The Best (worst) Spelling and Grammar Errors Thread

[nevets88]

Not an error but an interesting observation:

[jamo]

5 minutes ago, nevets88 said:

Not an error but an interesting observation:

That's really interesting. Where's that from?

[nevets88]

1 hour ago, jamo said:

That's really interesting. Where's that from?

 

The tweet thread is pretty interesting too:

 

[JonMA1]

1 hour ago, nevets88 said:

Not an error but an interesting observation:

I must be a stupid old unfit white American good-for-nothing crazy bastard.

Now that I know the order of adjectives, I'm going to start correcting those maniac friends and relatives who send improper text and email messages. They'll thank me for it.

[nevets88]

Lol

[Missouri Swede]

7 hours ago, nevets88 said:

Not an error but an interesting observation:

Except in English, we don't capitalize "Noun." I suspect a German was behind this. 

[CarlSpackler]

[DaveP043]

43 minutes ago, CarlSpackler said:

tenet  - a principle or belief

tenant - one who occupies a rented property

From a recent thread 

[Missouri Swede]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

tenet  - a principle or belief

tenant - one who occupies a rented property

From a recent thread 

Tenet - former Director of Central Intelligence 

[Golfingdad]

1 hour ago, Missouri Swede said:

Tenet - former Director of Central Intelligence 

Also one of those things you sleep in when camping, right?

[nevets88]

1 hour ago, Missouri Swede said:

Tenet - former Director of Central Intelligence 

Tennant - Doctor Who

[Missouri Swede]

Wait a minute ... don't we want to prevent something from not working?
I've read this several times, trying to avoid preventing myself from not getting unconfused.  Or something.

[Golfingdad]

35 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

Wait a minute ... don't we want to prevent something from not working?
I've read this several times, trying to avoid preventing myself from not getting unconfused.  Or something.

LOL, I had to read it a bunch of times too.  Still not 100% but ... I think the confusion was brought in by their effort to minimize the severity of the "issue."  They could have just said "an issue that could prevent headphone audio controls from working," but I assume that they wanted to stress that the issue is minor and they're not always not working, only temporarily.   Funny thing is once they added to the "temporarily" they could have dumped the "not" - it means basically the same thing with or without the "not."

[DaveP043]

17 hours ago, Missouri Swede said:

Wait a minute ... don't we want to prevent something from not working?
I've read this several times, trying to avoid preventing myself from not getting unconfused.  Or something.

So the fix is going to make sure (stop the issue from preventing) that the audio controls temporarily not work?  To be honest, this reads like it was written by a number of different attorneys, each adding a word or two until the meaning was completely incomprehensible.

[iacas]

8 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

So the fix is going to make sure (stop the issue from preventing) that the audio controls temporarily not work?  To be honest, this reads like it was written by a number of different attorneys, each adding a word or two until the meaning was completely incomprehensible.

It was not written by attorneys.

It was written by a few people, and sometimes when you've written something a few times, or proofread it a few times, you read what you think it says instead of what it actually says.

Y'all know this can happen.

[boogielicious]

18 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

So the fix is going to make sure (stop the issue from preventing) that the audio controls temporarily not work?  To be honest, this reads like it was written by a number of different attorneys, each adding a word or two until the meaning was completely incomprehensible.

 

9 hours ago, iacas said:

It was not written by attorneys.

It was written by a few people, and sometimes when you've written something a few times, or proofread it a few times, you read what you think it says instead of what it actually says.

Y'all know this can happen.

My wife is an attorney. She had me read a page on a lease the other day so she could compare it to the original. OMG. I told her my high school English teachers would have given in an 'F' because it was a massive run on sentence.

[GolfLug]

Nothing extraordinary  but this sentence (in a ridiculously long paragraph filled with lawyer speak) in particular from a warranty agreement doc that I have to sign today between us and a customer (X'ed out the actual name) gave me a headache. Sure by the 3rd try you can figure it out but man, there's got to be an easier way to express the statement:

' If, and to the extent that, these Terms conflict with any terms affixed to any confirmation, purchase or procurement document issued by Buyer, these terms and conditions shall prevail irrespective of whether Buyer accepts these conditions by a written acknowledgement, by implication, or acceptance and payment of goods ordered hereunder. '

For eg., what is the purpose of the phrase 'and to the extent that,' after 'If', in the opening? I read the sentence by removing the phrase and the meaning intended does not change at all. At least in my simpler perspective it does not.

[DaveP043]

11 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

Nothing extraordinary  but this sentence (in a ridiculously long paragraph filled with lawyer speak) in particular from a warranty agreement doc that I have to sign today between us and a customer (X'ed out the actual name) gave me a headache. Sure by the 3rd try you can figure it out but man, there's got to be an easier way to express the statement:

' If, and to the extent that, these Terms conflict with any terms affixed to any confirmation, purchase or procurement document issued by Buyer, these terms and conditions shall prevail irrespective of whether Buyer accepts these conditions by a written acknowledgement, by implication, or acceptance and payment of goods ordered hereunder. '

 

If the attorney had written this in real understandable English, someone would have questioned whether he was worth the $400 or $500 or whatever hourly rate he was billing.  If they can't understand it, they figure he knows something that they don't.