesn't matter, except to the odd complaining pedant.

PS: In the US they 'do science'.

Oh, and shouldn't the subject be 'Forums log in grammar'?

[Moem]

The point, which you completely missed, is that you complain about noun-verb confusion in English yet admit that language is fluid. The fact is, English is driven by popular usage.

That's true, like it or not. Still I feel that verbing nouns really weirds language.
*grins, ducks, runs*

[catweazel]

That's true, like it or not. Still I feel that verbing nouns really weirds language.
*grins, ducks, runs*

Hahahah.

On a slightly similar tangent, it's i before e except after c, which makes English weird

[gm10]

I'll just say that "language is fluid" was never a good excuse for bad spelling and/or grammar.

[catweazel]

I'll just say that "language is fluid" was never a good excuse for bad spelling and/or grammar.

Thats knot wat i ment tho.

[gm10]

I'll just say that "language is fluid" was never a good excuse for bad spelling and/or grammar.

Thats knot wat i ment tho.

It wasn't meant as a responsive specifically to you, this fluidity discussion has been going on throughout this thread. And what I said isn't a strict rule, either - if you carry on bad spelling for long enough for it to become common usage (see American English ) then it eventually becomes the correct spelling.

[catweazel]

It wasn't meant as a responsive specifically to you, this fluidity discussion has been going on throughout this thread. And what I said isn't a strict rule, either - if you carry on bad spelling for long enough for it to become common usage (see American English ) then it eventually becomes the correct spelling.

Actually, American English is only the way it is because there were no grammar rules when the nation was founding. It seems they never put any rules in place afterwards either ;->

[Faust]

Actually, American English is only the way it is because there were no grammar rules when the nation was founding. It seems they never put any rules in place afterwards either ;->

Yes indeed !

The entire notion of " correct " grammar and spelling is highly misleading .
It's a fairly recent concept , historically .

In Elizabethan times , if a word was written so that the " average " reader could make the correct sound of the word , it was deemed a correct spelling .
Keep in mind that in those times there were very few literate people ; the children of rich people , and those that had entered monasteries ,
and that's about it .
Willy The Shake was wise to this of course ( what a surprise ! ) , and he/she made much fun of the whole idea in "Love's Labour's Lost" .
Holofernes is a stickler for "correctness" in language .

And now I see that spell-check is nagging me about the word " Labour's " .....
.... that kind of say's it all -

[DAMIEN1307]

heck...even the king james bible form of english was not standardised when it first came out in 1611...depending on who was printing it, the type setters would add or subtract letters in order to "fit" the text into even columns, sentences, etc. more for eye appeal than for accuracy in spelling, punctuation, etc. spelling and punctuation etc. wasnt even standardised in the KJV until1769...DAMIEN

[Schultz]

Most don't know this, but there was some effort to simplify the spelling of (American) English in the early 1900s. Andrew Carnegie was one of the main financial backers, and Theodore Roosevelt backed the idea (at first). I've read some stuff from back then that used this simplified spelling. The one word I remember most was "though" became "tho." Simple, but weird looking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_Spelling_Board