Spelling mistakes

Eld

Mannimar said:

@Lianca depends on which dictionary you use

But British-style spellings (i.e. "ou" instead of "o" in this case) are standard in Achaea.

Delphinus

Achaean spelling: fervour

Sena

Achaean Spelling: Fervour

Edit: Ninja'd because I didn't notice the new page.

Alyssea

Principle - A fundamental law.

The U.S. Constitution is made up of many principles.

Principal - Most important (adj.)/someone in a leading position (noun).

The principal city in Colorado is Denver. 

The principal may suspend you if you break the rules.

College - The educational building most people go to after high school.

My friend could speak German fluently after one year of college.

Collage - An artistic creation of various materials glued on a surface.

The art teacher had her students make collages in class.

ETA: Oh, and I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. It is -ing spelled "grammar," not "grammer." Some certain people who edit their posts for "grammer" are just making themselves look like idiots.

Peak

Mannimar said:

UK Spelling: Fervour

US Spelling: Fervor

U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! 

Oceana

UK spelling: organisation
US spelling: organization

Turoi

so 'ou' is UK?

Always wondered about 'er' vs 're' like Centre, Theatre, etc.

Averi

Turoi said:

so 'ou' is UK?

Always wondered about 'er' vs 're' like Centre, Theatre, etc.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/british-and-american-spelling

Mannimar

@Turoi, you become decent at telling the difference after a bit of practice, but it's hell to write an English paper in a US college right after a RP session in Achaea. Even worse when you forget to change the spell-check dictionary.

On a related note: Taylor Mali - The the Impotence of Proofreading (The video is a bit vulgar)

Chryenth

Turoi said:

so 'ou' is UK?

I'm going to resist making an OU joke.

Peak

Turoi said:

Always wondered about 'er' vs 're' like Centre, Theatre, etc.

That's ertarded...

Cardan

Phaestus said:

Please stop saying 'would of.'

Phaestus saaaaaad.

I would of stopped by now but the twitching was funny.

Prythe

"A lot" is two words.

It is people _who_ never people _that_ as people are not things.

Carry on.

Eld

Prythe said:

"A lot" is two words.

You should read the thing I linked on page 1.

Apparently I missed a chunk of a page way back there. Forthose interested, things like "my curiosity was peaked" and "for all intensive purposes" are examples of what have come to be known as "eggcorns" (from the substitution of "egg corn" for "acorn"). There's a whole database.

Jhaeli

Well, since I can't think of any specific spelling examples, here's Active vs. Passive sentences for would-be designers:

Active - the subject does something.
"A polished pommelstone of mountain granite completes the hilt."

Passive - something is done to the subject.
"The hilt is completed by a polished pommelstone of mountain granite."

Passive voice tends to weaken your writing, especially if you're working on a description of some kind. Always worth taking note of and re-writing your sentences to be active whenever possible!

Sena

Eld said:

Apparently I missed a chunk of a page way back there. Forthose interested, things like "my curiosity was peaked" and "for all intensive purposes" are examples of what have come to be known as "eggcorns" (from the substitution of "egg corn" for "acorn"). There's a whole database.

I just spent an hour reading through that. I've never encountered most of them (even the "nearly mainstream" ones), but there were a couple that I never suspected were wrong, and have never encountered the original.

Tahquil

Thlips ewe or'll tha phinger.

Luhar

When referring to an organisation's doctrine or tenets*, it's creed or credo, not creedo. Creedo is not a word.

*Tenets, not tennents or tenents or tenants. One Tenet, multiple tenets.

Rovelda

"People who" and "people that" are both correct.

Edit: In some types of sentences (when the relative clause goes between commas), only "who" is correct for people = "My boss, who is very nice, lives in Manchester."

(In defining clauses -which are of the type "people that/who")"We can use ‘who’, ‘which’ or ‘that’. We use ‘who’ for people and ‘which’ for things. We can use ‘that’ for people or things."

The people who / that live on the island are very friendly.

Explanation with many examples here:  http://www.perfect-english-grammar.com/relative-clauses.html

Alyssea

@Rovelda "People that" is technically correct, yes, but as this and Prythe say, it makes you think of people as less than human. Wouldn't you rather be referred to as a "who" than a "that"?

Rovelda

I am not a native speaker, Alyssea, so I have to believe what the American Heritage Dictionary says (read it on your page) and not what Mignon Fogarty says (the author of that page).

Mignon Fogarty says:

"...my American Heritage Dictionary says,

It is entirely acceptable to write either the man that wanted to talk to you, or the man who wanted to talk to you (3). [emphasis added]"

Of course, those of you who don't like "people that" have a right to stop using it, but I am sure we could find examples where you'd have it difficult, because we are generalizing too much here. I wish it was as simple as "people=who".

Jiraishin

I use both 'people who' and 'people that', depending on which sounds better in context. I figure there's a bit more leeway writing a character's speech patterns than there is writing an essay.

One thing that confused me for a long time was the use of 'was' versus 'were' in the context of such sentences as 'I wish I were/was Tenebrus Ninefingers' . I'm pretty sure that 'were' is always the correct usage when it's describing something in the present, but I see "was" used both in speech and in novels, so I slip into that sometimes.

Rovelda

Grammars say that both are correct, Jiraishin, being "I wish I were" more formal. It is subjunctive.

To be more formal, I shoud have said "I wish it were as simple as...", but it could sound very formal.

Prythe

Eld said:

Alyssea said:

A lot - you know what this means, but it is written "a lot," not "alot."

There are a lot of Americans that speak with horrible grammar.

http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

Ameicans *who* speak! But yes, there are, far too many.

Mannimar

Prythe said:

...people are not things.

Xenomorph says in Mhaldorian, "Well... about that."

Delphinus

Was/were is kind of a strange rule: http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/subjunctive-verbs-was-i-were.aspx

Rovelda

Mignon is very entertaining, but she is confused. We need to find a better page. I will try tomorrow.

Edit: The first half of this page is about was/were, and it has many normal good examples. I will still try to find a different type of explanation (not a forum, though these replies are good).

http://www.englishforums.com/English/IWasIWereHeWasVsHeWere/vkwzg/post.htm

Vayne

Oh oh, my last rave made me think of a good one!

It's "bear witness" not "bare witness."

"Bear witness" means to provide evidence on behalf of something.

"Bare witness" means that you saw something while in the nude.

Eld

Vayne said:

"Bare witness" means that you saw something while in the nude.

And "bear bare bear witness" means providing evidence of unclothed ursids?

Oceana

Vayne said:

Oh oh, my last rave made me think of a good one!

It's "bear witness" not "bare witness."

"Bear witness" means to provide evidence on behalf of something.

"Bare witness" means that you saw something while in the nude.

There is a difference between a bear-hug and a bare-hug.