Learn Your Damn Homophones(learnyourdamnhomophones.com)
learnyourdamnhomophones.com
Learn Your Damn Homophones
http://learnyourdamnhomophones.com/
A friend and I put this site together out of our frustration. Mixing up homophones needs to end—now.
62 comments
English spelling and pronunciation is ridiculous. For instance I have never met anyone who can correctly read http://pauillac.inria.fr/~xleroy/stuff/english-pronunciation... aloud on the first, second, or even third try.
My favorite bit is in a long list of words, "Shoes, goes, does." Did you notice that the placement of the comma means that does there is the the plural of doe and not the third person conjugation of "to do"? Me neither until it was pointed out to me.
Of course we'll never fix it. See http://abusez.in/tag/konfusion and http://www.mantex.co.uk/samples/spell.htm for two examples of the mess that would result if we did.
My favorite bit is in a long list of words, "Shoes, goes, does." Did you notice that the placement of the comma means that does there is the the plural of doe and not the third person conjugation of "to do"? Me neither until it was pointed out to me.
Of course we'll never fix it. See http://abusez.in/tag/konfusion and http://www.mantex.co.uk/samples/spell.htm for two examples of the mess that would result if we did.
This is actually a surprisingly good way of getting the point across. If my teachers in school were able to describe it this way I probably would have grasped it even faster.
That being said, I don't think most grammar mistakes are made out of stupidity, rather carelessness. I've accidentally dropped a "they're" instead of a "their" knowing very well which one was correct, and when I go back to correct it, I often wonder how it even happened, or what I was thinking that allowed the wrong one to slip in.
... That's all I have to say, but I'd like to note that I don't think you're supposed to end a sentence with the preposition word "in" ...
That being said, I don't think most grammar mistakes are made out of stupidity, rather carelessness. I've accidentally dropped a "they're" instead of a "their" knowing very well which one was correct, and when I go back to correct it, I often wonder how it even happened, or what I was thinking that allowed the wrong one to slip in.
... That's all I have to say, but I'd like to note that I don't think you're supposed to end a sentence with the preposition word "in" ...
This page produced a negative affect for me when it said that "Effect is a noun; affect is a verb". IMO the author should effect the necessary changes to reflect this inaccuracy.
Lots of people have pointed this out. I was aware of this when I wrote it, however the entire point of the site is to stress basic grammar to the kind of people who would never use either in its alternative context. Most commonly (i.e., almost always) effect is a noun and affect is a verb. I'm certainly taking this under advisement, but I'll probably just add a clarification along the lines of "Effect is almost always a noun; affect is almost always a verb."
That's almost always true.
Except people who say 'effect the changes' instead of 'implement', Affect as a noun I can only think of as in affectation
Except people who say 'effect the changes' instead of 'implement', Affect as a noun I can only think of as in affectation
I think that this is mostly a non-issue for non-native speakers. (Which is a bit controversial.)
Or maybe it has to do with visual vs auditory learning?
It's hardly controversial for non-native speakers ;) I've always found this self-evident.
Auditory learning plays a much bigger role for native speakers, and you also need to consider the proportion of reading/writing vs speaking.
Auditory learning plays a much bigger role for native speakers, and you also need to consider the proportion of reading/writing vs speaking.
Fix the damn language. It's a serious bug in written English, which is basically a garbled bag of idiotic spellings that were much more flexible applied. Now that someone has marked time with a dictionary...we assume that spelling is never allowed to change again. txtrs say no.
It's simple you use 's in "it's" ="it is" to mark the missing 'i' and you use the 's in eg. "the writer's article" to mark a missing 'e' from "writeres" the original possessive which disappeared sometime in late Saxon (6th century)
Although "its" is also possessive you don't use an apostrophe because that would confuse its with "it's"
Then if the word ends in an s the rules are different unless it's a name, then the rules are different again, unless it's a biblical name then the rules are different to the last rule, except for Moses and Jesus which are exceptions to this. Then of course there are always a few special cases - St James' park (footbal ground) but St James's park (park)
Of course if the word originally comes from another language then you have to use the rules from the language instead, well sometimes, say for French but not German or Dutch, actually only sometimes for Dutch depending.
Although "its" is also possessive you don't use an apostrophe because that would confuse its with "it's"
Then if the word ends in an s the rules are different unless it's a name, then the rules are different again, unless it's a biblical name then the rules are different to the last rule, except for Moses and Jesus which are exceptions to this. Then of course there are always a few special cases - St James' park (footbal ground) but St James's park (park)
Of course if the word originally comes from another language then you have to use the rules from the language instead, well sometimes, say for French but not German or Dutch, actually only sometimes for Dutch depending.
People always want to write the third person possessive as "it's", presumably because they're thinking the "'s" is needed to indicate possession.
Why doesn't this mistake carry over to the gendered forms? That is, why don't people write "hi's" or "her's"?
Why doesn't this mistake carry over to the gendered forms? That is, why don't people write "hi's" or "her's"?
But you'll break backward compatibility. Also, there are too many different accents for any one-to-one mapping between spelling and pronunciation to work.
Not really. Did you ever read Shakespeare? Language and spelling are always changing. It works in many other languages as well, despite the existence of accents.
Did you ever read Shakespeare?
Couldn't make heads or tails of his writing. Maybe because it's shifted so much in the intervening centuries that it's only marginally comprehensible to someone who learned the modern tongue?
How has Gutenberg changed the rate of change in languages? Has greater availability of printed materials held things steady longer?
How is the Intertubes changing this? Has the ability to instantly view the work of people representing a zillion languages accelerated change?
Couldn't make heads or tails of his writing. Maybe because it's shifted so much in the intervening centuries that it's only marginally comprehensible to someone who learned the modern tongue?
How has Gutenberg changed the rate of change in languages? Has greater availability of printed materials held things steady longer?
How is the Intertubes changing this? Has the ability to instantly view the work of people representing a zillion languages accelerated change?
It's possible to build good communication on top of faulty protocols. Don't blame the language.
The value of the words in the dictionary stems from their widespread use. Intrinsically, they don't have any.
The value of the words in the dictionary stems from their widespread use. Intrinsically, they don't have any.
Downvoted for feckless prescriptivism. :-(
Well, I am actually in favor of the opposite of prescriptivism, when the current prescription causes so many problems.
English isn't broken. It simply comes with a built-in IQ test.
Repeated mistakes involving simple homophones are usually evidence that the author of the text has never been in the habit of reading for pleasure, and learned English mainly as a spoken language. If the offender is a native English speaker, you can be nearly certain that you are dealing with an intellectual lightweight.
I cannot pass this without pointing to the definitive reference on the subject: http://www.jerkcity.com/jerkcity381.html
Effect is a noun, affect is a verb? What rubbish is this?!
I'm okay with that, I just don't like the affect they effect.
Hint: Effect is a noun; affect is a verb.
Hint: 'E' stands for Effect and Entity (a noun). 'A' stands for Affect and Action (a verb).
Except sometimes we accept "effect" as a verb: http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/affect.html
Hint: 'E' stands for Effect and Entity (a noun). 'A' stands for Affect and Action (a verb).
Except sometimes we accept "effect" as a verb: http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/affect.html
And affect is also a noun (psychology term).
-r
-r
I'm trying to get the common case across. I understand both can be used as both a verb and a noun, but most commonly effect is a noun and affect is a verb. The people who will mess up basic homophones won't be writing anything that'll require the alternative forms.
Isn't it "damned homophones" and not "damn"?
Maybe we need a second page with curse terms. For example, it's "fucking" and not "fucken" or "fuckin"
Maybe we need a second page with curse terms. For example, it's "fucking" and not "fucken" or "fuckin"
fucken and fuckin are not always homophones. Often, the whole point of spelling them that way is to convey lazy or improper pronunciation.
The only example that I can think of here is "damn yankees", which suggests that "damn" is fine here instead of "damned".
My grampa always said he was 30 before he learned "damn yankee" was two words....
Hooray for the South?
Hooray for the South?
Damned is really only common in North America, so we used the more common damn.
We use both in North America. "damn" as a verb (curse, reject, denounce) and "damned" as an adjective (hated, revolting).
Right. I used both in the original copy. But elsewhere, damn is used as both.
How is 'loose'/'lose' not on there?
They're not homophones - lose is pronounced /lu:z/, and loose is pronounced /lu:s/.
agreed. by the same reasoning, affect and effect, compliment and complement also shouldn't be considered. It takes a well trained ear and a good tongue to get it right, but by my well trained ear and tongue they do not qualify.
True, affect is officially pronounced /ə'fɛkt/, versus /ɪˈfɛkt/ for effect.
Compliment and complement really are pronounced the same, though. Pronunciation is fairly discrete, either there's a noticable difference, or there's no difference at all.
Compliment and complement really are pronounced the same, though. Pronunciation is fairly discrete, either there's a noticable difference, or there's no difference at all.
Unfortunately for you, not only are people notoriously (in linguistically savvy circles) bad at properly making and recognizing all of the vowel distinctions, you're also just wrong- affect and effect share a valid schwa initial pronunciation, and compliment and complement share their pronunciation.
The phenomenon you have fallen prey to is hyperarticulation, also responsible for the 'off-ten' pronunciation of 'often'. (Compare to soften, for example.)
Pronunciation is a bad place on which to perch your well-trained pride.
The phenomenon you have fallen prey to is hyperarticulation, also responsible for the 'off-ten' pronunciation of 'often'. (Compare to soften, for example.)
Pronunciation is a bad place on which to perch your well-trained pride.
I think you misinterpreted my post. I have zero "pride" in place here. I was simply responding to the parent post that some of these may not be homophones (at least according to my definition).
For the record, the OP's strong reaction to people getting the words wrong is not something that bugs me. I commonly mistype words like weather/whether and there/their.
For the record, the OP's strong reaction to people getting the words wrong is not something that bugs me. I commonly mistype words like weather/whether and there/their.
True, but it is a very common mistakes. As is faze/phase, or moot/mute.
I don't think it's strictly a homophone because they are pronounced differently. As far as typo/grammar mistakes though, it's one of the most common.
We were mostly going for true homophones, but we're considering a lot for version 2.
Its the most wonderful grammar site their is too be seen online!
Sorry, but to my beer-addled brain (just went out with my kid for beers, so I'm probably talking like an idiot here) this page looked like: Fuck! (I'm profane) Dummy! (I'm smart) Look Here! (I'm angry), and Here's References! (I'm hooked in)
Too much of the internet is like this, unfortunately.
Correct, but not worthy.
Not upvoted.
Too much of the internet is like this, unfortunately.
Correct, but not worthy.
Not upvoted.
Personally I don't care. Unless I am writting a letter to the Queen, I will use lose/loose as I fancy, and I hope no one here will waste a braincell trying to figure out the difference between effect and affect.
Correct grammar is for people who have too much time on their hands.
Correct grammar is for people who have too much time on their hands.
> Correct grammar is for people who have too much time on their hands.
Or people who care about expressing themselves clearly.
Or people who care about expressing themselves clearly.
How do you clearly express the difference between homophones when speaking? It's obviously unnecessary for clear communication. Correct spelling is more generally used to convey educational status.
Correct spelling is more generally used to convey educational status.
...which, like it or not, is often a fairly reliable mental cue for determining how much importance to place on someone's opinion. Clarity is only part of the equation.
...which, like it or not, is often a fairly reliable mental cue for determining how much importance to place on someone's opinion. Clarity is only part of the equation.
Of course, I engage in the practice myself. However, my point was about the subject of the post, homophones. If you have a way of distinguishing them while speaking, they aren't homophones. If you have a way of distinguishing them when writing, you have a poorly constructed phonetic alphabet.
Everytime I see someone misuse lose/loose, it makes me want to kill them with knives. It's important to be precise, you can't just work everything out from context!
Then come up with simple rules (no more than 8 words total) for when to use one or the other.
English has the most moddy grammar of all languages, with so many exceptions and shit - this is one of the things I hope disappear as the world embraces English.
English has the most moddy grammar of all languages, with so many exceptions and shit - this is one of the things I hope disappear as the world embraces English.
You lose an object; unattached objects are loose.
Which doesn't cover every case I can think of, but demonstrates the difference. Also lose is a verb, loose is (almost always) an adjective.
Which doesn't cover every case I can think of, but demonstrates the difference. Also lose is a verb, loose is (almost always) an adjective.
Best site I've seen in months!!!
I need to print a few copies and hang them around the office ;)
I need to print a few copies and hang them around the office ;)