git ssb

title: "en-semantic" date: 2004-09-14 01:31 status: published description: > Writing English correctly is difficult. (By the way, for non-hacker types, the title implies that semantic English is a distinct dialect of English.)

tags: being right, English

links:

• url: http://www.designbyfire.com/000158.html
  title: "When I grow up, I want to be an interface designer (Design by Fire)" description: "The article that inspired this entry (note: quality of content is not determined by quality of English)" rel: related type: text/html

<p>
I don't like being wrong. I like it even less when everyone else is wrong and I can't (or shouldn't) tell them, for reasons of etiquette. I suppose I'm just finicky, which is why I spend quite a bit of time reviewing my own websites, <a href="/" title="Mooquackwhatnot">Here</a> and <a href="/thetwaddle" title="El Twad">There</a>, enjoying their majesty. Or something. </p>
<p>
It's OK when I don't know that a rule is being broken, or that something is just wrong. Unfortunately, I'm also just a little bit curious, so I eventually learn the rules, and then notice when things disobey them. </p>
<p>
...which brings me to the semantics of the English language. Read the following: </p>
<ul>
<li>
“Practise” is the verb; “practice” is the noun - think “advise/advice”.</li>
<li>A does not <em>comprise of</em> B and C; A <em>comprises</em> B and C.</li>
<li>
“There's” means “there is” and thus <em>cannot</em> refer to several items - it makes as much sense as “several items is...”; “there are” refers to several items (“several items are...”).</li>
<li>
“Theirs” means “the item that belongs to them”; “there's” means “there is”.</li>
<li>
“They is” and “their is” are wrong; “there is” is right.</li>
<li>
“Must of”, as in “It must of been cold.”, is wrong; “must have”, as in “It must have been cold.” is right.</li>
</ul>
<p>
And the classics: </p>
<ul>
<li>
“There” refers to a place; “their” means “belonging to them”; “they're” means “they are”.</li>
<li>
“Your” means “belonging to you”; “you're” means “you are”.</li>
<li>
“Its” is used like “his” and “hers”; “it's” means “it is” or “it has”.</li>
</ul>
<p>
While we're on the topic, some abbreviations: </p>
<ul>
<li>
“Etc.” is pronounced “et cetera”, not “ek cetera”, and is <em>not</em> spelt “ect.”.</li>
<li>
“1 gram” is abbreviated to “1 g”, <em>not</em> “1 gm”; “2 grams” is abbreviated to “2 g”, <em>not</em> “2 gms” - “s” is never added to <abbr title="Système Internationale d'Unités">SI</abbr> units' abbreviations when pluralising them.</li>
</ul>
<p>
(By the way, feel free to report any cock-ups in the above to <a href="/greg">me</a>.) </p>
<p>
What prompted all this? Well, it was <a href="http://www.designbyfire.com/000158.html" title="When I grow up, I want to be an interface designer (Design by Fire)">Andrei's use of <q>Practice, practice, practice</q> as a headline</a>. ...trouble is, it's actually valid to use nouns like that. But we all know he meant “Practise, practise, practise”, right? </p>
<p>
Remember that just because one can speak English effectively doesn't mean one can write English effectively. </p>