Your Roundup I'm Listening, by Tom Garrett
Today's pet peeve number 2
Community comments
Note: Payson Roundup doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy.
Post a comment (Requires free registration)
Posting comments requires a free account and verification.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
20 February 2009 at 8:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Tom's thread was getting to long.
Today's word is THRASH.
Page 8A tonight's paper. Right hand side.
Barrier keeps mud slide off Hwy. 87
By Alexis Bechman
If you've driven south on Highway 87 after the recent thrash of rainstorms, you may have noticed mud accumulating at the site of the March landslide and wondered if another landslide took place.
Alexis, don't take this personal, I am a warped person. Everyone that reads the blog knows this.
Shovelhead, I went to Webster and Google.
21 February 2009 at 6:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
SantaBerry (Bernice Winandy) says…
Maybe the reporter speaks with a lisp. :-) However, “rash” is the word she wanted. Since thrash is a word the mistake would not be caught by the automatic spell check. Automatic spell check has gotten me in trouble on more than one occasion! My ol' Merriam-Webster has (3) a large number of instances in a short period. So she meant a number of storms in rapid succession.
This blog is like going back to school. Check the dictionary, check the encyclopedia, check Google. Well, at least our minds are getting “tuned” up.
21 February 2009 at 8:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Bernice,
I thought maybe rash was the word that was meant but you never can tell.
If you make your living writing, you shouldn't need spell check.
Do you realize we have a whole generation of people that can't tie thier shoes, Velcro.
Can't tell time with a clock that has 12 numbers and hands on it. Only three numbers that light up.
Can't do arithmetic. Calculators.
Can't spell, use a machine that spell checks for them.
What happens if you try to type in the name of the cactus we have here in Ariz. Cholla, Ocotillo, or Saguaro? Will your spell check light up?
21 February 2009 at 10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Shovelhead (Mike McLaughlin) says…
Give them a break!
You made part of your living building trailers and didn't know you it was possiblle to illuminate the license plate with the taillight!
21 February 2009 at 11:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Shovelhead,
You and I aren't not going to have this conversation again. Got that?
21 February 2009 at 11:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Shovelhead (Mike McLaughlin) says…
You know I'm right!
21 February 2009 at 11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
SantaBerry (Bernice Winandy) says…
Pat, you are right. We have become, or becoming so very use to mechanical things doing the work for us. I always remember once when dealing with a young check out person. The problem was how to figure 20% off of $1.50. I told her 30 cents. She said how did you do that so fast. I said multiply by 2 and move the decimal. She was dumbfounded.
Too much dependence on calculators!
Don't you illuminate the license plate with a license plate light? :-)
21 February 2009 at 12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Shovelhead (Mike McLaughlin) says…
Not always!
Dual purpose comes into play! :)
21 February 2009 at 2:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Bernice,
Cashiers can't make change if the register doesn't tell them, and sometimes they can't do it then.
Depends on where the license plate bracket or holder is located and that is the end of the subject for me.
Shovehead is being a S.H. today. (:
21 February 2009 at 3:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Shovelhead (Mike McLaughlin) says…
you're grouping all cashiers again Pat. Some can make change without a calculator and some can illuminate a license plate without a separate light!
21 February 2009 at 3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
SantaBerry (Bernice Winandy) says…
:-) Cashiers can illuminate a license plate without a light???? What a talent. Wish they could also make proper change.:-)
21 February 2009 at 8:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Shovelhead (Mike McLaughlin) says…
Nice try, no cookie!
You missed the operative word in my post Bernice. That word being “separate”.
“…some can illuminate a license plate without a separate light!”
Back to the dictionary for you young lady! :)
22 February 2009 at 7:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
SantaBerry (Bernice Winandy) says…
Oops, we are really not communicating. In your entry “some” refers back to 'cashiers.” Therefore, the impression is that you are saying that “Cashiers illuminate a license plate with a separate light.” I would prefer that cashiers give proper change, and give up on illuminating license plates. :-) :-)
ahhhhhhhhhhhhh, the wonders of the English language
22 February 2009 at 8:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Shovelhead (Mike McLaughlin) says…
So would Pat! :)
22 February 2009 at 10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Bernice,
Sometimes it is impossible to communicate with Shovelhead.
He has an evil streak. (:
22 February 2009 at 11:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tom_Garrett (Tom Garrett) says…
I love it!!
We are actually having a discussion about the language, and about writing. Do you have any idea how unlikely that is? It;s a lot more unlikely than having a checkout woman make correct change.
Keep it up!
” He has an evil streak.”
Close, Pat, but not quite right. He has a mischevious streak. So do you. And when you two get together and cross swords I just sit back and grin. And I suspect that other people do too.
Keep it up.
By the way, want to hear one of my pet peeves about myself? I use the word “that” too often. I have to go back and edit it out. It's a useful little devil, but it can cripple an otherwise good sentence.
Take the sentence, “And I suspect that other people do too.”
Is that “that” needed? Well, no. The sentence flies without it. “I suspect other people do too.”
Should it be there? Sometimes, yes. Sometimes no.
22 February 2009 at 12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Tom,
This is the third time I have typed this and it disappears. Maybe my computer is trying to tell me something. Here goes again.
I don't care how people post as long as I don't have to stop and look up a word in the dictionary or Google.
It does bother me big time when it is an article in the newspaper I am reading and I have to stop and look up a word.
I went to school with Julia Randall as my 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade teacher and you better know the meaning of a word and how to spell it.
I would get so mad in school when I asked how to spell a word and the teachers would say look in the dictionary. If I don't know how to spell it how do I look it up?
I pick on you because you were a teacher and write for a newspaper. I think it is funny when your fingers are going faster than your brain. (:
22 February 2009 at 12:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Didn't get finished and hit the d– button.
Please do not critique my spelling and the rest of it. I usually know when I screw up but don't want to go back and fix it.
Most people understand what I am saying except Shovelhead.
When I use ain't it is to irritate people.
22 February 2009 at 4:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Shovelhead (Mike McLaughlin) says…
Ain't that the truth :)
23 February 2009 at 12:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tom_Garrett (Tom Garrett) says…
“Please do not critique my spelling and the rest of it.”
I don't critque anyone's spelling, Pat, or their English. Not my job. And too %$#@! elitist too!
What I find is that when someone has nothing else he can find wrong with what you're saying he'll pick on some typo, or start quoting from some book of quotations, or ask a lot of rhetorical questions he thinks you're fool enough to try to answer.
That kind of thing only goes to prove that you (not you, Pat, my theoretical “you”) are more interested in “winning” a discussion than in getting at the truth. In a discussion there are no winners and no losers, there are only people who state opinions, listen to opinions, and try to explain things to each other or supply information. If it happens that you change someone's mind, good. If it happens that someone changes your mind, also good.
The discussion is supposed to be something we enjoy. That's why we're here.
Aha!
See that!!!
I finally answered a very important question!!!
“Why are we here?” :-)
23 February 2009 at 1:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
patrandall (Pat Randall) says…
Tom,
Guess I will have to start all my posts with, “This is a joke folks.”
I seem to be getting in trouble with everyone. (:
I have never taken offense at anything you have said to me. May not agree, but not offended.
24 February 2009 at 11:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Tom_Garrett (Tom Garrett) says…
You're not in trouble with me. And although I don't always put a smiley face on the things I joke about, I am often talking with tongue in cheek.
Where else, come to think of it, would a tongue go? Tongue in eyeball?