Thursday, June 22, 2006

Before Anyone Posts Another Comment Anywhere on the Internet, Please Read This

LOSE = to misplace, or the opposite of "win"

LOOSE = the opposite of "tight"

Thank you for your cooperation.

17 comments:

Ellen said...

THANK YOU!!

"Its" about time someone finally posted this.

If I had a dime for every time I said that....well, I'd have a lot of dimes.

"Your" the bomb!

gina said...

Well, someone should of told me than! ;-)

The Film Diva said...

Their has to be higher standards in are schools. :-)

Jon Sherman said...

Can we also alert people to the fact that "they're" is a contraction of "they are," while "their" is a possessive pronoun, and "there" is a location, exclamation, or statement of existence?

Michael Markowitz said...

I feel all your assorted pains. Let me add one more: It's a LAND line, not a LAN line.

And I used to complain about "you're" and "your"... until "ur" started to replace them both.

And I'm increasingly seeing the awful "interstead."

norm said...

Whatever...
I could care less.

Michael Markowitz said...

Grrrr! Thank you Norm!! That one KILLS me!!!

Mary Stella said...

Oh God, thank you! Loose instead of lose occurs more frequently than any other screwup in writing. I'm convinced.

Ellen said...

I can't tell you how many times I have been inconvienced by those misspellings.

Michael Markowitz said...

I worked in a writers room where there were two grammatical things that drove me berserk:

Some of the writers insisted on writing the phrase "a couple" without the "of"... as in "I gave him a couple pills" or "We went for a couple days." It was like working with Myron Cohen.

These same idiots insisted that, if today is Saturday (which it is) then "this Tuesday" and "next Tuesday" are the same day, because the "next Tuesday" we'll experience will be "this Tuesday"

As I said, they were idiots.

Michael Markowitz said...

On a related note, there was an article in Salon or Slate not too long ago that says that "literally" really does mean the opposite of what we all think it means... as in it means "as in literature" or "figuratively" (It just got flipped around over the years, just like "no love lost between them" did)

So if someone says, "I hit the roof... literally!" don't correct them! Turns out they're right!

Michael Markowitz said...

Gina, you hit my pet peeve: should of and could of!

Mary Stella said...

Not a grammar point, but someone please tell sports announcers that the tennis championship in England is Wimbledon and not Wimbleton. (Insufferable simpledons. *g*)

norm said...

literally really does mean figuratively!?
I don't know if I can go on living.
I finally managed to come to terms with Bonds and McGwire on steroids...and now you tell me this?
What's left to believe in?

Michael Markowitz said...

We shouldn't let any of this stuff effect us.

Sean Tisdall said...

I'm going too say this, irregardless of whose got a problem with this board we're discussing on. Their our free type's of peoples in the world: Those who have a basic grasp of the english language, and the President.

Speaking of which, mad props to you if you wrote that "Well we don't live in England, do we?" bit. Every once in a while it just pops up with no reminder beforehand.

Ellen said...

Speaking of should of and could of, did you see that new horrible commercial for Eastwood car insurance?

Three doofy guys are standing together. They take turns speaking saying, "Shoulda, Coulda, Eastwooda".

Good thing I wasn't drinking, because that "woulda" caused a major spit-take.