I saw something on the news the other day about the perception that current standards of written spelling and grammar are declining, particularly amongst the younger generation. The debate was around whether it actually matters or not, and of course the whole problem was blamed entirely on mobile phones and Facebook (not quite, but you get my drift..)

Without looking for official stats or evidence of any kind, my gut feeling is that standards probably are lower now than they were (say) 30 years ago, and I have a few ideas about why this could be (and weirdly neither mobile phones nor Facebook really figure too high up my list). Certainly the amount of times I see incorrect use of "your" and "you're", and spelling of the word "definitely" with an 'a' feels as though it's the norm rather than the exception, but that could just be that I have more access to (informally) written words than ever before, and therefore more opportunities to see such mistakes.

However, I'm stuck between camps when it comes to whether it's important or not, because I think it largely depends on the context. If you're completing a job application form then you're doing yourself absolutely no favours what-so-ever if you submit it littered with spelling and grammar mistakes, but posting on a forum (for example!).. hmmm, I'm not sure how much that truly matters, provided people can understand what you're trying to say.

What do you guys think?

I am by no means a professor in this subject and regularly makes mistakes with my grammar and spelling, but do I think it matters? Yes.

Where do you draw the line? Sure it is of little importance on a forum, but that attitude can quickly move into other areas and before you know it a CV with the word manor and not manner ( A late night mistake on my draft CV) becomes acceptable as it sounds correct.

It's true of other things in life. Doing 80mph is seen as acceptable, when does 40mph in a 30 mph become acceptable? (Slightly extreme example)

I used to get a bit peeved when people on this forum picked up on my mistakes, but now appreciate it.

I also think spell checks and predictive texting are an issue. The amount of times I have had to correct this post because of them.

People are taught properly at school, there is no excuse for bad grammar and spelling (save the odd medical condition).

On a forum you are judged by what is written and how it is written plus context is everything in getting across your point. Spelling badly on a computer / your phone with spell check available is crass (again I know dyslexia can cause allsorts of confusion). So bad spelling would make you appear intellectually inferior and poor grammar (I'm not talking perfect, just what's basically acceptable) can take things out of context or make things bloody hard to read.

Especially for those who MAY struggle in the first place due to things beyond their control.

In other words:

Da kids av no xquse, dey suld spel proper n use da rite words in da rite places, dey are taut dis in scool innit.

Long-term members will know I have a pathological interest in spelling and grammar, and have been researching spelling and optical character recognition for years.

The most recent research evidence I've seen suggests that kids' texting activities *do not* impact upon their more formal written work; it appears that they maintain two sets of spelling and grammar rules and can easily switch between them. (How this relates for predictive text from a smart-phone is not discussed - I suspect that most predictive text errors are from not checking and just accepting the phone's suggestion.)

I have argued in the past, and continue to do so, that English is a complex language capable of very fine distinctions of meaning, containing over half a million words in current usage. It is also a language conglomerated from three significantly different roots and containing a large number of (sometimes anglicised) loan words from other languages. This reduces the redundancy of the language - in effect, the amount by which you can get it wrong and still be accurately understood.

Given that when you write something it is often all that is visible of you, it seems to me that you should endeavour to make your point of view as clear as possible - and the clearest and most unambiguous way is often through good spelling, good grammar, and good structure. I try to do this irrespective of the medium; sometimes, I succeed.

I am also fairly old-school when it comes to spelling and grammar - I even use full punctuation in texts, which is probably a bit excessive

So - I find myself thinking that the effort expended on writing correctly should reflect the medium and the purpose. A text to Wifey saying I'll be late home (again) can be abbreviated, include text-speak and any number of grammar errors that would (rightly) be slated in a more formal document. However, using the same medium, a text to a potential future employer would be word-perfect

On internet forums, I would venture to say that its not important, but half-decent writing makes posts MUCH easier to read (and understand, if English doesn't happen to be your first language)

I can put up with spelling mistakes on the forum - it happens and we have to accept that not everyone is great at spelling.

I think there are two (inter-connected) issues:-

1) There appears to be a gradual decline in standards, over several decades - whether this is teaching standards or student standards is another, much wider debate. Either way, the end result is that people simply don't see the error

2) There is an over-reliance on spelling and grammar checkers and auto-correct algorithms and far less thought as to whether the work "looks right" - this might go some way to explain the proliferation of "defiantly" instead of "definitely"

And a possible third cause (maybe linked with 2) above:

3) There appears to be less and less emphasis on the written word - certainly having pride in a particularly well-structured sentence appears to be a thing of the past for the vast majority

And a possible fourth cause, (this is beginning to feel like a Python sketch...) maybe linked to 1) above

4) Some people can't even speak properly - what chance do they have of committing their thoughts to paper or keyboard? For a very brief period in the middle of 2014, I signed on for Jobseeker's allowance, simply to maintain my NI credits. This involved a weekly visit to the Job Centre. I waited in the (long) queue, listening to the conversations between the Neanderthals that had clearly been in the same weekly queue for many years and wondering how they would find work of even a menial nature if they couldn't string half a sentence together without expletives or grunting. I managed one week and signed off again.

So - in a very long winded reply - I agree with Lucifer - the necessity for good writing depends on the context

I'm not sure I agree with that.

Like Nigel, I am rather "old school" and indeed, I went to a rather old school with quaint old traditions like a school uniform featuring shorts and a cap, saturday morning school, and CCF. But even in my junior school and maybe even infants I remember (fondly!) handwriting classes (consisting of writing monster letters in the air) and endless spelling tests.

These days kids only seem to get weekly spelling tests at quite a young age at school and then nothing afterwards. In senior school the teachers seem to have given up on correcting spelling, and many cannot even spell themselves (frequently using "should/could/would of" instead of "should/could/would have"). And at work these days, one or two graduates have the most attrocious spelling but rely upon spell checkers, or rather more embarassingly, non-native english speaking clients to correct their spelling when in meetings.

But on the other hand, hasn't it been proven that it makes no difference to reading speed if words are mis-spelt, as long as the first letter is correct? To paraphrase Eric Morecambe (also old school ) you just need to have all the right letters, but not necessarily in the right order!

So jsut as a tset, I wlil wirte thsi setnenec wthi all teh ltertse jubmlde aourdn. See? It mkesa no dfifreence!

As soon as people start accepting bad spelling and grammar as 'the norm', that's when everything will get worse.

People can't be arsed as it is now, but if it's widely accepted as normal, it'll become worse.

I'm not the greatest at spelling, etc., but I made the effort to learn and know the differences between words such as they're, there and their, etc., and I expect others to do the same, unless they have a condition that prevents them from doing this.

If I don't know how to spell a word, I won't use spell check, I'll re write the sentence instead.

We seemed to have reached the era of 'anything goes', 'can't be arsed' and 'who cares'. This applies to spelling, writing, driving, work, etc., etc.

I'm from the "old school" (or is that just "old") and do not like seeing bad spelling and punctuation.

How many times does one see 's used for the plural of a word when we all know that this indicates possessive case.

What about the greengrocers who can't even spell the fruit and vegetables that they sell or the coffee shops that do not spell "cappuccino" correctly. Perhaps Signwriters should also learn to spell correctly or do they only reproduce what is given to them by their customers?

Several years ago, when I was still working as an Insurance Agent/Financial Planner, I was looking through Zurich's job descriptions in their quotation software and came across "Shopkeeper , Stationary - no deliveries". My reaction to Zurich was that if he/she was stationary then they would not be doing any deliveries. They couldn't see the funny side of that one!

Bought some stationery at a "cheap shop" last week, and the receipt showed "stationary". It is still out there.

Of course, "spell check" does not pick up everything when the incorrect word is used: e.g. accept/except.

Sadly, a bit of both

Here we go again!

I can't resist musing yet again on the irony of how grammar and spelling vigilantes seem to be vulnerable to the very mistakes they so hate. Not to worry.

As I spend a lot of my time marking essays from undergraduates, I've had plenty of opportunity to compile a list of the worst offences. Here are just a few, as they occur to me:

1. The comma-splice. This is what you do when you connect two completely discrete sentences with a comma, I really hate that.

2. The use of 'however'.

It looks like rain, however the forecast was for snow. Incorrect.
It looks like rain however the forecast was for snow. Incorrect.

Why not just use 'but', or 'although'?

It looks like rain. However, the forecast was for snow. Correct.

3. Loose instead of lose. Drives me up the wall!

I'm probably guilty of breaching number 2, a lot.

The over-use of "as" annoys me too, especially at the start of a sentence, where "since" would be preferred? Or even "because", but then we can't have that starting a sentence can we!

And there goes 1 too! Bong!!

Due to. Owing to.

Grrr

Nope! I'm defiantly not going to get worked up this time.

I think this qualifies as success!

That was deliberate.

I was hoping it was.

I just couldn't bare to sneak number 3 in.

Success at what, Brilly?

How do you pour guys sleep?

Like a log like.

What about "effect" and "affect"?

Another one that Spell Check will not correct.

That one came up in a conversation at work recently and although I'm clear on which is used it wasn't clear in my head enough to explain as to why. One is a verb and one is a noun.

People that start sentences with And

I was always taught it was wrong to start a sentence with an And or a But.
I don't know if it's wrong or right, but it always looks wrong to me.

It's not wrong, T, but it's one of those things which is considered wrong as a matter of style. It's usually used when you have a continuation of a previous subject, and the previous sentence is too long; or when you want to make a point:

"And another thing..."

..and on that bombshell...

I think a forum could well sit between two camps: a) the written word and b) the 'chat' place where a conversation is carried out via er, digital means rather than aural.

The latter is distinct from letter or c.v. writing for example where there is a fair amount of planning. Here the fun of spontaneity and quick-fire riposte is less formal.

Much as I'm in favour of trying to live up to what I suppose are self-imposed standards, if not those which have been rigorously applied to us in our dark school past, I find I don't mind the odd alternative spelling or grammatical experimentation on here as long as there is clarity in the message. However my £5 would be on a greater likelihood of misunderstanding if one or two words deviated from standard, i.e. as laid down in dictionaries as a snapshot of our language's status quo.

Having said that, language is not static, and like everything living thing adapts to its environment and will therefore be constantly teased at the edges.

Defiantly.

I think I agree with Simon. It seems inappropriate to insist on perfect spelling and grammar on a forum such is this, as long as people are seen to be making the effort to write intelligibly.

Having conceded that much, though, I still feel a twinge of annoyance every time certain mistakes appear:

Loose - Lose
Phenomena - Phenomenon (and vice versa, unbelievably!)
Criteria - Criterion
Definately/Defiantly - Definitely

and so on. I don't know exactly why they annoy me so much, but they do, and I note that I am in good company here.

They are actually both verbs and both nouns, dude.



Examples:

1. Dirks's syphilis severely affected his eyesight, Your Honour.

2. On medication, he exhibited reduced affect.

3. The effect on Dirk's eyesight was significant.

4. We want to effect a solution as soon as possible.