Love the sentiment expressed in the top one, but it always irks and embarrasses me when a teacher making a public statement makes a grammar goof. Ugh!!! This woman obviously meant this meme to be as public as possible. Why didn't she take the time to proofread it?
In case you're wondering, it should read "that allow my colleagues and me to know...." How can a person check without cracking open a grammar book? It's simple. You'd never say "allow I." So why in the world would you say "allow my colleagues and I"?
And here's a math goof for you that's just as stupid. On KSL today there's an article about the inversion. It tells us that "more than half" of the pollution is caused by car fumes but that "the other half" is from industrial pollution. Uh, last time I checked out fractions, "more than half" + "half" didn't add up to "whole."
Lisa - let's see, given m = the part of vehicle emissions that is more than half, car emissions = c, and by definition in the article: c= 1/2 + m industrial emissions = i, and by definition in the article: i = 1/2 and that c + i must equal 1, 1 representing the "whole" of the pollution, then
c + i = 1, by c = 1/2 + m:
1/2 + m + i = 1, by i = 1/2:
1/2 + m + 1/2 = 1, by combining the constants:
1 + m = 1, subtract 1 from each side: -1 -1 0 + m = 0, so:
m = 0 and:
c = 1/2 + m = 1/2 + 0 = 1/2 and therefore c cannot be greater than 1/2, or i must be less than 1/2, so we have proof that not only do people (who should know better) have problems with the English language, but also simple mathematics.
3 comments:
Love the sentiment expressed in the top one, but it always irks and embarrasses me when a teacher making a public statement makes a grammar goof. Ugh!!! This woman obviously meant this meme to be as public as possible. Why didn't she take the time to proofread it?
In case you're wondering, it should read "that allow my colleagues and me to know...." How can a person check without cracking open a grammar book? It's simple. You'd never say "allow I." So why in the world would you say "allow my colleagues and I"?
And here's a math goof for you that's just as stupid. On KSL today there's an article about the inversion. It tells us that "more than half" of the pollution is caused by car fumes but that "the other half" is from industrial pollution. Uh, last time I checked out fractions, "more than half" + "half" didn't add up to "whole."
That first one is really good- and of course the other one (how did you know it happened to me!!!) Ha! Ha! Ha! Nah, but it is the cutest ever!
Lisa - let's see, given
m = the part of vehicle emissions that is more than half,
car emissions = c, and by definition in the article: c= 1/2 + m
industrial emissions = i, and by definition in the article: i = 1/2 and that
c + i must equal 1, 1 representing the "whole" of the pollution, then
c + i = 1, by c = 1/2 + m:
1/2 + m + i = 1, by i = 1/2:
1/2 + m + 1/2 = 1, by combining the constants:
1 + m = 1, subtract 1 from each side:
-1 -1
0 + m = 0, so:
m = 0 and:
c = 1/2 + m = 1/2 + 0 = 1/2 and therefore c cannot be greater than 1/2, or i must be less than 1/2, so we have proof that not only do people (who should know better) have problems with the English language, but also simple mathematics.
Post a Comment