|
Edited on Mon May-08-06 10:42 AM by alcibiades_mystery
I keep hearing how oil dependent we are and how higher consumption is driving up prices... I hear how it is adversely affecting 75% of americans, It seems like if that was the case, 75% of americans would cut the amount they use! I know I cant be the only person in america that has drastically cut the amount of fuel I use over the past year. I want to know what everybody has done to use less fuel.
1) I keep hearing how oil dependent we are and how higher consumption is driving up prices - A bit awkward, but nothing grammatically wrong
2) I hear how it is adversely affecting 75% of americans, Given the parallel structure of the previous sentence, the antecedent for the pronoun "it" here is ambiguous, but one would assume that the pronoun refers to "higher consumption" since that was the final element in the series. Inelegant? Sure. But not really that bad. Now, clearly "Americans" - as a proper noun - should be capitalized, and the final punctuation should be a period rather than a comma, but these could easily be typos, and it is a bit much to expect perfect, proofread documents on an internet message board, no?
3) It seems like if that was the case, 75% of americans would cut the amount they use! Obviously, the problem of capitalization at the beginning of the sentence, but this goes further to indicate that the final comma in the previous sentence was a typo. Sentences 2) and 3) would be comma-spliced. Again, "Americans" and continuing problems with antecedents (violation of the given-new contract, really), but overall, nothing major.
4) I know I cant be the only person in america that has drastically cut the amount of fuel I use over the past year. - Should use "who" instead of "that," since the Freeper is referring to a person (him or herself). Otherwise, a perfectly acceptable sentence, if inelegant.
5) I want to know what everybody has done to use less fuel. Nothing wrong with this sentence, structurally. Like the others, it is inelegant and lacks conciseness. It should probably read: "What have you done to reduce your fuel consumption?" but that's neither here nor there.
I find attacks on grammar and spelling online to be a bit silly. Such attacks mistake context: online contexts don't really call for grammatical precision - in the same way that oral discourse is very forgiving on grammatical issues. Online writing, many have argued, constitutes a kind of secondary orality, so attacks on grammar and spelling become tantamount to ad hominem arguments.
|