By Unteachable - 8/2/2017 06:00 - United States
Today, as a high school English teacher, I had to read submissions for a writing contest. The entries were filled with words like "irregardless", "could of", "acrost", and "ain't". These papers were supposedly written by the best students in the school. FML
Add a comment
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
Create my account Sign in
Top comments
By  chrauch  |  2

"Ain't" is used since the 18th or 17th century. "Acrost" since the 18th century in various dialects. "Irregardless" is a hundred years old and part of the "American's don't speak the queen's English" nonsense, wich doesn't make it a correct usage, but it's not that bad. "Could of" (and iregardless and any kind of straight incorrect and stupid term, and wheadonspeak / buffyspeak) is acceptable in written speech or first person perspective as it's used by the character to show their personality, level of education etc. Also in satire. And people wonder why bookworm me hated lit teachers...

COMMENTS
Reply
  stormy0307  |  16

I had one that demanded you write (sic) behind every quote. You only use (sic) after a quote or word if they used improper grammar and it's letting the reader know that improper phrase is exactly what the person said.

Reply
  Cali  |  54

I had one who, during an exercise finding synonyms for "fancy", told me that "genteel" was incorrect and anti-semitic. Another one had never heard the phrase "brains over brawn". SMH.

By  Mightytall  |  35

Same everywhere ... proper spelling and grammar are a problem in just about any of the leading industrial nations.
We've all gotten fat and lazy and can't be bothered to check the kids homework (or don't have time due to multiple jobs).

And the approaches in some elementary schools, to write like you hear it, totally clash with what the kids are supposed to deliver later on in middle school and high school. (at least here in Germany)

By  chrauch  |  2

"Ain't" is used since the 18th or 17th century. "Acrost" since the 18th century in various dialects. "Irregardless" is a hundred years old and part of the "American's don't speak the queen's English" nonsense, wich doesn't make it a correct usage, but it's not that bad. "Could of" (and iregardless and any kind of straight incorrect and stupid term, and wheadonspeak / buffyspeak) is acceptable in written speech or first person perspective as it's used by the character to show their personality, level of education etc. Also in satire. And people wonder why bookworm me hated lit teachers...

By  Gromann  |  9

Of all the idiotic aspects of English - the fact that "ain't" is not considered a word yet selfie is is absurd. For some reason a language such as English as a living construct that adapts and conforms yet somehow this word that has been in common usage for the last 100+ years isn't "a word". My ass.