Skip to Content
11-09-2009 @ 9:05PM
"Blizzard weren't happy with..." I laughedWTB authors reviewing work :D
11-09-2009 @ 9:23PM
In some forms of English, such as that spoken by, well, the English... "Blizzard" is a collective noun which implies "those at Blizzard", and it would thus use "weren't".As proof that this was the intended usage, see the rest of the sentence (emphasis mine): "Blizzard weren't happy with this use of a voidwalker and so THEY".
11-09-2009 @ 9:28PM
Shrike beat me to it, but yea the author is using Blizzard as a collective noun.
11-09-2009 @ 10:04PM
Shrike is right, however this: "A player would have to be very bad to not generate more threat then your voidwalker" doesn't make any sense."Then" means subsequently or soon afterward. "A player would have to be very bad to not generate more threat subsequently your voidwalker" doesn't make any sense. I think the word you're looking for is "than", which is a comparison word.
11-09-2009 @ 10:10PM
That Blizzard is a collective noun is a given. But just because it's a collective noun doesn't mean that it's automatically plural. Because he's not talking about individual devs of Blizzard, but the group as a whole, Blizzard is singular. If the sentence read, "Some at Blizzard weren't happy..." or "Blizzards devs weren't happy..." then the plural would be correct, as would be the plural pronoun. You wouldn't say, 'McDonalds are the largest restaurant chain in the world, because they have great hamburgers."
11-09-2009 @ 10:23PM
Yeah, I don't know about every one else, but the improper use of they and then makes this otherwise excellent article impossible for me to read. Change this or risk inducing my wrath. That is all.(sarcasm)
11-09-2009 @ 11:03PM
@ ZykoThat's fine for you mate, but for the rest of the world, a person's command of the English language affects the way in which their ideas are received.You cant getaway wit usin bad speling and sentense structcha and grammer if you won't pplz 2 tayk youse all seriously. Just arks anyone.
11-09-2009 @ 11:59PM
I work in the education sector, and I am constantly trying to justify the modern generation's use of technology to my peers. I am trying to convince my fellow colleagues that the increased use of technology does not have an overall negative effect on our generation's language skills. Sometimes I feel like I'm fighting a losing battle.I don't understand why people are downgrading the grammar corrections above. I sincerely hope that we, as a technology savvy people, have not developed such a disdain for effective communication because we are lazy. Why is it that we hold such contempt for someone who cannot remove themselves from a pixelated fire on an imaginary in-game floor, but we defend another person who is too slack to learn the difference between "than" and "then"?
11-10-2009 @ 12:18AM
@DboyI can't speak on behalf of everyone who downvoted you. But I personally downvoted you because, while I agreed with your points otherwise, you came across as an obnoxious, smarmy git when you pointed out the author's 'than/than' typo, as you accused him of being "too slack to learn the difference." I suspect if you better understood the concept of a typo, you would not automatically assume any erroneous typing was intended as such.While the poor spelling and grammar you speak of is one of my pet peeves as well, there is a very marked difference between poor understanding of these things and occasional flaws in their execution. From the high mastery of the English language the author displays in his posts, it should be clear to you that what occurred was a typo. What I find far more annoying though is comments like the first poster's, who try to correct perfectly fine spelling and grammar. If you don't know what you're talking about, please shut up. You just look like an idiot.
11-10-2009 @ 12:33AM
Excellent reply - thanks Stridez.If I have come across as a smarmy git, I apologise. My tone was probably born out of the frustration that an English teacher feels when s/he has corrected the same mistake in four hundred pieces of students' work over the year. My later comments were worded strongly for effect, rather than derision.It's interesting you mention the 'high mastery' of the English language in the author's posts - I would agree! I do, however, have students that have an excellent vocabulary but still do not know how to use a possessive apostrophe (no matter how many times I tutor them or point it out). There are gaps in all our knowledge, I am sure, and from my experience the 'than/then' substitution is, in almost all circumstances, a spelling error rather than a simple typo (in all the pieces of work I've marked, a student who misuses 'than/then' does it consistently throughout their piece, regardless of their overall expression and intelligence).
11-10-2009 @ 1:17AM
@DboySome historical perceptive should make you feel a little better. I'm an aspiring Renaissance scholar and spend most of my time reading texts where spelling is a matter of personal choice and written punctuation had barely begun to separate itself from the rules of classical rhetoric concerning oratory. Of course, print and the fixation of scholars during the 18th Century to standardize the King's English has led to the point where we can argue about the proper use of a pronoun or where to place an apostrophe. Still, it's all arbitrary in many ways. There is a communal agreement on certain rules of language, but most of the history of English has involved the creative bending or flat out ignoring of those 'rules' to generate new and striking meaning. Milton, Shakespeare, and Spenser played with spelling to create more effective puns, or left out apostrophes so the reader was left wondering if a word is possessive or plural. While I completely understand your frustrations (I've taught college composition) I'm not that afraid for the language itself. Its rules evolve and change; its riotousness is what gives it life, and that's why it will survive and grow no matter what technological changes occur. Buck up!
11-10-2009 @ 7:23AM
Personally I consider "effective communication" to be I communicate something, and the person I'm communicating it to, understands. Anything beyond that is rather pointless unless your trying to make yourself look better than someone else, which in my eyes just makes you a jerk with an education degree.WTB my crazy Grade 12 english teacher who would go off on rants about throwing frozen cats...
1-26-2010 @ 4:19AM
@JehanneWhilst I agree with the general post, there was one glaring error:"Milton, Shakespeare, and Spenser played with spelling to create more effective puns, or left out apostrophes so the reader was left wondering if a word is possessive or plural."Firstly, Shakespeare was never meant to be read; so much in fact that each actor was only given his lines, not anybody elses. Couple this with the fact that many of the actors added their own lines and soliloquies (the more lines you had, the more important you were deemed - so often they 'bigged up' their own part) and that the manuscripts we have are not originals but in fact are sourced from people who would stand in the crowd and write down what they were hearing (yes, really), then it's inevitable that the enigma of deducing if a word was possessive or plural would arise. Simply, we will never know exactly what the original scripts and intents contained.Also, Milton, Spenser and Shakespeare were both before the standardization, as such, they were free to ignore apostrophes and grammar in general as they saw fit.I agree with both also: the idea that language must change with the times, and that rules must be enforced. Truth is, the English language breaks it's own rules frequently, more than most languages, usually for little more than convenience or simple memetic linguistics.Consider: If shown to a person to whom English is not the mother tongue, and also to an English National, the flaw in the following sentence is more likely to be spotted by the person to whom English is a secondary language:"I cannot decide whether I should go to the cinema."In fact, many English people don't know what's wrong with this... but to be fair, why -should- it matter? We know what's meant by the sentence, but perhaps the additional clarity is a boon. I would that we lived in a world based more on clarity than implied intent.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.