Why is this so hard -- "lose" is spelt with one "o", not two!

meanreversion · Dec 2, 2010

Ok, I can't take any more of this. Why the fook do people insist on spelling "lose" with two o's? It's really not hard!

My trousers are too big, they are LOOSE.

If the trade doesn't work out, I will LOSE money.

Don't get me started on there/their/they're ... I'm convinced the majority of native English speakers now simply couldn't care less about the difference.

But look - if you want to appear knowledgeable, at least try to spell the very simple words correctly!

(Rant over)

Mr. Charts · Dec 2, 2010

meanreversion said:
Ok, I can't take any more of this. Why the fook do people insist on spelling "lose" with two o's? It's really not hard!

My trousers are too big, they are LOOSE.

If the trade doesn't work out, I will LOSE money.

Don't get me started on there/their/they're ... I'm convinced the majority of native English speakers now simply couldn't care less about the difference.

But look - if you want to appear knowledgeable, at least try to spell the very simple words correctly!

(Rant over)

Agreed, but what does "fook" mean?
I mean, if you can't spell that.......

Pento · Dec 2, 2010

I hate people spelling stuff wrong. THEIR really annoying

Mr. Charts · Dec 2, 2010

wrong LY

Pento · Dec 2, 2010

meanreversion's' got his knicker's's in a twist

Mr. Charts · Dec 2, 2010

The apostrophes are catastrophes.

MrGecko · Dec 2, 2010

I've said it before, there is a current of antisemanticism running through this forum.

counter_violent · Dec 2, 2010

meanreversion said:
Ok, I can't take any more of this. Why the fook do people insist on spelling "lose" with two o's? It's really not hard!

My trousers are too big, they are LOOSE.

If the trade doesn't work out, I will LOSE money.

Don't get me started on there/their/they're ... I'm convinced the majority of native English speakers now simply couldn't care less about the difference.

But look - if you want to appear knowledgeable, at least try to spell the very simple words correctly!

(Rant over)

Thing is, we have to except that these forking morons are tort by failures, so it's knot there fault rely.

I'd just like to add, this message has passed the spell checker.

meanreversion · Dec 2, 2010

Mr. Charts said:
Agreed, but what does "fook" mean?
I mean, if you can't spell that.......

Crikey, fok/fook, how hard is this??

I eat with a knife and FOK

If I'm very nice to my wife, she allows me a ...

HowardCohodas · Dec 2, 2010

Two complaints on the same thing are too many to endure.

FX Bandit · Dec 2, 2010

Good thread Mean.

MrGecko · Dec 2, 2010

1-1 was one racehorse, tu-tu was one too. 1-1 won one race one day and tu-tu won one too.

Hilarymannah · Dec 2, 2010

I dno't konw waht the **** you lot are maonnig aobut, if you can raed it, it's diong it's job !!

BTW: http://virgil.azwestern.edu/~dag/lol/TwoPlusTwo.html

scose-no-doubt · Dec 2, 2010

is that phonetic Canadian, Hillary?

meanreversion · Dec 2, 2010

Yes, well there are many other pet hates, but without doubt lose/loose is number 1.

There/their/they're I've given up on. Its/it's ditto.

By now, the only people reading this thread are those who give a sh1t, so its (sic) all a bit pointless. But I'm not some extreme pedant who argues against split infinitives, I just worry that standards of literacy are becoming so debased that the very meaning of the sentence is lost - at which point, what is the purpose of attempting to speak?

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr

trendie · Dec 2, 2010

meanreversion said:
Yes, well there are many other pet hates, but without doubt lose/loose is number 1.

There/their/they're I've given up on. Its/it's ditto.

By now, the only people reading this thread are those who give a sh1t, so its (sic) all a bit pointless. But I'm not some extreme pedant who argues against split infinitives, I just worry that standards of literacy are becoming so debased that the very meaning of the sentence is lost - at which point, what is the purpose of attempting to speak?

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr

Completely agree with you, meanreversion.

Clarity of expression reflects clarity of thought.
It's not pedantry. It's attention to detail.

robster970 · Dec 2, 2010

Accipere quam facere praestat injuriam

FX Bandit · Dec 2, 2010

robster970 said:
Accipere quam facere praestat injuriam

The f*** it is. You turn the other cheek if you want, but me? I unleash the beatdown.

robster970 · Dec 2, 2010

FX Bandit said:
The f*** it is. You turn the other cheek if you want, but me? I unleash the beatdown.

In alio pediculum, in te ricinum non vides

BTW

Quomodo cogis comas tuas sic videri?

MrGecko · Dec 2, 2010

meanreversion said:
Yes, well there are many other pet hates, but without doubt lose/loose is number 1.

There/their/they're I've given up on. Its/it's ditto.

By now, the only people reading this thread are those who give a sh1t, so its (sic) all a bit pointless. But I'm not some extreme pedant who argues against split infinitives, I just worry that standards of literacy are becoming so debased that the very meaning of the sentence is lost - at which point, what is the purpose of attempting to speak?

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr

For the record, I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

During the evolution of man, many things have been deemed as "must haves" for the aspiring classes; knowledge of the classics... how do dance at court... which fok (sic) one uses at the starter - these are redundant in the 21st century.

Language is a means to the end; namely communication. And while many " l33t" and generally dorky kids might rely on spellcheck, they are most likely to be the next google/microsoft/apple.

Adapt or die, said the Cockroach to the Dinosaur.

Why is this so hard -- "lose" is spelt with one "o", not two!

Senior member

Legendary member

Active member

Legendary member

Active member

Legendary member

Senior member

Legendary member

Senior member

Experienced member

Established member

Senior member

Well-known member

Veteren member

Senior member

Legendary member

Veteren member

Established member

Veteren member

Senior member

Similar threads