the correct usage would be 'i have seen' or 'i've seen'... or any other combination of 'to see' with a form of the auxiliary verb 'to be'... without the auxiliary verb, first person past tense of 'to see' would be 'i saw'...
I hate when my Word turns all my 'thens' to 'and thens.' The only thing that really bugs me about other people's grammar is when they don't even try.
Sorry if it came out like I was trying to bust your balls or something. I really wasn't! I was just curious, and always looking for a chance to learn something.
I didn't see "over exaggerate." One of my friends uses it often. Of course, it would be hard to "over exaggerate" how screwed up our government is right now.
I find that I really get irritated over the use of 'alot', when the writer means 'a lot'. One that makes me laugh though is this: "To all intensive purposes". And how about 'into', when the writer should use 'in to', or its reverse..."He got in to the boat" etc, etc... This list of grammatical faux pas, I mean fox paws, could go on for a bit, but while I am at it, I particularly detest 'on route' which I believe should be 'en route' (although there may be an argument for supporting 'on route', since it could be said that common usage has made it acceptable.)
I just remembered one that has me bouncing up and down in agitation when I hear it... 'Disoriented'. Simple enough, right? But why, oh why is it so often pronounced as "disorientated?" Where does the extra vowel come from? Of course, spoken English can get some really peculiar pronunciation...Which reminds me, it is pronunciation but so often I hear people say pronounciation. Sorry if I am wondering off topic...
Disorientated is a permissible alternative to disoriented in UK English, even though US English rejects it. But you have raised one of my facepalm words: Wondered: He wondered who kept leaving voice mail messages of breathing followed by a click. Wandered: She wandered away from the marked trail until she arrived at a sheer cliff, and realized she was hopelessly lost.
Wouldn't this be misspelled as "faw puh" or something by The Ignorant? I've come across "on route" surprisingly often actually, and come to think of it, I like the 'bastardization.'
from whence instead of just whence I know perfectly well that it's acceptable usage. I know too well that even by Shakespeare's day, the use of the preposition with whence was already starting to be seen. The Bard himself tended to vacillate back and forth depending on the meter he was trying to achieve. Still, it bugs the bajinkies out of me when I see it. None of the rest of the words that belong to the same class show this shift to taking a preposition. The from is superfluous. Me no like.
"Disorientated is a permissible alternative to disoriented in UK English, even though US English rejects it." Hmm..Now that I think about it, I have heard this on the BBC....damn those Limeys! What on earth can the justification be for simply adding extra bits to words when spoken? Would they write it that way too? I am doubtful. Generally, spoken language has a habit of removing bits from words. Just look at the history of the word 'year' in French. These days, it is barely just a vowel! It is tempting to jump on a soapbox to condemn innovations in language, but we really should not. Just that its soooo hard....
on the foreign word front, what's always bugged the bleep outa me is everybody who doesn't know french or italian, saying silly things like 'his forte [pronouncing it 'for-tay'] is music' or whatever, when the correct word [for 'strength'] is the french 'forte' that is pronounced like 'fort' and not the italian word that is spelled the same, but means 'strong, or loud' and is pronounced with the final 'e' pronounced as 'ay'... the french word cannot be pronounced 'for-tay' unless the 'e' has an 'aigu' accent mark over it, which gives it the 'ay' sound, but since it is not a verb and is only a noun [for 'fort'] and an adjective [see above], it can't have an accent aigu... like the bastardization, deformation and misuse/acceptance of so many foreign and even english words, this one has even made its way into dictionaries with the totally wrong pronunciation thus legitimized, to the horror of all like me who yearn for proper usage of all the words we cherish and use with proper respect...
While I admit this kind of bugs me too, I'm just wondering, has forte become a loanword at this point? Especially if it's in the English dictionary? I think it's okay for loanwords to become bastardized, that their meaning, pronunciation, spelling etc. change a bit -- or a lot -- and looking at it from that point of view, I'm not particularly bothered, after all ("Damn you English, can't you spell let alone pronounce 'cake' correctly? It's supposed to be kaka!).
If we have the time to branch out into words that are annoying, in any language, we will be here a very long time. In Norwegian there is a word, from the French 'abonner', which means subscription. It is abonnement. Fair enough, I hear you cry. It looks like it is derived directly from the original French, and it is! Ok, I will try to write it as it sounds to me. Now, I am no expert in French pronunciation but I would hazard a guess that it is not ABONOMANG.
I know this is everyones peeve; but 'They're, their and there' as well as 'Your and you're'. I cannot stand it. To, too and two. Also, a lot is 'A LOT' not 'alot'. There are A LOT of great writers on this forum.
IMHO opposition to the semi-colon stems from the large numbers of people--including would-be writers --who don't understand how they should be used.
I actually know people who panic at the sight of semicolons because they don't know how semicolons function. By the way, I just found out that exclamation commas exist. How cool is that?
So rather than learn how to use semicolons, these people blame their own ignorance and incompetence on those inoffensive punctuation marks, and advise everyone else to avoid them: "Don't you dare use semicolons!" "Why not?" "Because I don't know how to use them!"
@Browning - and probably also because of the minimalist way of writing that's so trendy right now! Semi-colons are elegant and elaborate. God forbid writing should be either of these @thirdwind - what on earth is an exclamation comma?? What does it even look like? There is one thing I've never quite known how to use - that's the comma dash. Like when someone punctuates something like this,- How/when do you use that??
It's like a normal exclamation mark except the period at the bottom is a comma. I guess it's used when you want to put an exclamation mark in the middle of a sentence.
No, that's a simplistic explanation. I discourage the use of semicolons in fiction, but I understand quite well how to ise them. What I see is overuse of them. They become a crutch, when the writer won't commit either to a full stop or a comma and conjunction. In those cases, I believe the use of a semicolon is wishy-washy. That's not to say I would never use a semicolon in fiction. However, I haven't written anything yet that seemed to demand one - in fiction. I have used them in more formal writing, but even there I use them infrequently. There's no call to assume that anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant.