your and you're
"The difference between knowing your sh** and knowing you're sh**"
CAPITALS
"Helping your uncle Jack off a horse. or. Helping your uncle jack off a horse."
Any others?
To and too
There, their and they're.
Makes anyones argument useless if they've used the wrong word. So many people just don't know the differences.
Let's eat Grandpa
Let's eat, Grandpa
Grammar can save a life. 
The one that ****s me badly is "you should of....."
No, it is "should have". When shortened it is "should've" which does sound like "should of" but it isn't written like that. It is "should've"
To hear very intelligent people say "should of" or even worse write "should of" is a bit annoying.
Many teachers don't get it.
Don't get me started on Americans.......
Select to expand quotemclovin said..
To and too
There, their and they're.
Makes anyones argument useless if they've used the wrong word. So many people just don't know the differences.
You missed an apostrophe their.
'nother' is not a ****ing word! i hate hearing 'it's a whole nother....'
and 'wellness' ****s me, too. it's wellbeing.
How about "whether the wether can withstand the weather"
bit obscure I know, maybe I should just say wanker
Select to expand quoterune said..
your and you're
me and mine... Gramma, died in 2000.
(English and German)
Select to expand quoterune said..
How about "whether the wether can withstand the weather"
bit obscure I know, maybe I should just say wanker
I thought wethers and wankers came from different planets.
Who can resist a grammar-nazi thread? Here's a couple that sh** me, more to do with meaning than grammar.
"Fulsome" means insincere, not "full"; "enormity" is not just something large, but means an outage, like genocide. I here ?? politicians and news/sports announcers getting these too ??wrong all the time ??.
One One was a racehorse.
Two Two was one too,
One One won one race.
Two Two won one too.
Select to expand quoterobbo1111 said..
I bought a new sail then brought it to the beach
Then stepped through it.
Should of is an interesting one Mark.
Should have, or should've, whilst correct grammar is utterly meaningless.
Should implies that it ought to be done in the future. Have implies the past. So telling someone that they ought to do something in the future in the past is, well, meaningless.
Thats why young children, when berated with this logic, look at you as though you're gormless.
And the erosion of language is deliberate according to many:
www.goodreads.com/book/show/225849.The_Deliberate_Dumbing_Down_of_America
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..musorianin said..
outage
And I proof red that so carefully
Select to expand quoterune said..
How about "whether the wether can withstand the weather"
bit obscure I know, maybe I should just say wanker
My recent favourite, 'a shipping ship shipping ship shipping shipping ships'
I always thought dept was a contraction of department but now it seems it is something the liberals have got us into.
Select to expand quotejapie said.. And the erosion of language is deliberate according to many: ttps://www.goodreads.com/book/show/225849.The_Deliberate_Dumbing_Down_of_America
would one ever need to deliberately dumb down America?
Upcoming - not a word. It is forthcoming.
TripleJ - every fkn thing was "dropped" not released.
I understand the reference but it gets really annoying to hear "dropped" every 2mins like they are trying so hard to sound cool.
Select to expand quoteDunkO said..robbo1111 said..
I bought a new sail then brought it to the beach
Then stepped through it.
No that was the old sail
"Stationary" as I once saw in a shop directing me to the stationery isle.
I have some trouble with " to". Or is that "too"?
