EVE Search - Spelling Mistake When Enlisting For A Faction

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Issues, Workarounds & Localization

Spelling Mistake When Enlisting For A Faction

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
ViRUS Pottage R.U.S.T. G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.06.11 15:58:00 - [1] Edited by: ViRUS Pottage on 11/06/2008 15:58:35 Tried to enlist for the Gallente faction today and found that it didnt make sense.. Quote: Before you enlist with the Federal Defence Union, you need to be aware of some of the consequences of this choice. Please read the following carefully! You will be at war with our enemy's militia Entering enemy-controlled high-security space WILL RESULT IN YOUR BEING ATTACKED by the powerful navies of that faction Result in your being attacked... thats not right is it? Or is it me being half asleep
Prisoner 257 Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.06.11 16:03:00 - [2] uh that is correct spelling.. and it is correct grammar as well.
Knowla	Posted - 2008.06.11 16:06:00 - [3] Originally by: Prisoner 257 uh that is correct spelling.. and it is correct grammar as well. No. It is not.
WARTECH TYCOON	Posted - 2008.06.11 16:22:00 - [4] Spelling and grammar check showed it to be INCORRECT.
achoura	Posted - 2008.06.11 16:47:00 - [5] If you're relying on spell checks then how would you know what's correct and incorrect, only what the program tells you It is wrong though . *The EVE servers and their patches*
Morgan Lorus Aki'na Mining Corp The Omni Federation	Posted - 2008.06.11 17:59:00 - [6] WILL R_SULT IN YOUR_ B_ING ATTACK_D Ill buy an E.
brakespear Wayward Brewing	Posted - 2008.06.11 19:37:00 - [7] looks correct to me
Blev Oblix Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.11 21:20:00 - [8] For those who think there should be an e at the end of "your" - there ain't no such word. Unless you add an apostrophe which takes it to "you're" which is an abbreviation of "you are" which changes the sentence to Entering enemy-controlled high-security space WILL RESULT IN YOU ARE BEING ATTACKED by the powerful navies of that faction which is gibberish. The original sentence is perfectly fine.
Promytheus	Posted - 2008.06.11 21:40:00 - [9] This is perfectly fine english. It seems awkward because this type of sentence is normally said aloud, and is an odd structure for written language, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.
Hiywan	Posted - 2008.06.11 22:40:00 - [10] Quote: This is perfectly fine english. It seems awkward because this type of sentence is normally said aloud, and is an odd structure for written language, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. This, the sentence is fine and I can only weep at the person who suggested it should be "you're". In fact I weep at all of you, stop playing the internets so much and read a book

Pardit Lastor	Posted - 2008.06.12 01:50:00 - [11] Originally by: Blev Oblix For those who think there should be an e at the end of "your" - there ain't no such word. Unless you add an apostrophe which takes it to "you're" which is an abbreviation of "you are" which changes the sentence to Entering enemy-controlled high-security space WILL RESULT IN YOU ARE BEING ATTACKED by the powerful navies of that faction which is gibberish. The original sentence is perfectly fine. You are one to talk, AIN'T isn't a word either. Neither is Y'ALL or MAMOTHERISMASISTER
ViRUS Pottage R.U.S.T. G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.06.12 09:28:00 - [12] Nah. It should be either Will result in YOU being attacked. Will result in your SHIP/VESSEL being attacked. YOUR does not fit into that sentance. Atleast i'm almost sure it doesn't. ---------------------------------
Blev Oblix Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.12 11:17:00 - [13] Originally by: Pardit Lastor You are one to talk, AIN'T isn't a word either. Unfortunately for your argument (whatever it may be), all of the published references on the English language that I checked confirm it as a fully recognised word - not polite or "standard" but a word available for use in modern English. I repeat, the original sentence is perfectly fine. As another correspondent has pointed out, this construction is probably more common in speech.
Prisoner 257 Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.06.12 12:56:00 - [14] me speek guud inglisch.. Yes CCP could have input the sentence as your ship/vessel or You being attacked (which almost sounds as awkward). BUT YOUR is correct in spelling, it just sounds awkward when read instead of spoken aloud. putting in the 're at the end would result in YOU ARE being attacked by... youre is not a word yore is a word but not applicable in this scenario.

CCP Tanis.	Posted - 2008.06.12 15:00:00 - [15] a bug report should be enough to ensure this info gets to the right guy and ensure that it doesn't get lost int eh flood of forum posts. ____________________________ I break things. Tanis. Testing Lead EVE Online CCP Games "GM Voodoo > That plan really straddles the fine line between genius and idiocy." "CCP Tanis. > And that differs from everything else I do how?"

Slickdrac JET FORCE Ka-Tet	Posted - 2008.06.12 23:11:00 - [16] Originally by: CCP Tanis. a bug report should be enough to ensure this info gets to the right guy and ensure that it doesn't get lost int eh flood of forum posts. I see what you did there. Seriously people, say it aloud, it's correct English. I second the guy who said to read a book. I suck at forums
MotoMissles Rim Collection RC Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2008.06.13 04:38:00 - [17] Edited by: MotoMissles on 13/06/2008 04:38:05 The original sentence is grammatically correct. I might suggest changing it though to avoid having this argument repeatedly. Entering enemy-controlled high-security space will result in an attack on you by the powerful navy of that faction. Notice 'navy' becomes singular, as there is really only one navy per faction.
Knowla	Posted - 2008.06.13 09:55:00 - [18] Afaik the op did not suggest Youre. Just pointed out the error. Which it is it SHOULD be "... will result in you being attacked... -- Everyone is someone elses wierdo.
El Yatta Mercenary Forces	Posted - 2008.06.13 13:05:00 - [19] Edited by: El Yatta on 13/06/2008 13:07:23 Edited by: El Yatta on 13/06/2008 13:06:56 Originally by: Knowla Afaik the op did not suggest Youre. Just pointed out the error. Which it is it SHOULD be "... will result in you being attacked... Originally by: ViRUS Pottage Nah. It should be either Will result in YOU being attacked. Will result in your SHIP/VESSEL being attacked. YOUR does not fit into that sentance. Atleast i'm almost sure it doesn't. No, it isn't wrong. It DOES fit in. Your is perfectly valid in the original quote. Its less usual to WRITE it that way as opposed to saying it, but it IS valid. It is the pronoun of the second person, in the nominative, dative, and objective case, indicating the person or persons addressed. Ie. in this case, it is referring to the person being adressed (you). Please do NOT bug report this, just wasting CCPs time over a spelling error perceived only by those who cannot spell.
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.13 13:49:00 - [20] Originally by: ViRUS Pottage Nah. It should be either Will result in YOU being attacked. Will result in your SHIP/VESSEL being attacked. YOUR does not fit into that sentance. Atleast i'm almost sure it doesn't. /signed. If we analyse the sentence, we can find no subject, since YOUR is not a noun, or an adjectif. It is either YOUR (SHIP implied, and should be written) or YOU (the subject, or as we teach small kids, the person where the action of the verb takes place)

Promytheus	Posted - 2008.06.13 15:48:00 - [21] Edited by: Promytheus on 13/06/2008 15:52:37 Originally by: Bruce Deorum If we analyse the sentence, we can find no subject, since YOUR is not a noun, or an adjectif. It is either YOUR (SHIP implied, and should be written) or YOU (the subject, or as we teach small kids, the person where the action of the verb takes place) Sure, let's all take spelling lessons from someone who can't spell in more common situations :) Secondly, in declarative statements, such as this one, there doesn't have to be a subject. The subject is implied as the environmental context of the sentence, in this case declaring a property of you (the receiver of the comment) as clarifying the results of a possible action you may take. Consider the sentences "There's no such thing as ghosts," or "There is no spoon," or "When smelling methane, it is frequently the case that a flatus was emitted nearby." All of these sentences have an indirect object, namely ghosts, spoons, and flatus respectively, and a subject, the first two being life/the universe or your belief's equivalent, the third being the person smelling the fart. (The third sentence could also be reworded to make the generator of the flatus the subject and the smeller the indirect object if one was so inclined.) In the case of the sentence in question, the subject is you, as you are the one being addressed by the sentence. If you have ever been a programmer, this is similar to calling a variable that is not locally defined: it defaults to the value in the enclosing environment, and so on recursively. Finally, consider rephrasing the sentence by simply replacing "being attacked" with "death", which are both simply state changes, and being of the same language form are thus technically replaceable. "Entering enemy-controlled high-security space WILL RESULT IN YOUR DEATH by[at the hands of] the powerful navies of that faction." ___________________________________________________ (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.13 17:02:00 - [22] Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 13/06/2008 17:11:23 Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 13/06/2008 17:04:41 I am not a native speaker, thus i excuse myself some - minor i hope - spelling mistakes. But when i was taught english, i approached the language the formal way meaning traditional grammar rules, sentence structure etc. Anyway this is not the point. I agree with what u say. But you actually agree with me. The fact is that the current sentence doesnt say YOUR DEATH (that would be ok) but YOUR BEING ATTACKED. Semantically same phrases are not equal in all aspects, when we have a verb we need (or we may imply if it is strongly suggested by context) a subject. Instead of YOUR, YOURSELF being attacked would be much much better. PS. There is a spoon = A spoon exists. ( the spoon is the subject who said no subject existed...) the verb [TO BE] in this case is not transitive (it needs no object). The subject is not always followed by verb. PS2. What were my spelling mistakes? Cheers.
Promytheus	Posted - 2008.06.13 19:27:00 - [23] Edited by: Promytheus on 13/06/2008 19:30:43 Originally by: Bruce Deorum Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 13/06/2008 17:11:23 Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 13/06/2008 17:04:41 I am not a native speaker, thus i excuse myself some - minor i hope - spelling mistakes. But when i was taught english, i approached the language the formal way meaning traditional grammar rules, sentence structure etc. Anyway this is not the point. I agree with what u say. But you actually agree with me. The fact is that the current sentence doesnt say YOUR DEATH (that would be ok) but YOUR BEING ATTACKED. Semantically same phrases are not equal in all aspects, when we have a verb we need (or we may imply if it is strongly suggested by context) a subject. Instead of YOUR, YOURSELF being attacked would be much much better. PS. There is a spoon = A spoon exists. ( the spoon is the subject who said no subject existed...) the verb [TO BE] in this case is not transitive (it needs no object). The subject is not always followed by verb. PS2. What were my spelling mistakes? Cheers. Analyse = Analyze, Adjectif = Adjective. From this past post: Doesnt = Doesn't Rewording declarative statements to static statements doesn't technically change their meaning, but it very significantly changes the contexts in which they are used. Thus, you cannot simply declare that "There is no spoon" == "[No] spoon exists" (to adapt back to my original example.) The verb to be is not typically considered a transitive verb because one of its arguments almost always defaults to the entity that might be described as "rl". Saying that something exists does, however, require two arguments, an object to be describing and an environment in which the statement is valid. This was essentially the entire point of my post, which seems to have been misplaced. Neither "death" NOR "being attacked" are verbs. They are state declarations. Think of them as variables that belong to the environment in which they are contained. Now consider the statement "Your table is brown." This statement would create or modify a variable local to the subject (you, as the recipient of the 2nd-person statement) called "table" which contains the value "brown". Similarly, according to the statement in question, "Entering enemy-controlled high-security space WILL RESULT IN YOUR BEING ATTACKED by the powerful navies of that faction," the variable "BEING ATTACKED" is declared in the environment of the subject (the reader of this message) and the non-nullified statement "WILL RESULT" is signifying that this is a boolean value of true (assuming you have met the prerequisites of the clause, namely completing the action of "Entering enemy-controlled high-security space". I hope this is more clear than my previous post. P.S. Mozilla Firefox has a built-in spellchecker. Although you need to be somewhat careful to avoid becoming dependent on it as an alternative to knowing how to spell, for someone who doesn't natively speak English I would highly recommend it, not to mention it's an amazing browser in general ___________________________________________________ (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.13 19:53:00 - [24] Lets simplify this a little bit, 'cause its really getting too complicated. YOUR (your what, your hat, your ship, your mother, your brother-your what?) being attacked. [YOUR] alone as a word doesnt exist. It always refers to smth, like your [noun] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/your If you can find a dictionary that can indicate otherwise, i would be glad to check it. Yourself being attacked would be fine, you being attacked would be fine, but YOUR being attacked means nothing. YOUR as a word (if it has no possessive meaning) doesnt exist.
Promytheus	Posted - 2008.06.13 20:03:00 - [25] If you don't feel like reading the posts I already wrote about how the definition you just presented works perfectly well in the context provided, that's fine, but I'm not going to retype it. If the reasoning is too complicated for you, you probably shouldn't be trying to argue a point. ___________________________________________________ (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.13 21:10:00 - [26] Arghh, dont turn this into a flame, i can only add that i carefully read and understood (hopefully) your post. There is no such use for [YOUR]. I rest my case, let some other pilot post his toughts. Fly safe.
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.13 21:12:00 - [27] Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 13/06/2008 21:13:12 Originally by: Bruce Deorum Arghh, dont turn this into a flame, i can only add that i carefully read and understood (hopefully) your post. There is no such use for [YOUR]. I rest my case, let some other pilot post his toughts. Fly safe. EDIT PS. By the way do you know what your name means, what is the etymology for this word, its origins, and the story behind it? (dont google it up ... :-P ) LOL confused edit with quote... where is the delete button...
Promytheus	Posted - 2008.06.13 21:14:00 - [28] Edited by: Promytheus on 13/06/2008 21:14:23 Indeed. Prometheus was the titan who stole fire from Olympus to give to the humans on earth. Unfortunately, when I created this character several years ago, it did not occur to me to verify the spelling of his name ___________________________________________________ (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination
Blev Oblix Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.14 00:14:00 - [29] Yes, some wonderfully grand theorising about the English language. Such a pity it's just theory. The problem is that the theory and practice of the English language often diverge. As a native English speaker (that's English in England, not American English or Australian English or any other variety of English), that sentence is easily understood and acceptable in English as she is spoken and writ.
Bruce Deorum Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.14 05:56:00 - [30] Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 14/06/2008 05:59:00 these are not grand theories my friend. And trust me, the fact that you are a native speaker (thus not having to learn all the theory behind your language in order to speak, read and write it) doesnt make you invulnurable. would i speak, lol this is total ubersome,cmon lads lets get outta here, thats understood also. IMHO whoever says the sentence is fine (and here lies the confusing point)confuses written with spoken language, which are (or should be) different. If i say, he walk down the street (instead of he walkS) is also understood, isn't it? Written language should (for good or bad) stick to theory, its only the spoken language that diverges. I said i wouldnt speak further but i couldnt help it. And since you all pose arguments (that i am a native speaker so my opinion counts more than yours (lol i used the Y word, let me say that i've been studying english linquistics for 4 years. (semantics, pragmatics, phonology, etc... ) I want a dictionary that in the uses of the words YOURS has a similar example. a non-possessive use of the word. Please find me one and i will give you 10m isk. lol



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.