"Loveless" by My Bloody Valentine, £4.99!

Shit, and i bought that the other week for a tenner!

Asda have gone mad in the sales this year. Madonnas new album for £6.99, 3 Playstation games for 20 quid, double CD compilations £3.99, Theme Park World for a fiver. I don't understand.

Tremors and Tremors 2: The Rumbling (or whatever it was called) for a total of 8.98 at HMV!
I haven't actually seen Tremors 2 - I'm taking it for granted that, like all films, it's worse than Tremors - but how much worse? Any ideas?

tremors 2 is a good film i think. it was on tv recently, but i couldn't really hear it because of my FUCKING ROOMMATE.
err... that's all sorted out now.

It stars the old one from the first film, and the miletary guy, and the tremors sort of change half way through.

"Happiness" on DVD at HMV - £9.99

I am refusing to buy it because it has an abberant apostrophe on the front copy. I can't face owning something with "it's" on the front where it should be "its".
"Am I shooting myself in the foot?" writes London's favourite miserable pedant.

I'm with you on the apostrophe front. It's the only way these bastards will learn...

Taking this a step further, anyone care to help me get rid of DVDs where the subtitles are spelled incorrectly? Very annoying indeed.

I should have known that this site would attract the sort of pedantic souls who could join me in my campaign to roam the shops and billboard sites of this land, brandishing my red marker pen, correcting and editing until all publicly displayed copy is checked!
I mean, I don't really mind pub chalkboards advertising "lasange" and greengrocers offering "potatoe's", but printed copy MUST go through editors at some fucking point, mustn't it? Do these people not care?

The Argos catalogue is selling "Video's", I think. It also said that on a fucking huge display in-store. I fear we may be fighting a losing battle, comrades...

This tendency baffles me.
The placement of apostrophes is one of the few parts of English that actually follows strict and easy to apply rules. What is so hard about it?
I think teachers have become afraid of teaching it because it's perceived to be difficult, arcane. Like all other unfashionable causes in English teaching (spelling tuition for example) it merely creates a false "elite" of people who can apply the simple rules, and an "underclass" of misusers who look stupid to the "elite" every time they write "Video's".
The act of correctly placing an apostrophe is not clever. It has nothing to do with intelligence. Making it seem like particle physics is unfair on everyone, denying many people the chance to use their language correctly to express themselves.
It's not the end of the world, but it does make me sad.

FOX over here are STILL running an advert for a new show in which they quite PATENTLY let an idiot check the copy. Apostrophe misplacements weren't the start of it.

At last, likeminded souls! I detest errors such as the ones mentioned, especially considering that spellcheckers are present in most software, and dictionaries are at their cheapest ever (!) I possess a book, bought for me last year called "Wierd Wonders", how on Earth did that slip through the net? I've seen adverts in local shops selling (amongst other things) "Big Borther Video's", Currys advertising a "Digital Video Disk Player" (aaagh, 'versatile disc' you idiots) and not forgetting the Christmas special at our local shit homewares shop, "Laver Lamps".

Right, I've got a packet of Jumbo Permanent markers in my hot little hands, where do we start?

Oh another thing, who else has noticed subtitles on TV/DVD where they are clearly not what is being said on screen, but a sort of rough phonetic guess? On 'East is East' there is a scene where the mother is holding a new hat. The dialogue is "Nice hat mum", the subtitles are the more nonsensical "Night out oh?". Why? Don't subtitlers work from a script?

My favourite aberrant apostrophe was on my local hardware shop.
It didn't annoy me (they don't employ copy editors at hardware shops) but was symbolic of the confusion about apostrophisation that has gripped the country.
The hardware shop was owned by a bloke called Robbie. The big sign outside read:

"ROBB'Ys"

(with a superscript lower case "s")
They knew that the word needed punctuation, they just weren't really sure how...
Bless.

Definitely with you all on the apostrophe front, especially when people use "it's" instead of "its", or write things like did'nt.
Another thing which I always notice is when people mix up "less" and "fewer". I blame this one on my mum, who used to teach English. She actually complained in the supermarket about their "10 items or less" checkout, pointing out that it should be "...or fewer". I think they've changed it now, so maybe people power really can work.

>They knew that the word needed punctuation, they just weren't really sure how...


I hope you burned it down.

>Definitely with you all on the apostrophe front, especially when people use "it's" instead of "its", or write things like did'nt.


Lewis Carroll always wrote "did'nt".
And "Ca'nt" too.
It's clearly a modern affectation to apostrophise the missing "o" rather than the missing space.
Or maybe that's just something peculiar to repressed Victorian paedophile geniuses.

butler - i think you'll find he wrote "ca'n't" and "did'n't." clearly the grammar of a lunatic.

Some would say aberrations and flexibility are what make the English language great, I say on the spot fines of £10,000!

>they don't employ copy editors at hardware shops

lol

sha'n't.
ca'n't.

Basically, they bunged in an apostrophe for BOTH missing bits - the 'll ' and the 'o' in sha'n't, and the 'n ' and the 'o' in ca'n't.


Well, *I* like it that way. It's better.

>sha'n't.
>ca'n't.
>
>Basically, they bunged in an apostrophe for BOTH missing bits - the 'll ' and the 'o' in sha'n't, and the 'n ' and the 'o' in ca'n't.
>
>
>Well, *I* like it that way. It's better.


It certainly makes more sense logically. I'm with you, Subbes! Grammar reform NOW!

I'm lazy let's keep grammar the way it is! yay.

I hate people on usenet, who don't know the difference between "lose" and "loose", also "have" and "of". It's hardly rocket science is it?