Who actually understands the difference between 'to' and 'too'?

Question

Anyone else saddened by the lack of grammer skills illustrated by those who post on Yahoo Answers?

Other examples? I know this is not a great question, but still think it's a point that deserves being brought to light.

Thanks.

Answer 1

I think you meant "grammAr" skills, but I feel certain that is what you meant and so cannot condemn your communication skills.

We owe Samuel Johnson a few expletives for coming up with the first widely accepted English dictionary and thus starting the standardization of English spelling. Shakespeare managed to muddle through his illiterate life without the benefit of knowing how to spell his own name, which we know he spelled at least seven different ways. Shakespeare also had problems with his punctuation, but so did almost everyone in his era. This is why printers, rather than writers, took care of punctuation concerns.

I was a hack writer for a double-digit number of years. I followed that up with an editorial stint. I have also been an English professor and am now a publisher. During all that time, I was constantly amazed by the poor grammar skills of some and the poor communication skills of others. The two of these things seem to share little relation to each other. If someone is "two" funny for words, I know what is being said.

What I really want to say is life happens. There are any number of reasons a person may use poor grammar or poor spelling; such as English is their second language, poor educational opportunities, dyslexia, early environmental influences, dialectical distortions, or even just plain old disinterest. In some cases a person's brain may be so talented in the direction of the sciences there just wasn't much gray-matter space left to the mastery of language details. While all of these factors may influence a person's grammar skills, none seem to influence communication skills. Shakespeare did not even know how to spell his own name (or care), but that sucker sure could communicate.

There have been a lot of comments in this thread about how flexible and beautiful English is. I don't disagree, but all languages have their limits. This is why we so often find our best writers and thinkers slipping into another language to find just the perfect word or phrase to say what they want to say. Unfortunately, the majority of us do not have the luxury of fluency in more than one language. This means we often stumble to make ourselves clear.

There is also the debate over profanity. The more elitist and self-righteous among us say profanity is evidence of a small mind and/or small vocabulary and should be left out of all conversation. Those among us with small minds and small vocabularies believe profanity is the most colorful part of any language and should definitely be available when its components communicate better than other available words. I find myself on the side of the ignorant unwashed with small minds and smaller vocabularies.

Please get the point. Grammar and spelling are taught because they can be important communication tools. Mastery of those skills can help even the poorest communicator make himself understood at least part of the time, but the whole idea behind language mastery is to make yourself understood. If you can do that without ever learning the difference between a participle and a proper noun, then you don't need to know that difference.

If someone can write something down and leave little doubt of what they intended to say, they should be applauded despite their errors of spelling and grammEr (will leave punctuation for another time). If you have mastered the ability to correctly identify and spell "infinitives," great -- but it doesn't make you a communicator. Pontificating the virtues of this ability without remembering the fact that this is just one of many tools that add up to communication skills amounts to no more than pseudo-intellectual babble. Get over it -- I understand "Shakespere," and just can't quite come to believe the fact that he couldn't even spelll his own name makes him an idiot.

I hope I've made myself understood.

Answer 2

I am saddened by the lack of grammar skills in most of our young people. I know when I was in school, if your pronounced something wrong or wrote something you were immediately corrected. I have a child in middle school, and it easy to see why children today are practically illiterate. Most of here teachers can"t seem to speak proper English. Also is my answers page the only one with a free spell checker?

Answer 3

as far as message boards etc i don't take the grammar(btw it's "ar" not "er" lol ;) )/spelling/punctuation very seriously. i've always gotten straight a's in these areas, but i doubt u'd notice it from my typing. i think most people

1 type fast - sometimes i think it's a matter of poor typing skills
2 try to shorten words as much as possible to get their point across as quickly as possible
3 don't bother proofreading much because it's usually an informal site like this one (exceptions aside)
4 i want to help people, but don't want to spend the time to make it look formal - my ideas seem to be getting across

that said, there ARE times when i want to go thru and correct people's grammar (see above ;) j/k) but i know i often make the same mistakes even tho i know better and would have caught them myself had i taken the time. so... "saddened"? no. annoyed? maybe the few times i can't understand what they are trying to say. valid question? of course.

Answer 4

It doesn't really bother me cuz I'm here for the questions and answers not the spelling.Some people don't or didn't have the opportunity to go to school.I have never been 1 to judge for I know I'm not any better.They do provide spell check which could help a few but some r to lazy to click on it but it doesn't help anyone in any other way like how a question is phrased etc...
Well have a great weekend.

Answer 5

I know the difference but I am not saddened by how it is used in print. When I speak to you and use the word ,to, too, two, you have no idea of the spelling. Your brain recognozes the context within the language and determines the meaning. Same happens when you read print.

Answer 6

to is an infinitivate, such as "to run" or "going to"
too is an adjetive intensifier as in "too bad" or "too long"

And... I just read the rest of your question and I do agree. The English language is the most beautiful hybrid language on the planet, combining the subtlties of French with the direct nature of German. However, the combination of these two distinctly different language groups can lead to some very confusing grammatical quandaries.

Answer 7

Hear hear!! (or is it Here here?)

I too, am saddened by the lack of attention paid to correct grammar. Never mind, their lack of communication skills will come back to haunt them once they get into the work force.

Ditch diggers don't have to speak properly - they just need a strong back.

Answer 8

I, too, am saddened by the pathetic lack of grammar skills. I believe that the ability to spell is also lacking on this site. Too many people forget to refer to the spell-check tool on this site. It is just too, too sad that they're unable to clearly communicate. Their's is a life I would not want to live. Fortunately, there is a remedy to this problem: education!

hmm.... did I use "to" , "too", "they're" "their" and "there" corretly?

Answer 9

I just learned the difference last year and I'm 29. Too is used in place of also.

Ex. I too love that. I also love that.

Otherwise, use to in your grammer.

Answer 10

To is a preposition or the beginning of an infinitive--to sit, to stand.
Too means also, or in addition.

These are commonly misused--They're (they are) there (location)their (possession)

Effect (what happens) Affect (a change)