This is Emblematic of Contemporary Writing/Speech

One of the problems I see and hear in the speech and writing of contemporary native (ab)users of English is a baffling lack of an ability to grasp simple tenses. Example: Writing about an event in the past of a character,

“If he knew, he probably would think twice.”


No, “If he had known, he probably would have thought twice.”

OK, even that construction is a wee tad stupid as a statement, but at least it would have properly reflected the circumstances the writer attempted to convey. (Better: “In hindsight. . . ” but the writer’s vocabulary didn’t seem to stretch that far, if other text is any indication.)

12 Replies to “This is Emblematic of Contemporary Writing/Speech”

  1. Um, since the ability and capability, understanding of ‘University’ English now seems to be a requisite to become an Australian citizen … am guesing that us dingbats born hear, have parrents born hear, will be deported …. AHA … Amurrica, land of the free … Coca cola, Big Mac, Big Trumps (5 card Stud?).
    Even Mexicalis can read the Constitution????

  2. And if anyone uses the the word “gotten” (which seems to have originated in UmurriKa – and infested the rest of the worlds media)
    on anything that i read will strongly suggest that there are alternatives. “become” is one.
    i.e. ‘i have become angry”.

    1. Oh, I definitely understand that you and English grammar are not acquaintances, Davo. I got that a long time ago. It’s all right, po’ thing. I know literacy in general is a struggle for you, so I understand.

  3. Politically? One of the tings that fascintes me about your current president is that he seems to fail to understand that American ‘democracy’ (as is Australian) a mere, what 300 years old?

    Iran (Persia) was the cradle of ‘civilisation’ (long story).

    1. And one thing your illiterate perspective still fails to grasp, Davo, it that “America” (The USA) is not designed to be a democracy.

      But then one cannot expect historical literacy from you, can one?

      1. OK. Think on this re ‘democracy’. 100% percent of the Australian population is required to VOTE, and 95% of them do.

        As distinct from the American version where ‘disadvantaged’ voters can be ‘put in prison’, bullied and discouraged from voting.

        Your ‘Electoral College’ system is flawed.
        52% of a 60% ‘turnup’ at the ballot box IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE of the MAJORITY … que. 40% of your population did not vote.

        1. *yawn* Your stupid comments about democracy are just that, Davo: stupid, uninformed, a result of hiostorical illiteracy: take your pick (I’m sure you will select “All of the above,” given your track record to date).

          If you can find one among your acquaintances, you might consider having a literate person with the patience of Job explain to you a few of the differences between a democracy and a republic (in its many varied forms). Of course, you probably ought to specify that they use small words and speak very slowly.

  4. … and if we choose to quibble – especially about the Cambridge comma …
    If ‘ means that there is, or are, ‘letters missing’ ..
    i.e. ’tis has the letter missing – it is – and a road – i.e King’s Road has a letter, or more than one letter missing – i.e. The King, his Road.

    What happens when we have a name “Queen’s Road”??
    Should that then be “Queen’r” Road??? The Queen, Her Road.
    Or simply name it Queens Road.

    And yes, laddie – become annoyed when a shopkeeper advertises tomato’s. Or potato’s. A potatos what? A potatoes skin? A potatoes annoyance?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *