5 ms·

I have this with spelling. Even a fractional glance at a poster/billboard/sign, without focusing my eyes on it, and certainly without reading a single word ...

I have this with spelling. Even a fractional glance at a poster/billboard/sign, without focusing my eyes on it, and certainly without reading a single word ... any misspelled word triggers a flag in my brain sort of "pinging" me with the precise location of the misspelled word.

Brananarchy 3y ago
The grocer's apostrophe (which I will argue should be called the grocers'(1) apostrophe, since there are many offending grocers) is the bane of my existence (1) My phone absolutely tried to correct that back to "grocer's"
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ttepasse 3y ago
  If you want to make your existence slightly more irritating: Learn German and move to Germany. There the possessive s ending is written without an apostrophe - but there is an equivalent which then falsely writes the possessive with an apostrophe - the so-called Deppenapostroph (idiot's apostrophe).
  - rob74 3y ago
    What annoys me most about German vs English is that German has lots of English loanwords ending in "y" (e.g. "Party"), but it's officially not allowed to use the plural form that would be correct in English, e.g. "Parties" - you have to write "Partys". As a bonus, you could try using "Party's", but that would be incorrect again...
- kqr 3y ago
  > which I will argue should be called I think you're missing the joke of the name!
  - Brananarchy 3y ago
    I don't think it's a joke. The possessive plural is a disaster in American English
    - Nevermark 3y ago
      Well, it is "a baker's dozen", right? Not "all the bakers' dozens". Since the phrase incorporates a reference to a single individual, as a representative concept for all bakers. So "the grocer's apostrophe" makes sense as a phrase referring to a typical individual grocer with a typical atypical apostrophe, standing in as a representative for all grocers and all their darned grocers' apostrophes.
- dmurray 3y ago
  Maybe it should be the grocer's' apostrophe, since there are many offending grocer's.
  - zilti 3y ago
    Aaaagh, make it stop!

Brananarchy 3y ago

The grocer's apostrophe (which I will argue should be called the grocers'(1) apostrophe, since there are many offending grocers) is the bane of my existence (1) My phone absolutely tried to correct that back to "grocer's"

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ttepasse 3y ago
If you want to make your existence slightly more irritating: Learn German and move to Germany. There the possessive s ending is written without an apostrophe - but there is an equivalent which then falsely writes the possessive with an apostrophe - the so-called Deppenapostroph (idiot's apostrophe).
- rob74 3y ago
  What annoys me most about German vs English is that German has lots of English loanwords ending in "y" (e.g. "Party"), but it's officially not allowed to use the plural form that would be correct in English, e.g. "Parties" - you have to write "Partys". As a bonus, you could try using "Party's", but that would be incorrect again...
kqr 3y ago
> which I will argue should be called I think you're missing the joke of the name!
- Brananarchy 3y ago
  I don't think it's a joke. The possessive plural is a disaster in American English
  - Nevermark 3y ago
    Well, it is "a baker's dozen", right? Not "all the bakers' dozens". Since the phrase incorporates a reference to a single individual, as a representative concept for all bakers. So "the grocer's apostrophe" makes sense as a phrase referring to a typical individual grocer with a typical atypical apostrophe, standing in as a representative for all grocers and all their darned grocers' apostrophes.
dmurray 3y ago
Maybe it should be the grocer's' apostrophe, since there are many offending grocer's.
- zilti 3y ago
  Aaaagh, make it stop!