Given that some monks can be offended by poor spelling and grammar, I would like to suggest that a new group (maybe even a cabal) of Grammarians be added.
Given the differences between US English and the various forms of English used in the members and former members of the Commonwealth, there may be a need for grammarians of the US, Canadian, British, Australian, etc varieties. When Monks start posting in French, Spanish, Euskara, Urdu, or Farsi, appropriate experts may be added.
I should have put on my asbestos suit; I did not expect quite so much controversy over what I had intended as facetious. I do get mildly annoyed, but not offended by bad spelling and grammar. I get more annoyed (as does one of the respondents) by the use of spellings such as "ur" for "your" (and probably "you're").
emc
At that time [1909] the chief engineer was almost always the chief test pilot as well. That had the fortunate result of eliminating poor engineering early in aviation.
—Igor Sikorsky, reported in AOPA Pilot magazine February 2003.In reply to Grammarians: do we need a new group? by swampyankee
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |