Literally No One Likes a Grammar Cop | Otherwords 

"Grammar Nazis are literally the worst." "No, literal Nazis are literally the worst."

President Obama wasn't a language slouch either. Oh, and he also is a lawyer with an expertise in Constitutional Law, so the look on his face said it all. *_Really, we're going to argue linguistics right NOW? With ME?_*

I used to be a grammar cop-until I took Linguistics in university. Now I see how ridiculous it is to police how people speak. The only reason one way of communicating is considered “more correct” is invariably because it’s how the rich happen to speak. I believe that educating people on the study of how languages operate-and have always operated-is the best way to drive grammar cops to extinction. Huzzah! 🎉 #DefundTheGrammarPolice

I was literally just explaining this to my ESL students -- English grammar is confusing and all over the place; as long as you're getting your message across as you intended, grammar can take a hike. Language is for communicating and if you're not doing that because you're worried about getting some rules wrong then it defeats the purpose.

I am in a linguistics class for my degree and this channel just makes me happy because it's a fun way to review what I am learning!

I used to be a grammar cop of sorts when I taught English as a foreign language. My students were the only people I have ever met who appreciated having their grammar corrected.

Ok, the editors were killing it in the intro. I hope they got some bonus pay or extra vacation time for that one.

This was cathartic to watch; as a student of linguistics, the dichotomy of prescriptivism vs descriptivism has been a difficult concept to explain to family and friends who believe in the righteous validity of Standard English to categorize [discriminate] speakers/ human beings. I would love to learn even more about the sociolinguistic implications and historial background of using language as a tool of social discrimination. Love Other Words!!!!

I actually *have* had someone thank me for correcting her and ask me to continue to do so. She was a student from China, and knew that if she wanted to be able to become a teaching assistant in grad school, she'd have to be able to pass a test proving she spoke English well enough to communicate clearly to her students. At a large university with students from many different backgrounds, speaking many different first languages or dialects, it was necessary to adopt one language, standard English, as the *lingua franca* for everyone to communicate in, and requiring teachers to all be fluent enough to make themselves understood in the same language meant that students only had to learn one language, not a dozen. We taught each other a lot of other things, too. She expressed frustration that most Americans couldn’t tell at a glance who was Chinese vs Japanese vs Vietnamese. I asked her if *she* could tell an Italian from a Swede, and she exclaimed in surprise, "There's a difference??"

My 10th grade English teacher said: "I don't care how you talk, as long as you know you're doing it wrong."

The most common zero copula has to be "Where you at?" That question has no verb! I imagine that phrasing arose because "where" and "where're" sound indistinct.

I never correct spelling or grammar mistakes in comments unless doing so would cure someone of an obviously long held mistake, English is their second language or my favorite, when some troll is marginalizing another's otherwise good comment based on a mistake in grammar when their criticism also contains a mistake. I love that.

"Everyone but her won an award" vs "Everyone but she won an award." I think I would just write around that and say "She was the only one who didn't win an award."

I love when people correct me. Stronger memories are formed in the moment so that I am not as prone to forget the lesson.

In high school, one of my classes had a sub in MATH who went on a rant after she asked a question and several students raised their hands and said, "Me! Me!" about how it's grammatically incorrect. The entire class came to a silent agreement to screw up English as much as possible for the rest of the class, and when the Math teacher asked for an explanation the next day, one student volunteered that it's math class, not English class.

When I was 8th grade, I was paired with a girl I didn't get along with for an English assignment and we got into some heated argument. So we went to the teacher and I was like "Rebecca and me are having all these problems blah blah blah...". He listened to my whole schpeil, then said "Rebecca and I". And made me say the whole thing again

I feel this message, especially on any social media platform. If it's not an official or professional statement, then no one need concern themselves over anyone's grammar.

I can’t tell you how much I needed to hear this. Someone once pointed out the split infinitive in Star Trek and it’s been driving me nuts for assorted reasons. I feel like a weight has been lifted from my mind…❤

That section on AAE made me flashback to how Hawai'i grappled with Hawaiian Creole English aka Pidgin during the 70s and 80s. A lot of us learned to code-switch, Standard English in the classroom, HCE on the playground, and HCE/mother tongue at home.

My brain has literally expanded after watching these series of videos

One of the things that always gets me is when people use “there’s” followed by a plural noun instead of “there’re”. “There’s” is a conjunction for the phrases verb “there is” which is only used with singular subjects.

The backlash against ‘Jennifer and me’ has become so strong that now people are saying ‘Jennifer and I’ even when it's _not_ the subject of the sentence! I especially notice this in period pieces, when writers give this overcorrection to upper-class characters who would never have used it in real life.

When I was in elementary school, the teachers worked very hard to eliminate all traces of "Dutchified" accent and usage from us. (Like "ch" for "j": Chust a minute now once. Or "ain't" which is not just a contraction for "am not", but also as a way to elicit agreement, much like the Hochdeutsch "nicht wahr".) So imagine the surprise when this Pennsylvania Dutchman gets to college in St. Louis: everyone else is speaking their local dialects in both intonation and construction, while I'm speaking "broadcast standard". I decided Dutchified English was chust fine, even though I mostly use broadcast standard.

One holdover I still have in speech is when someone calls and asks for me, I’ll say, “This is he.” For some reason, even though it sounds archaic, it still sounds pleasant to me. Lol. But I don’t say, “It is I” ever. Lol.

I'm a linguist and I approve this message 👍🏼

My sister is an absolute grammar cop - necessity of being a bankruptcy lawyer - and when I sent her the link for this video, she flippantly refused to even watch it. She was trying to be funny (unsuccessfully), but she's always had difficulty seeing beyond her own perceptions, and her attitude honestly makes me roll my eyes sometimes.

Okay, I’ll cop (see what I did there?) to channeling Stannis Baratheon in my own personal grammar reflex regarding the use of “fewer” and “less.” But like him, I mostly just satisfy myself with muttering “fewer” under my breath when it comes up, and refrain from actively correcting anyone. At least I’m getting better! Wonderful video! I’m glad in recent years to see this topic discussed more and more, increasing the understanding of language as a living thing that inevitably changes and grows. Thanks!

This was informative and eye-opening. Looking forward to more like this. On a side note, as I'm learning German I've found that thinking about the ambiguity of a sentence is more helpful to me than the strict grammar rules. Beyond this, I'm fascinated by the contextual knowledge one needs to understand a given sentence. E.g, "Am Freitag chomi nach Zöri". It wasn't in a book and required cultural experience to understand. Even in English: "Yeah, nah." I imagine someone reading that and thinking that it's completely ambiguous.

I'm a native English speaker but spent most of my life outside North America and consistently defend people who say "oh, my English isn't so good". Like, it's not you, bud. English is a hopped up trade language McGuyver'd together from multiple other languages and most of our grammar is just ducttape. If I understood you, we're cool. And I never jump in with a correction unless someone asks me how to say something.

The other main advantage of standard English is to enable communication between dialects. Not that this is anything like a standard, but for an example, even though different regions of the US disagree on what is the proper word for "carbonated beverages" most people will recognize "soda" even if their regional variety of English would prefer "pop" or "coke." I also had a thought on the use of "literally." Besides being an ironic intensifier, I think it's also the case that some words that used to be metaphors are now literal. Like "My mind was literally blown!" Sure, a blown mind seems like a metaphor, but I think maybe these days "blown" is something a mind can literally be.

my father constantly comments on what he perceives as people doing things incorrectly, grammar being only one of which. he's utterly insufferable.

i have neurological issues that affects on my ability to handle language and anything related to it, so i intentionally choose to ignore many "rules" to make writing and talking easier for me, while still making myself understood. so nothing is more annoying than people nitpicking on my mistakes. why it matters, when its not even a professional setting, and others still understand my message with no problem. not to mention that english is not even my native language, and is wildly different from my own native language, and people still act like i am inferior and stupid for not speaking or writing perfect english 😔

I don't hate grammar cops, but I need them to be respectful. I do love correct grammar.

I think when you are learning a new language, it's definitely okay to make sure your grammar is correct. But when it comes to just speaking your language, we all take on different linguistics depending on who we are speaking with. The only time it gets frustrating is when you are unable to understand what is being said.

But...but... I'm a grammar cop. Nobody likes me?

grammando(noun): combination of "commando" and "grammar" to describe a person who constantly corrects others' grammar. Example: Grammandos at work.

I'm a reformed (reforming...?) pedant. As I've gotten older, I have realised that being "unable" (which is, of course, "unwilling") to discern meaning based on perceived incorrectness, is very much a 'me' problem, and, if I *can* discern meaning then the "error" is irrelevant

I prefer to be told when I make a mistake. When I discover by myself that I had made a mistake and no-one mentioned it, that tells me that no-one cares enough about me to help me.

Language is a bit like the pirate code in pirates of the Caribbean, its more of a set of guidelines than a code per say 🤣

as long as you understand what they were trying to convey to you, there is no need to nitpick their grammar, spelling etc. *because you understood their intended meaning even if it wasnt correct* nobody will look at you after like "damn what a smart person, so cool".

When I learned the difference between a hypothesis and a theory I had the unfortunate impulse to correct people when they used "theory" informally. This wasn't out of malice or a sense of superiority, but was simply because I wanted to make sure we were all communicating our ideas clearly, and for whatever reason I was absolutely sure that there would be irreputable damage done as a consequence of using the word "theory" when "hypothesis" was more correct. It wasn't until someone clearly stated "Bruh: no one cares" that I realized I was unintentionally being a twit. Thus, a hypothesis I have for why people feel inclined to correct someone else's grammar is that we (the grammar police) take it upon ourselves to learn and use Standard English rules to genuinely better ourselves, and seeing others not make the effort to learn/use those rules makes us feel like our efforts are being wasted. We deeply feel that learning the rules are important, and seeing someone not use the rules is a sign of ignorance, unintentional or otherwise, so we feel we are helping the offending party by informing them of the proper method for which they should communicate their ideas. More testing is needed.

as a non-native speaker, i actually want to be corrected (to improve my english). they literally help me learn free grammar in 1 sec. so i didn't know some people hate to be corrected. maybe different country, different culture, different way of thinking. if you think it's an insult then it's an insult. if you don't think it is an insult then it's not

this is why i say perfect grammar is only necessary in academic and professional settings, and that anywhere else the only requirement is that i know what the other person is trying to say.

Communication comes down to the communicators’ understanding each other, not whether or not they express themselves in the exact same way.

In Finland, the grammar police usually attack and intervenes in the conversation when a dialect or colloquial language of Finnish is used instead of the written language and standard language of Finnish, but the problem that the grammar police don't understand is that the written language and standard language of Finnish are artificial and too stiff and clumsy to use when speaking and that dialects and colloquialisms are not faulty or corrupt language that should be corrected.

English is a language we only use in school, some work and online. My grammar is far from perfect but I am glad I don't see a lot of these grammar police in recent years. Usually, when I see them, it's when they try to pick apart an argument that isn't grammar related by using their grammar policing as a distraction, to appear funny, or just because they have nothing to relevant to add to the argument.

🇧🇷 I’m Brazilian studying English and the “prepositions at the end of the phrase thing” is SO natural to my ears that I started to use - even sounding weird - in Portuguese (a Latin language). Exemple: -In English: “This is a subject that I’m worried about”. -In Portuguese: “Isso é um assunto o qual eu estou preocupado com”. And this is SO strange 😂

My brain understands that descriptivism is the academically appropriate approach to analyzing and understanding language use; however, my ears and heart are still frequently pained upon hearing certain patterns in modern spoken English which cause me to cringe as involuntarily as one would upon hearing nails against the chalkboard. In my effort to reconcile my brain with my ears and heart, I only ask my absolute closest friends, with whom I spend the most time, to please be mindful of these few pet peeves, and I just bite my tongue the rest of the time. I also happen to live in a foreign country with a foreign language as of 15 yrs, and I even teach this language to native English speakers, so I have much empathy for people speaking a foreign language and how difficult it can be to always get the grammar right - I myself make small mistakes every day, even after working in this language for nearly 25 yrs! I tell all of my students that the most important objective is to communicate - and this can be achieved with broken grammar and hand waving if needed! So, I'm aware of the dichotomy that exists within me...And I hope to one day be able to desensitized my involuntary cringe at my certain pet peeves (and yes, I have a few I've developed for my 2nd language too haha). Thank you for your well-produced segment and humble reminder to lean more heavily into descriptivism!

I've definitely been warming up the idea of linguistic descriptivism over the years - language is bound to change, and it is more interesting and practical to observe its evolution than to keep it in stasis forever, and clarity of communication should be valued as the primary factor of language. Rules like "no split infinitives" don't really improve clarity of communication. However, I can't help but be bothered when words/expressions change to mean their exact opposite. I have a really hard time accepting the modern usage of the word "literally", as it actually disturbs clarity of communication. I appreciate the original meaning of the term, e.g. "I went on a ziplining trip - it was tough at first, but I hung in there, literally" as opposed to the modern usage, e.g. "the job interview was tough, but I hung in there, literally". The modern usage as a generic intensifier has diminished the original meaning of the word, to the point where you will often have to ask to be sure about whether they are being literal or not - and isn't the first example more interesting? Where the word has a unique meaning, and is not just a generic intensifier that could be replaced with "really"? The same goes for "I could care less". I know that everyone who uses this form actually mean that they couldn't care less, but it is confusing to someone who has never heard this usage before, as the expression makes no sense if you try to interpret its meaning.

8:35 Wait. Say that again! The part about, "If the point of language is to facilitate understanding and form social bonds"

I don't remember what was the issue exactly, but once at my job (We speak spanish) someone was trying to convince us to use a certain word with the classic "The RAE says is this" and an actual Spaniard from Spain yelling back "The RAE can *** itself, they don't make the rules of language" which until this day to me is hilarious

You've convinced me of all those. Can you convince me of things like "off of", which is becoming the norm and seem to have come from other languages, and "should of", instead of "should've".

I generally try to avoid correcting others' grammar precisely because it can be seen as elitist, grammar rules are there for clarity and as long as the person's speech is clear it shouldn't matter. I only make an exception when it comes to major gaffs such as misused (or misheard) words, e.g. when one mistakes "could've" with "could of" because "could of" (which i was guilty of once-upon-a-time years ago and I'm glad to have corrected it). Same goes for misheard phrases such as "for all intense and purposes" (it's: 'intents and purposes'). These aren't so much broken rules but just outright words that are out of place. Even then I always try to do it as gently as possible (and if it's absolutely necessary).

After she used the "litterally" in the last video, I totally laughed. 🤣🤣

i'm not a grammar cop but i do wish people use " their they're there" correctly

I speak my English the way I learned, then years later I found out I was speaking Texas English all along

I still think their are times when there valid in correcting people and they're mistakes

Tell this to the french (primarily in Paris) regarding francophones in other regions of the world lol

"Gonna miss ya, broski" sounds like a pretty great eulogy to me!

The problem with never correcting anyone's grammar is that grammar can sometimes get so bad it obscures what is meant. In such cases, I think a correction should be pointed out.

Wow. I literally was just corrected by the grammar police about 20 minutes before this video popped up in my feed. I'm saving this one to my favorites.

I *literally* laughed out loud when I saw that last blooper. 😆

my favourite response to split infinitives came from Douglas Adams, "to boldly split infinitives, where no infinitive had been split before

As a native Spanish speaker, I actually do like other people correcting my grammar or orthography, because it helps me see mistakes and wrong things I didn't know. Like "I wish I was there" it is, were? Won't has an apostrophe?, it is explosion and not explotion? So, as long if the one correcting you is polite, I think it is perfectly fine and I actually like it. Feel free to fix any mistakes I made :)

Loved the video. But we all have our quirks. I often communicate ironically/sarcastically, but using "literally" to mean "figuratively" sticks in my craw; I keep silent, but inwardly fume, and may be distracted from what is being said (as in, if recorded, needing to replay). I also quietly accept comments that someone my age should not be sarcastic (however phrased). We all have our quirks.

I am LITERALLY sending this to all my grammar cop friends

This has nothing to do with grammar, but if I hear somebody say 'I could care less' or 'a whole another' or say 'instance' when they mean 'incident', I'm correcting.

To quote Winston Churchill, *"That is something up with which I can not put."* 😉

"Everyone but she won an award?" People find this to be natural? I find this very hard to believe.

Proud grammar cop here. I just don’t associate with stupid people.

Otherwrods is one of the best series PBS came up with. Dr. Erica, I hope that you won't get tired of doing the show. I learn so much from the show. Dr. Erica is also the best.

7:00 I think this is because her is actually correct. The full phrase would be “Everyone- having an exception of her- won an award.” Since ‘but’ is being used to modify everyone, the awardless feminine pronoun is the Object of the Noun phrase “Everyone but ___”, so the object form, her, is used.

Well, I guess I must not be either sensitive enough or spoiled enough, because I'm always thankful if someone points out a mistake in my grammar.

I do ask people to correct my grammar because I personally want and like using more formal speech in many cases (although I am not going to talk to my friends as in the same wat I would write a scientific paper). In my opinion language is a bit similar to D&D, there are official rules and they have a purpose and it is very useful to know them but ultimately you should be allowed to modify the way you use them to what is working best when you are having a session with your friends. And most importantly: those rules might change over time, and that is perfectly fine.

I’m happy to find the is channel! Thank you so much! Wish you all the best!

I have heard that "A language is a dialect with an army", although we might extend that to simply a language is a dialect with a power base.

amazing informative and entertaining video, as always keep up the fantastic work y'all ^^

I don't police how people talk 1:21, I police how people speak LOL

It is very cool that we have so many tools to record language and see how it changes.

I’m from Texas, and it’s often hard for people to understand what I’m saying. I’ve slowly adopted a lot of new words and ways of speaking. I didn’t even notice it until I said “you guys” one day and I gasped.

Man, people "correcting" the usage of literally are doing it so badly. "you mean figuratively?" No. Obivously not, did you think I meant "I'm figuratively starving to death"? clearly I didn't, no one needs to clarify they're not actually starving to death. What I'm doing is putting emphasis, like how you could say "I'm really stressed" without anyone thinking you were literally being crushed

I'm a writing tutor, so it's my job, but only on paper. In real life, I'm not picky about it because I know how annoying it is.

"One ought to recognize that the present political chaos is connected with the decay of language, and that one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end."-George Orwell, _Politics and the English Language_

Something I'm constantly corrected on is my singular use of the word data. I will regularly construct phrases like the "The data shows" and "the data is" indicating a singular body called data. I'm constantly told that Data is in fact plural, and I should say "The data show," and "The data are." Growing up everyone around me used singular constructions for the word data, but I feel like around 2005, or 2010 I suddenly saw a discussion online about the proper verb conjugations to be used along side the noun data. I think at the time that I saw these discussions explaining that the Latin word data was the plural form of datum. My first thought when I get corrected is, "just because that's how Latin worked, doesn't mean it works the same way in English." Also no one describes "a datum point" but they will say "a data point" which is a singular construction so whatever.

This video is LITERALLY amazing. This is the one personality of mine many, MANY friends hate. And the worse part is I can't stop it. So now I am really hesitant to tell my immediate officer that the "your here" in our office map is supposed to be "you're here". Also I feel like there is something wrong with this sentence.

My favourite part about Linguistics is that you learn to accept all kinds of people, just being themselves.

I love this so much. We've used "correct" grammar as a shibboleth to sort out who doesn't "really belong" in certain contexts.

In 1990 my college philosophy professor dropped that Captain Kirk correction of to go boldly and every time I watch the show I think about the sequence of the words.

Too bad Judge Roberts isn’t as big of a stickler for the Law as he is for grammar.

I definitely agree with the general idea of this video. I have always said that grammar “rules” should really be interpreted as “style guides” with varying degrees of strictness. It is generally better to keep the verb infinitive together, but don’t do it if it makes it sound clunkier (“to boldly go where no one has gone before” does sound better than “to go, boldly, where no one has gone before”). The real purpose of grammar rules is to slow the evolution of language so that it doesn’t change too fast and doesn’t split off into 10 different languages every 100 years or so. However, the example she gave of “Everyone but her won an award” was misleading, and a bit of a straw man argument, in my opinion. The reason “Everyone but she won an award” sounds more awkward is *not* because the subject has two components joined by a conjunction (she calls this “headless”) it’s because the conjunction in this case is the word “but.” “But” is not like “and” and “or” in that it doesn’t put its components on equal terms. With “but”, the second term is always contrasted from the first term (notice that “but” can only have 2 terms, while “and” and “or” can have as many as you like). “But” is really a synonym for “except” and “however” (I personally don’t think it should be considered a conjunction at all) and that changes the entire dynamic of that sentence. It is *not* awkward to say “Jennifer and I are going swimming” because the conjunction “and” puts both components on equal terms, unlike “but” which always excepts or excludes the second component.

When I was a fresh graduate, I had a colleague who would literally correct everything I said in English - grammar or pronunciation-. While she was a good friend of mine, I felt so embarrased to the point of I stopped speaking English with her at all. Fast forward several years, I won a scholarship to United States and had an internship as a journalist. I was surprised to find out native speakers didn't care about the mistakes as long as they could understand me. Those experiences boost my confidence as well as my skill. The funny thing is after I've returned to my country, my so called 'grammar cop' colleague lost her confidence in English. She kept asking me to check on her grammar even though I told her that those mistakes were insignificant. While I really appreciate people who point out my grammar mistakes, being corrected all the time is frustrating. Now, as an ESL teacher, I've learned to not embarrass my students while correcting them.

When I proofread a document using the F7 key in Word it can be annoying. It checks not only spelling, also conciseness, formality, punctuation, and so on. Great work Erica. 👏👏

Excellent video, there is no right or wrong English, just different ways of talking and it needs to be respected.

The only grammar mistakes that get under my skin are the 'artificial' ones, like using "myself" instead of me, or "utilize" instead of use This happens specifically in business language, but since middle class white guys say it, no one calls them on their crap People don't really talk like that. It's just the speaker trying, and failing, to sound more intelligent than they really are. Unless someone can make a >really< good argument why it should be allowed, this is a hill I'm willing to die on.

I learned english as a second language and was taught it as a 'foreign' language. Language taught that way is a simplified less nuanced version of it. At this point in my life it's my dominant language, it's the one I use to read and write. It organically became more complex and nuanced for me, some topics I only know well enough in english and cannot articulate well in my native language. But nuances of grammar AND punctuation are well over my head to pick up as an adult, because those were not taught to me at a time where they would organically stick. My native language grammar (one also notoriously snobbish for being used correctly or *else*) is equally bad, I was never great at it to begin with and used english early on as my 'playground', getting more information than provided in a textbook by feel, and always made a sport out of picking up on how people culture code it. It doesn't upset me to be corrected, but more often than not - they are correcting an intentional play :) It's interesting how my much younger brother, who moved to an english speaking country at only 4 yrs old, also struggles at school. His english (absolutely a dominant language, he doesn't know how to read in our mother tongue at all) is simply 'not rich enough' for his teachers and it's really baffling to fix. Even if he chooses to speak it at home - the environment is not native and unless school can teach him, there's only so much that can be done about his experience. It feels unfair.

We spend 12 years teaching kids the right way to speak and write English. Is it any surprise that some of them have trouble breaking the habit of looking for errors?

I totes got a jobby job in part when I made one of the interviewers laugh with a very local colloquialism I grew up with and then proceeded to say the projects i was genuinely most interested in. She was engaged enough to really listen.

I can get behind all of that except the "literally" issue. It just means its opposite now. Also, it is not a good idea for "inflammable" to mean "flammable."

As far as I know, non native speakers tend to use more the gramatically correct but clunky version of a sentence more than the contraption or mistaken one, because we learned to master the language perfectly, it being our second one. So basically, non native speakers of any language would be better than the natives themselves! 😂

This is my first video of yours! I’m so excited to discover this! Love it ❤