Talk:Common English usage misconceptions/Archive 3: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:51, 22 July 2022

Latest revision as of 06:11, 11 December 2023

Line 200:

Many other misconceptions arise from over-application of advice that is beneficial in some cases but not all. For example, overuse of [[passive voice]] in writing can cause a passage to sound weak and, in some cases, less clear. But it does not follow, and is not true, that the passive voice is wrong or inferior in all cases.

== Perceived usage and grammar violations ==

You [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Common_English_usage_misconceptions&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=890579404&oldid=890241156 reverted] my edit and wrote that:<br>

> "Perceived usage" means "perceived violations of correct English grammar and '''usage'''"

Usage of what? Usage of "''perceived violations of correct English grammar''"? But let's get rid of that "usage", and replace "''Perceived usage''" by "''Perceived violations of correct English grammar''".

Now our statement means that visceral reactions are elicit by:<br>

*<s>perceived</s> violations of correct English grammar

and

*grammar violations {{red|(not perceived?)}}

The word "perceived" is redundant because anything that elicits someone's reaction is somehow perceived. Do you need any further explanations?

<br>[[User:Vikom|'''Vikom''']]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:Vikom|talk]]} 23:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

:"Perceived" is not redundant, because perceived violations are not always actual violations. I will edit accordingly. [[User:AlsoWukai|AlsoWukai]] ([[User talk:AlsoWukai|talk]]) 22:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

::This makes sense. Good catch :-) However, the new version:

::"''Perceived violations of correct English usage and grammar elicit visceral reactions in many people.''"

::suggests that '''actual''' violations do '''not''' elicit visceral reactions. Besides, "''correct English usage''" is a general term, that includes "correct grammar", which is redundant here.

::So, how about something like this:<br>

::"''Both actual and perceived violations of correct English usage elicit visceral reactions in many people.''"? [[User:Vikom|'''Vikom''']]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:Vikom|talk]]} 00:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

:::I agree that "and grammar" is redundant, but we don't need to add "actual", because perceived violations include actual ones, and this article is specifically about those that are perceived but not actual. So how about just "Perceived violations of correct English usage elicit visceral reactions in many people"? [[User:AlsoWukai|AlsoWukai]] ([[User talk:AlsoWukai|talk]]) 02:46, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

::::First of all, {{green|neither perceived violations include '''all''' actual ones}}, {{brown|nor actual violations include '''all''' perceived ones}}. I emphasized "''all''", although I didn't have to, because the default meaning of the word "include" is "[[Subset|include all]]". <br>

::::Violations can be:

::::*both perceived and actual

::::*perceived but not actual

::::*actual but not perceived

::::You wrote:

::::* ''perceived violations include actual ones'' {{red|(I disagree)}}

::::and then

::::* ''this article is specifically about those that are '''perceived but not actual'''.'' {{green|(I agree)}}

::::Of course, violations of correct English usage must be '''perceived by definition''' to elicit '''any''' reactions, no matter whether violations are actual or not. In my previous post I wrote that the word "perceived" "''suggests that actual violations do not elicit visceral reactions''". I was wrong. This word says '''nothing''' about actual violations, especially that language changes constantly, and what is correct today, may be incorrect tomorrow, and vice versa. So, your proposed sentence "''Perceived violations of correct English usage elicit visceral reactions in many people''" is absolutely true, especially that it emphasizes that many violations are perceived but not actual. Perfect :-) [[User:Vikom|'''Vikom''']]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:Vikom|talk]]} 23:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)