Spelling and the internet

The BBC reports that Great Britain’s online economy is harmed by bad spelling:

An online entrepreneur says that poor spelling is costing the UK millions of pounds in lost revenue for internet businesses.

Charles Duncombe says an analysis of website figures shows a single spelling mistake can cut online sales in half.

Mr Duncombe says when recruiting staff he has been “shocked at the poor quality of written English”.

He says the big problem for online firms isn’t technology but finding staff who can spell.

The concerns were echoed by the CBI whose head of education and skills warned that too many employers were having to invest in remedial literacy lessons for their staff.

Mr Duncombe, who runs travel, mobile phones and clothing websites, says that poor spelling is a serious problem for the online economy.

Charles Duncombe says poor spelling is costing the economy millions

“Often these cutting-edge companies depend upon old-fashioned skills,” says Mr Duncombe.

And he says that the struggle to recruit enough staff who can spell means that this sector of the economy is not as efficient as it might be.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics published last month showed internet sales in the UK running at £527m per week.

“I know that industry bemoaning the education system is nothing new but it is becoming more and more of a problem with more companies going online.

“This is because when you sell or communicate on the internet 99% of the time it is done by the written word.”

Mr Duncombe says that it is possible to identify the specific impact of a spelling mistake on sales.

He says he measured the revenue per visitor to the tightsplease.co.uk website and found that the revenue was twice as high after an error was corrected.

“If you project this across the whole of internet retail then millions of pounds worth of business is probably being lost each week due to simple spelling mistakes,” says Mr Duncombe, director of the Just Say Please group.

Spelling is important to the credibility of a website, he says. When there are underlying concerns about fraud and safety, then getting the basics right is essential.

via BBC News – Spelling mistakes ‘cost millions’ in lost online sales.

This reminds us that information technology still communicates most of that information by language and therefore the classic skills of writing and reading well are still necessary.

Are there other cues that make you not trust an internet site?

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • http://acroamaticus.blogspot.com Pr Mark Henderson

    I regularly read a monthly American hobby magazine that consistently has spelling mistakes and poor grammar. Call me a pedant, but I actually look forward to correcting their English. In a strange way it’s endeared the magazine to me. I’ve even considered writing to them and offering my services as a proof reader. I could use the extra income!

    Btw, our news ‘down under’ this week has made much of the new US education curriculum phasing out handwriting. The consensus here seems to be that we should not follow this trend. I agree, but then I’m very much an analogue person in a digital world.

  • http://acroamaticus.blogspot.com Pr Mark Henderson

    I regularly read a monthly American hobby magazine that consistently has spelling mistakes and poor grammar. Call me a pedant, but I actually look forward to correcting their English. In a strange way it’s endeared the magazine to me. I’ve even considered writing to them and offering my services as a proof reader. I could use the extra income!

    Btw, our news ‘down under’ this week has made much of the new US education curriculum phasing out handwriting. The consensus here seems to be that we should not follow this trend. I agree, but then I’m very much an analogue person in a digital world.

  • SKPeterson

    I have noticed this increasingly in print, as well. While it is odd to find a typo in a book, I find all sorts of poor grammar, syntax and word choice in print newspapers on a daily basis. I’ve noticed the WSJ is particularly bad in many instances, as well as the Washington Post. The local paper? Replete. I wonder if this is Spell Checker backlash – it so often tries to correct words that are already correct, that people turn it off and the typos, misspellings and poor word choices sail right through. Editing appears to be reduced now to “Did you use Spell Check?” “Yeah, yeah.” “Okay, let it print. We can bury the retractions and clarifications on pg. 5.” Or, maybe there aren’t enough people left who actually know how to construct a sentence, convey meaning with words and shape a paragraph that care.

  • SKPeterson

    I have noticed this increasingly in print, as well. While it is odd to find a typo in a book, I find all sorts of poor grammar, syntax and word choice in print newspapers on a daily basis. I’ve noticed the WSJ is particularly bad in many instances, as well as the Washington Post. The local paper? Replete. I wonder if this is Spell Checker backlash – it so often tries to correct words that are already correct, that people turn it off and the typos, misspellings and poor word choices sail right through. Editing appears to be reduced now to “Did you use Spell Check?” “Yeah, yeah.” “Okay, let it print. We can bury the retractions and clarifications on pg. 5.” Or, maybe there aren’t enough people left who actually know how to construct a sentence, convey meaning with words and shape a paragraph that care.

  • Dennis Peskey

    SKPeterson (#2) “poor grammar, syntax and word choice”
    IMHO – LOL (i.e. KISS)
    Pax,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    SKPeterson (#2) “poor grammar, syntax and word choice”
    IMHO – LOL (i.e. KISS)
    Pax,
    Dennis

  • Michael Z.

    cues not to trust a site?

    Pop-ups
    Poorly formatted web-site (this can vary from colors and boxes, to bad html)
    It isn’t amazon.com and it is asking for a CC not PayPal. :-P

  • Michael Z.

    cues not to trust a site?

    Pop-ups
    Poorly formatted web-site (this can vary from colors and boxes, to bad html)
    It isn’t amazon.com and it is asking for a CC not PayPal. :-P

  • WebMonk

    I think the main source in the story is feeding some poor conclusions to the author – I highly doubt that spelling mistakes cost the industry money, at least not on the scale he is suggesting. Rather it is far more likely that the spelling and grammar mistakes shift where people buy their products away from sites with poor spelling toward sites with better spelling.

    Just a nit-pick.

  • WebMonk

    I think the main source in the story is feeding some poor conclusions to the author – I highly doubt that spelling mistakes cost the industry money, at least not on the scale he is suggesting. Rather it is far more likely that the spelling and grammar mistakes shift where people buy their products away from sites with poor spelling toward sites with better spelling.

    Just a nit-pick.

  • Anonymous

    Could anyone direct me to a book/website that explains in detail what good English grammar is? Also, what is syntax? I have never encountered such a word in any English class. I had grammar classes up until the eighth grade, but in high school the English classes were mostly literature and public speaking, writing was secondary. I took and failed a class on writing simply because I didn’t really know how to brainstorm for a topic, and College Prep English was not what it was supposed to be (i.e. preparing a student for college English).

  • Anonymous

    Could anyone direct me to a book/website that explains in detail what good English grammar is? Also, what is syntax? I have never encountered such a word in any English class. I had grammar classes up until the eighth grade, but in high school the English classes were mostly literature and public speaking, writing was secondary. I took and failed a class on writing simply because I didn’t really know how to brainstorm for a topic, and College Prep English was not what it was supposed to be (i.e. preparing a student for college English).

  • Mockingbird

    “Could anyone direct me to a book/website that explains in detail what good English grammar is? Also, what is syntax? I have never encountered such a word in any English class.”

    There are grammar textbooks available; I took a great course on grammar in college. We used a test called “Advanced English Grammar”. I still reference it from time to time.

    But the real problem you point out is that schools are not teaching students to write. I know of too many schools that say “Yeah, we teach writing. We journal almost every day.” Then worse, they grade this by simply making sure there are words on the page. As Capote said, “That’s not writing, that’s typing.” Writing certainly is an art, but there is a skill behind it as well, and skills can be taught. Not every one of them will become Shakespeare or Austen, but they can to communicate effectively by putting words on a page.

  • Mockingbird

    “Could anyone direct me to a book/website that explains in detail what good English grammar is? Also, what is syntax? I have never encountered such a word in any English class.”

    There are grammar textbooks available; I took a great course on grammar in college. We used a test called “Advanced English Grammar”. I still reference it from time to time.

    But the real problem you point out is that schools are not teaching students to write. I know of too many schools that say “Yeah, we teach writing. We journal almost every day.” Then worse, they grade this by simply making sure there are words on the page. As Capote said, “That’s not writing, that’s typing.” Writing certainly is an art, but there is a skill behind it as well, and skills can be taught. Not every one of them will become Shakespeare or Austen, but they can to communicate effectively by putting words on a page.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I just want you all to know how hard I am struggling to not correct every last mistake in all these comments. Live by the Chicago Manual of Style, die by the Chicago Manual of Style. Well, that’s our in-house manual, at least. But then, I’m sure at least one of you is already disappointed that I split an infinitive earlier in this paragraph.

    I’d have to guess that credulity is at least as much of a problem as poor spelling and grammar. Like, I don’t know, taking the word of a man who just might have an interest in getting the name of his Web marketing group (and the Web sites they run) in a news article for wide distribution. After all, on their own site, the Just Say Please group mentions that:

    We prefer to give this money to you rather than big TV companies and adveristing [sic] agencies.

    Yes, that’s ironic, isn’t it? Let’s just revel in that for a bit. Anyhow, what’s most ridiculous about this man’s claim is this part:

    Mr Duncombe says that it is possible to identify the specific impact of a spelling mistake on sales. He says he measured the revenue per visitor to the tightsplease.co.uk website and found that the revenue was twice as high after an error was corrected.

    So, um, there’s this saying about correlation and causation. That’s a remarkably thin basis there for the claim, made earlier in the article, that “a single spelling mistake can cut online sales in half.”

    I mean, sure, spelling errors make your site (or book, or magazine, etc.) look unprofessional.

    But here’s the thing. Mr. Duncombe’s thesis requires us to believe that the general public is (1) incredibly bad at spelling and grammar, and yet (2) incredibly concerned about spelling and grammar. That is, he talks about “the struggle to recruit enough staff who can spell”, and yet apparently the Web-shopping population demands proper spelling, taking their business to sites with fewer errors. Am I to believe that it’s only grammatically pure old people shopping online these days? Couldn’t they get hired writing copy for Web sites?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I just want you all to know how hard I am struggling to not correct every last mistake in all these comments. Live by the Chicago Manual of Style, die by the Chicago Manual of Style. Well, that’s our in-house manual, at least. But then, I’m sure at least one of you is already disappointed that I split an infinitive earlier in this paragraph.

    I’d have to guess that credulity is at least as much of a problem as poor spelling and grammar. Like, I don’t know, taking the word of a man who just might have an interest in getting the name of his Web marketing group (and the Web sites they run) in a news article for wide distribution. After all, on their own site, the Just Say Please group mentions that:

    We prefer to give this money to you rather than big TV companies and adveristing [sic] agencies.

    Yes, that’s ironic, isn’t it? Let’s just revel in that for a bit. Anyhow, what’s most ridiculous about this man’s claim is this part:

    Mr Duncombe says that it is possible to identify the specific impact of a spelling mistake on sales. He says he measured the revenue per visitor to the tightsplease.co.uk website and found that the revenue was twice as high after an error was corrected.

    So, um, there’s this saying about correlation and causation. That’s a remarkably thin basis there for the claim, made earlier in the article, that “a single spelling mistake can cut online sales in half.”

    I mean, sure, spelling errors make your site (or book, or magazine, etc.) look unprofessional.

    But here’s the thing. Mr. Duncombe’s thesis requires us to believe that the general public is (1) incredibly bad at spelling and grammar, and yet (2) incredibly concerned about spelling and grammar. That is, he talks about “the struggle to recruit enough staff who can spell”, and yet apparently the Web-shopping population demands proper spelling, taking their business to sites with fewer errors. Am I to believe that it’s only grammatically pure old people shopping online these days? Couldn’t they get hired writing copy for Web sites?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    On a slightly different note, I’m sort of the office IT guy, and many of the problems I have to deal with involve malware infections — whether they have already taken place, or are simply attempting to lure the user into causing them. This malware almost always masquerades as an anti-virus program, in an attempt to scare the user into downloading it and using it. Which will, of course, only cause them to get an infection, not prevent one.

    Anyhow, it is remarkable to me how one of the most consistent signs that the messages popping up on a user’s screen are malicious is poor spelling. The people making these viruses just aren’t interested in proper English.

    So when your kid asks you why he needs to learn proper spelling, tell him it’s so he can more easily identify potential computer attacks.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    On a slightly different note, I’m sort of the office IT guy, and many of the problems I have to deal with involve malware infections — whether they have already taken place, or are simply attempting to lure the user into causing them. This malware almost always masquerades as an anti-virus program, in an attempt to scare the user into downloading it and using it. Which will, of course, only cause them to get an infection, not prevent one.

    Anyhow, it is remarkable to me how one of the most consistent signs that the messages popping up on a user’s screen are malicious is poor spelling. The people making these viruses just aren’t interested in proper English.

    So when your kid asks you why he needs to learn proper spelling, tell him it’s so he can more easily identify potential computer attacks.

  • SKPeterson

    I can confirm that what Todd refers to in #9 is provided as a key warning sign for internet phishing attacks in our organization’s cyber security training. I’d write some more, but I need to respond to this intriguing offer from Mrs. Mabel Kofomo in Benin.

  • SKPeterson

    I can confirm that what Todd refers to in #9 is provided as a key warning sign for internet phishing attacks in our organization’s cyber security training. I’d write some more, but I need to respond to this intriguing offer from Mrs. Mabel Kofomo in Benin.

  • helen

    This afternoon I am musing on the fact that “Mrs. Mabel Kofumo” (or her cousin) can sail through net security to my office inbox, while a supervisor had to warn us that a missive from Human Resources here on campus had landed in her junk mail, so we might check there, (as it actually was something we needed, even from HR). ;)

  • helen

    This afternoon I am musing on the fact that “Mrs. Mabel Kofumo” (or her cousin) can sail through net security to my office inbox, while a supervisor had to warn us that a missive from Human Resources here on campus had landed in her junk mail, so we might check there, (as it actually was something we needed, even from HR). ;)

  • Holly

    One of my favorite recent examples of irony was a Facebook petition about how we are “loosing” great teachers because of some reason or other. I sincerely hope that one of those great teachers was not in charge of teaching the petition writer how to spell. (Also, I really don’t get why the spelling of “losing” as “loosing” has become so pervasive on the web. I can understand mixing up “its/it’s” and “your/you’re” but this one I really don’t understand.)

  • Holly

    One of my favorite recent examples of irony was a Facebook petition about how we are “loosing” great teachers because of some reason or other. I sincerely hope that one of those great teachers was not in charge of teaching the petition writer how to spell. (Also, I really don’t get why the spelling of “losing” as “loosing” has become so pervasive on the web. I can understand mixing up “its/it’s” and “your/you’re” but this one I really don’t understand.)

  • Pete

    I try to avoid websites that feature creepy, winged serpents prominently on their home page.

  • Pete

    I try to avoid websites that feature creepy, winged serpents prominently on their home page.

  • Mockingbird

    @tODD – I appreciate your fortitude. I knew I’d make at least one before I posted. It was an unavoidable irony.

    On a related note, your post reminded me how a friend of mine once pointed out to a professor that he split an infinitive in a chapel homily. For the rest of the year, the same professor made a point of splitting an infinitive in every chapel homily he gave.

  • Mockingbird

    @tODD – I appreciate your fortitude. I knew I’d make at least one before I posted. It was an unavoidable irony.

    On a related note, your post reminded me how a friend of mine once pointed out to a professor that he split an infinitive in a chapel homily. For the rest of the year, the same professor made a point of splitting an infinitive in every chapel homily he gave.

  • MarkB

    To those of you who are not as well schooled in grammer:
    From the Grammar Girl website

    by Mignon Fogarty

    “You may have heard there’s a rule that you shouldn’t split infinitives, but I’m here to tell you it’s not a real rule, and the idea itself is based on a shaky foundation.

    What are Infinitives?

    To understand split infinitives, we first have to clearly define the word “infinitive.” Wikipedia defines “infinitive” as the unmarked form of a verb (1), but you really need examples to understand what that means. In English, there are two kinds of infinitives: bare infinitives and full infinitives. Bare infinitives are the kind of verbs you usually see in a dictionary, such as

    go
    sprinkle
    run
    split

    Full infinitives are made up of two words, usually putting the word “to” in front of the bare verb:

    to go
    to sprinkle
    to run
    to split

    What Is a Split Infinitive?

    The safest choice is to avoid splitting infinitives.

    A split infinitive puts an adverb between the two parts of the full infinitive. “To generously sprinkle” is a split infinitive because “generously” splits the word “to” from the word “sprinkle.”

    If you want to remember what a split infinitive is, just remember what might be the most famous example: Star Trek’s “to boldly go where no one has gone before.” “To boldly go” is a split infinitive. “Boldly” splits “to go.”

    The Latin Origin of the Split Infinitive Rule

    Many sources say the origin of the misguided rule against splitting infinitives in English comes from a devotion to Latin that was prominent in the late 1800s. The Victorian Era was a time of great language debate, with dueling dictionaries and people pontificating about language. The conventional wisdom is that people decided that because infinitives can’t be split in Latin, they shouldn’t be split in English (2).
    One of the earliest printed instances of the rule against splitting infinitives comes from an 1864 book called The Queen’s English by Henry Alford (3), and through the magic of Google Books, you can see the entry yourself. Alford was the Dean of Canterbury. He had given a series of lectures on language and compiled them into a casual book, which became quite popular.

    On split infinitives, Alford wrote, “A correspondent states as his own usage, and defends, the insertion of an adverb between the sign of the infinitive mood and the verb. He gives the instance ‘to scientifically illustrate.’ But surely this practice is entirely unknown to English speakers and writers. It seems to me that we ever regard the ‘to’ of the infinitive as inseparable from its verb. And when we have the choice between the two forms of expression ‘to scientifically illustrate’ and ‘to illustrate scientifically,’ there seems no good reason for flying in the face of common usage.”

    The Common Usage Argument Against Split Infinitives

    It may be that Alford was influenced by the unsplittable Latin infinitives, but in his book, he invokes common usage as his reason. It’s also odd that he says, “surely this practice is entirely unknown to English speakers and writers,” when he’s responding to a correspondent who describes doing it.

    If you tried invoking common usage today to argue with the people who think you shouldn’t split infinitives, you likely wouldn’t get very far. They’d probably say people also use the word “irregardless,” but that doesn’t make it right.

    Actually, other writers started arguing with Alford about his assertion pretty quickly, but for some reason his dictum caught on with teachers who started teaching it as a strict rule, and some continue to do so to this day, even though you won’t find a modern grammar book or style guide that says you should never split an infinitive.

    Should You Split Infinitives?

    What’s a modern working writer to do? If you split infinitives, you’ll likely get nasty mail from cranky people who believe it’s their job to enforce imaginary grammar rules; so it kind of depends on how much you hate getting that kind of mail.

    On the other hand, there’s also no reason to deliberately split infinitives when you know it’s going to upset people. The safer path is always to avoid splitting an infinitive. I would never split an infinitive in a pitch letter to an editor, for example, because there are certainly editors out there who believe the myth. If you want to get the assignment, don’t split infinitives. For the same reason, I’d never split an infinitive in a cover letter for a job.

    How to Avoid a Split Infinitive

    It usually easy to avoid splitting an infinitive. Instead of “to boldly go where no one has gone before,” the Star Trek writers could just have easily have written, “to go boldly where no one has gone before.”

    You do have to be careful though. Sometimes when you try to avoid splitting an infinitive you can change the meaning of a sentence. Consider this example:

    Steve decided to quickly remove Amy’s cats.

    The split infinitive is “to quickly remove,” but if you move the adverb “quickly” before the infinitive, you could imply that Steve made the decision quickly.

    Steve decided quickly to remove Amy’s cats.

    You could put the adverb at the end—Steve decided to remove Amy’s cats quickly—but that seems potentially ambiguous. You may want to rewrite the sentence without the split infinitive to make the same point:

    Steve decided to grab Amy’s cats and set them free before she got back from the corner market.

    That’s clear and doesn’t have a split infinitive, but it also isn’t necessary to rewrite the sentence unless it’s important that your writing be as safe as possible. The bottom line is that you can usually avoid splitting infinitives if you want to, but don’t let anyone tell you that it’s forbidden.”

  • MarkB

    To those of you who are not as well schooled in grammer:
    From the Grammar Girl website

    by Mignon Fogarty

    “You may have heard there’s a rule that you shouldn’t split infinitives, but I’m here to tell you it’s not a real rule, and the idea itself is based on a shaky foundation.

    What are Infinitives?

    To understand split infinitives, we first have to clearly define the word “infinitive.” Wikipedia defines “infinitive” as the unmarked form of a verb (1), but you really need examples to understand what that means. In English, there are two kinds of infinitives: bare infinitives and full infinitives. Bare infinitives are the kind of verbs you usually see in a dictionary, such as

    go
    sprinkle
    run
    split

    Full infinitives are made up of two words, usually putting the word “to” in front of the bare verb:

    to go
    to sprinkle
    to run
    to split

    What Is a Split Infinitive?

    The safest choice is to avoid splitting infinitives.

    A split infinitive puts an adverb between the two parts of the full infinitive. “To generously sprinkle” is a split infinitive because “generously” splits the word “to” from the word “sprinkle.”

    If you want to remember what a split infinitive is, just remember what might be the most famous example: Star Trek’s “to boldly go where no one has gone before.” “To boldly go” is a split infinitive. “Boldly” splits “to go.”

    The Latin Origin of the Split Infinitive Rule

    Many sources say the origin of the misguided rule against splitting infinitives in English comes from a devotion to Latin that was prominent in the late 1800s. The Victorian Era was a time of great language debate, with dueling dictionaries and people pontificating about language. The conventional wisdom is that people decided that because infinitives can’t be split in Latin, they shouldn’t be split in English (2).
    One of the earliest printed instances of the rule against splitting infinitives comes from an 1864 book called The Queen’s English by Henry Alford (3), and through the magic of Google Books, you can see the entry yourself. Alford was the Dean of Canterbury. He had given a series of lectures on language and compiled them into a casual book, which became quite popular.

    On split infinitives, Alford wrote, “A correspondent states as his own usage, and defends, the insertion of an adverb between the sign of the infinitive mood and the verb. He gives the instance ‘to scientifically illustrate.’ But surely this practice is entirely unknown to English speakers and writers. It seems to me that we ever regard the ‘to’ of the infinitive as inseparable from its verb. And when we have the choice between the two forms of expression ‘to scientifically illustrate’ and ‘to illustrate scientifically,’ there seems no good reason for flying in the face of common usage.”

    The Common Usage Argument Against Split Infinitives

    It may be that Alford was influenced by the unsplittable Latin infinitives, but in his book, he invokes common usage as his reason. It’s also odd that he says, “surely this practice is entirely unknown to English speakers and writers,” when he’s responding to a correspondent who describes doing it.

    If you tried invoking common usage today to argue with the people who think you shouldn’t split infinitives, you likely wouldn’t get very far. They’d probably say people also use the word “irregardless,” but that doesn’t make it right.

    Actually, other writers started arguing with Alford about his assertion pretty quickly, but for some reason his dictum caught on with teachers who started teaching it as a strict rule, and some continue to do so to this day, even though you won’t find a modern grammar book or style guide that says you should never split an infinitive.

    Should You Split Infinitives?

    What’s a modern working writer to do? If you split infinitives, you’ll likely get nasty mail from cranky people who believe it’s their job to enforce imaginary grammar rules; so it kind of depends on how much you hate getting that kind of mail.

    On the other hand, there’s also no reason to deliberately split infinitives when you know it’s going to upset people. The safer path is always to avoid splitting an infinitive. I would never split an infinitive in a pitch letter to an editor, for example, because there are certainly editors out there who believe the myth. If you want to get the assignment, don’t split infinitives. For the same reason, I’d never split an infinitive in a cover letter for a job.

    How to Avoid a Split Infinitive

    It usually easy to avoid splitting an infinitive. Instead of “to boldly go where no one has gone before,” the Star Trek writers could just have easily have written, “to go boldly where no one has gone before.”

    You do have to be careful though. Sometimes when you try to avoid splitting an infinitive you can change the meaning of a sentence. Consider this example:

    Steve decided to quickly remove Amy’s cats.

    The split infinitive is “to quickly remove,” but if you move the adverb “quickly” before the infinitive, you could imply that Steve made the decision quickly.

    Steve decided quickly to remove Amy’s cats.

    You could put the adverb at the end—Steve decided to remove Amy’s cats quickly—but that seems potentially ambiguous. You may want to rewrite the sentence without the split infinitive to make the same point:

    Steve decided to grab Amy’s cats and set them free before she got back from the corner market.

    That’s clear and doesn’t have a split infinitive, but it also isn’t necessary to rewrite the sentence unless it’s important that your writing be as safe as possible. The bottom line is that you can usually avoid splitting infinitives if you want to, but don’t let anyone tell you that it’s forbidden.”

  • MarkB

    I should have mentioned, I am one of those that are grammar challanged.

  • MarkB

    I should have mentioned, I am one of those that are grammar challanged.

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    The title of this post should have been, “Speling an teh intarwebs.”

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    The title of this post should have been, “Speling an teh intarwebs.”

  • helen

    Mark B.
    Thanks for the review and the “Grammar Girl” web site.
    I shall probably continue to split infinitives,
    but I may remember to occasionally correct myself . ;)

  • helen

    Mark B.
    Thanks for the review and the “Grammar Girl” web site.
    I shall probably continue to split infinitives,
    but I may remember to occasionally correct myself . ;)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Helen (@18), just for the record, there’s nothing wrong with split infinitives. Anybody who thinks they’re wrong doesn’t understand that English isn’t Latin. There are enough grammar mistakes being committed on the Internet without our having to worry about made-up ones.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Helen (@18), just for the record, there’s nothing wrong with split infinitives. Anybody who thinks they’re wrong doesn’t understand that English isn’t Latin. There are enough grammar mistakes being committed on the Internet without our having to worry about made-up ones.

  • Pingback: Spelling Lesson | YOU DECIDE

  • Pingback: Spelling Lesson | YOU DECIDE


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X