| |
| ▲ | StopDisinfo910 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | It’s also grammatically incorrect. Edit: As I stand massively downvoted at this point in time despite my comment being entirely factually correct, I invite any potential downvoter to consider the sentence “Give me apple” before reaching for the button. | | |
| ▲ | danaris 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Those are not analogous. You have added a direct object without preposition, which is not standard usage in such contexts. The closest analogous sentence would be "Give apple", which works perfectly well as a choice to select in a textual medium. This form of imperative clause does have clear and consistent rules, whether you like them or not. And just stating that your opinion is factually correct, when it is plainly not, reeeeeally doesn't help your cause. | | |
| ▲ | StopDisinfo910 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > The closest analogous sentence would be "Give apple", which works perfectly well as a choice to select in a textual medium. Definitely no, "Give apple" is baby talk. Completely unacceptable in a choice. That's not proper English. I will die on that hill. I'm actually shocked by the amount of people here who thinks it's acceptable and fine. > Those are not analogous. You have added a direct object without preposition, which is not standard usage in such contexts. The "apple" in "give apple" is a direct object without preposition. It's entirely analogous to what I wrote. Are you confused by the "me" in my sentence. "Me" is an indirect object here. We basically have the same sentence. It just became entirely obvious that omitting the article is erroneous as soon as you had an indirect object. It's equally erroneous without it but apparently people have somehow convinced themselves it is acceptable after years of misuse in poor computer interfaces. | | |
| ▲ | munificent 24 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > That's not proper English. There is no officially sanctioned authority specifying the English language so "proper English" is not a defined concept in any way or form. You can choose to die on that hill, but you're fighting a war that doesn't even have defined sides. | |
| ▲ | danaris 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Would you like to give them the apple or the pear? ] Give Apple ] Give Pear Do you actually think this is an unacceptable and grammatically incorrect way of phrasing these provided options? > The "apple" in "give apple" is a direct object without preposition My apologies, you're correct. I mistyped—I should have said "indirect object". That does not negate any of the rest of what I said. |
|
| |
| ▲ | DonHopkins 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's factually incorrect, which is worse. Imperative mood: subject you is implied, so no need to write it. https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/imperative_mood.htm Zero article/bare noun phrase: allows omission of your, the, etc. in fixed instructions. https://www.thoughtco.com/zero-article-grammar-1692619 Standard negation: "don’t" is the grammatical way to negate an imperative. https://www.scribbr.com/verbs/imperative-mood | | |
| ▲ | StopDisinfo910 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Sadly that is factually correct and none of the links in your reply actually supports your point. The rule about the zero article doesn't list the case of a noun after an imperative. The first link is about the subject, not the object and the third is about negative imperative. Why are you posting links about completely unrelated things? Once again, using a noun without an article this way is gramaticaly incorrect. | | |
| ▲ | crazygringo 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | "Share profile photo" would be grammatically incorrect as a complete sentence. But it's perfectly grammatically correct as a command label. English has different grammar rules in different contexts. For example, newspaper headlines omit articles all the time. That doesn't make the NYT grammatically incorrect on every page, though. Because they're using correct headline grammar, which is different from sentence grammar. | | |
| ▲ | andoando 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Heres a secret: Grammer rules are just whats colloquially acceptable speech 50 years ago | | |
| ▲ | tremon 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's commonly called Grandma's rules, sometimes shortened to gram's rules. I've never seen the spelling "grammer" before, even though gram'r is arguably more correct than gram's. |
| |
| ▲ | StopDisinfo910 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > But it's perfectly grammatically correct as a command label. Agree to disagree. The reason it sounds robotic is because it's grammaticaly incorrect. The article is not optional before the object in this sentence. | | |
| ▲ | card_zero 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | How about these commands: Raise anchor, fix bayonets, hands up I think I'm with crazygringo on this one, there's special command grammar. | | |
| ▲ | Thorrez 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | The 2nd and 3rd examples are plural. You don't need an article for plural nouns. "Fix bayonets." and "Fix the bayonet." are standard grammar. "Fix bayonet." isn't. | | |
| ▲ | card_zero 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well, hands up is lacking a verb, and fix bayonets is in a funny passive tense - or something - because it seems to say "generally go around looking for bayonets to fix", but means specifically "fix your bayonets". In fact hands up is like that too, the intent is "put your hands up", not just "put hands up" in the abstract. Then there's informational signs, too. Wet floor is not an instruction. Labels generally aren't sentences. Or instructions on signs: ring bell for assistance, return tray to counter, close gate after use. | | |
| ▲ | StopDisinfo910 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Or instructions on signs: ring bell for assistance, return tray to counter, close gate after use. I have never seen this. I have seen plenty of "Please close the gate" or "Keep the gate closed". Sometimes, the article is eluded when the noun is subject "Gate must be kept closed" but imperative + noun without an article on a sign seem highly unusual to me. It feels weird so I would definitely notice. I have seen "ring bell for assistance" however. It's jarring everytime. I must be the strange one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
