My spelling's better too.

[Edited on April 22, 2008 at 3:40 PM. Reason : d]

4/22/2008 3:39:37 PM

Quote :

"grammer"

4/22/2008 3:40:11 PM

FALSE

4/22/2008 3:40:24 PM

4/22/2008 3:40:29 PM

Was she sick? What's her username?

4/22/2008 3:41:13 PM

BTT cause nobody got my funny funny joke

4/24/2008 1:05:23 AM

4/24/2008 1:05:57 AM

actually so has mine

i say bored instead of board

4/24/2008 1:52:09 AM

It's because awesome people like me search for posts with spelling/grammar/punctuation mishaps and correct them.

4/24/2008 9:53:22 AM

"has gotten better" = passive voice

You're grammar might be better, but is still bad.

4/24/2008 10:43:33 AM

I don't understand the whole passive voice thing. Why can't I talk with a passive voice. If it happened in the past, why can't I say it happened in the past?

4/24/2008 10:45:25 AM

Quote :

""has gotten better" = passive voice You're grammar might be better, but is still bad."

Intentional fail?

4/24/2008 10:47:21 AM

To take the passive out of the title would you have to resay it like this

"Since joining TWW my grammar is better" ?

4/24/2008 10:50:30 AM

I want to answer, but I think I'd rather let minderbinder do it

4/24/2008 10:53:20 AM

Passive voice is fine no matter what your english teacher says. It works, it just isnt as dominant or other some such nonsense.

4/24/2008 10:57:09 AM

Sigh.

4/24/2008 11:01:26 AM

^^^^ Your version is technically correct, but I'd just flip it around to "My grammar is better since joining The Wolf Web"

4/24/2008 12:17:11 PM

The title is not passive voice.

4/24/2008 12:25:08 PM

Quote :

"Passive voice is fine no matter what your english teacher says"

"fine," sure

but it can be awkward and unpleasant as fuck
since it tends to confuse rather than elucidate

and

Quote :

"The title is not passive voice."

so this discussion seems irrelevant

Quote :

"I don't understand the whole passive voice thing. Why can't I talk with a passive voice. If it happened in the past, why can't I say it happened in the past?"

You can. Passive voice has nothing to do with tense.

[Edited on April 24, 2008 at 12:33 PM. Reason : .]

4/24/2008 12:27:13 PM

Mine has done got better two. Dang better.

4/24/2008 12:32:09 PM

"has" is a form of to be, and used to modify another verb makes it passive.

Passive voice is perfectly acceptable in some circumstances, like creative writing where it's more stylistic than it is a hard and true grammar rule, but in formal or legal writing should be avoided at all costs.

4/24/2008 12:34:14 PM

so what is passive?

4/24/2008 12:36:29 PM

Quote :

""has" is a form of to be, and used to modify another verb makes it passive"

It's in the present perfect tense, which DOES NOT denote passivity. It is easy, for example, to use the same tense in a sentence like this: "John has gotten an A on his exam." without it being passive.

I mean, how is there an actor here, if not "grammar" itself? Your "fix" suggests that fixing the verb is all that matters when true passivity leaves out the subject in preference of the object.

In other words, what is the subject of your sentence if you claim it is a passive construction?

[Edited on April 24, 2008 at 12:44 PM. Reason : /]

4/24/2008 12:38:04 PM

This thread was a joke.

I'm going to go eat some grammer crackers now.

4/24/2008 12:43:53 PM

yums

4/24/2008 12:44:53 PM

The technical definition of passive voice is making the object of a verb the subject of the sentence. However, the use of any form of "to be" to modify verbs, particularly to denote past events, weakens the sentence. Whether technically passive or not, you should be avoiding "has been" "was opened".

4/24/2008 12:45:36 PM

4/24/2008 12:46:27 PM

There's no need to avoid "has been."

The sky has been cloudy today.

OMG NOES THAT MUST BE PASSIVE I'M DESCRIBING SOMETHING HALP

it's fine

4/24/2008 12:47:22 PM

StillFuchsia stole my fun. I had to go to lunch. Boo.

4/24/2008 1:35:18 PM