You guys are forgetting about the AOL slogan that caused a generation to mangle the language.

I cringe ever time I hear “you’ve got…” in a conversation. It’s the adaptation into casual language that makes people sound ignorant.

Funnest: this is just a joke to sound cute.

Let the language evolve! The mutant words with beneficial traits will live, the weak will die.

I thought the following article / podcast on this subject was interesting. http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/is-funnest-a-word.aspx

@29 Dave:

The Chinese do complain about the Japanese atrocities committed during their occupation of China.
And, they complain loudly and frequently.
It is the “western” press that ignores the issue.

it’s simply a matter of prescriptive grammarians vs. descriptive grammarians. according to the former, the conventions of language are rules that can be either followed or broken. descriptive grammarians, on the other hand, examine the conventions of a language and say, “this is how people use the language, therefore, it is the language.” there’s no “right” or “wrong.” languages are constantly evolving and self-correcting, so if i use “ain’t,” it’s not the end of the world. i promise.

…the slogan says to “think different”. Perhaps it’s referring to English as well.

How do you guys feel about Walt Whitman? Do you have to be a dead homosexual before your allowed to ignore all the rules of grammar?

While Grammar police skills may be a precondition in some spheres, I continually remind myself that I went to school to understand and grasp complex, abstract ideas in the area of computing. One may refer to these exercises as “Thought Synthesis”.

It’s possible that one could infer an English major would remain interested in linguistic discourse analysis for hours, yet interest in a typical “thought experiment” (Also referred to as Gedankenexperiment) may be closer to nil.

From an economic perspective, an organization that adheres to linguistic discourse analysis as a cornerstone eventually may succumb to a condition of “Grasping at Straws” where Grammar Police Skills may become an irritant to others, and prevent innovation to occur.

Yet, things get tricky when adding in a psychological side of the coin. Understanding that a said “Grammar Police” person may feel somewhat inadequate due to their inability of being able to partake in said “Thought Synthesis” exercises, and therefore wants to contribute value in a way which they know: this usually is in the form of applying skillfully woven grammar. Goals should not to enable it to become an HR issue of it as that makes it difficult for all.

So while based with theories of possible inadequacy, or inability to participate, the best reaction to exhibit to a person exhibiting “Grammar Police” behaviors, is avoid what could become an emotional conflict and apply this incredibly effective literary device:

“Oops! Your Right! Thanks!”

I am amazed by the way people are treating this topic… what in God’s name does it have to do with politics (or even England)?? I am very patriotic and I support Obama happily, but I make a living by correcting people’s writing. It doesn’t make me conservative anglophile!

(For the record, whoever said that the US kicked England’s ass in two wars is sadly misinformed. I’m guessing that the second war you’re referring to is the War of 1812, during which the Brits burned the Capitol. If there was a different one, I’d be glad to learn about it.)

For the actual discussion about lingustics, as a Grammar Nazi myself, I’d like to point out that A) written and spoken language are NOT the same, and B) even the rules for “correct” language are always changing. ALL languages are constantly evolving, hence the many, many editions of dictionaries and style manuals. These “rulebooks” NEED frequent updates to reflect how the language changes; it’s the language that determines the rules, not vice versa.

Written language misses the context and expression that adds meaning to spoken word – hence the need for rules to help consolidate meaning. Putting a comma in the wrong place (or omitting it) can entirely reverse the meaning of a written sentence. It’s much less common for people to be confused if you pause at the wrong place while speaking. Hence, something that’s grammatically incorrect – “Got Milk?”, “Think Different,” or “Where you at?” – is perfectly comprehensible SPOKEN English, and it attracts attention because it’s breaking rules of WRITTEN english. “Think Different” is a long shot from Walt Whitman, but a new way of saying something is well rewarded if you’ve got the right audience. If everyone accepts “funnest” as a normal word, then there would be no reason for Macintosh to use it.

Certain words and usage attain connotation. People tend to gravitate toward the way a language is spoken by the more elite economic or social classes or groups that are seen as authorities on a subject – for example, ever notice that the English language contains a lot of French words that refer to food? Also, cultural groups take on dialectic differences… think “y’all” or “ain’t.” Certainly these words are parts of our language, i.e., everyone understands what they mean, and eventually words like this show up in dictionaries as colloquialisms or jargon. What’s more, they may become accepted dialectic differences – just like our American versions of the British words “colour,” “flavour,” or “aluminium.” (AluminIum came first; it’s sloppy Americans who started calling it “aluminum.” The “wrong” way won out, and today most people never think about it!)

The factors for language change are many, and often arbitrary. Rules simply help us agree on ways to avoid miscommunication and keep from sounding like an idiot who didn’t pay attention in school. But keep in mind that Grammar Nazis disagree with each other, too… almost as often as they disagree with Apple!