#1
Here's is an email that I drafted out for my boss. He said that my grammar sucks.

Quote by Me, obviously
We were conducting our outside drill at [removed], and we noticed that the fire safety of the place can be improved. Therefore, I would like to request for a joint inspection with [removed] on Friday, 09/05/2014. Please find the photo documentation and site layout of the area in the attachment.

As mentioned earlier, the company's past records in [removed] shows that their premises are generally okay. They were issued notices in 2008 for staircase obstruction and improper housekeeping, but these were complied with. Therefore, the company has generally been compliant with our notices and should not be considered a recalcitrant offender.


Do I really have bad English? I'm feeling very indignant at the moment because I'm pretty sure that there's nothing wrong with the email I drafted.
#2
Sure, a few little things. Enough to warrant a complaint? Eh, not really, I understood what you were trying to say and frankly that's all that really matters.
#3
Quote by Valience
Sure, a few little things. Enough to warrant a complaint? Eh, not really, I understood what you were trying to say and frankly that's all that really matters.


Could you specify what those are?
My banana senses are failing me here. I could only spot maybe two places where he could've worded better.
BEWARE THE BANANA ARMY.

I SAY, I SAY, BEWARE THE BANANA ARMY.

They say when they finally attack, all the impostors will peel themselves. In order to tell if you have been assimilated, check for a zipper somewhere near your pelvis.


#4
tense agreement in the first sentence. you cant use a gerand and the past tense in the same sentence it is either one or the other.

when you're using therefore it has to be set up as such .... I am dumb; Therefore, I shall fail my classes.
Quote by JacobTheMe
JacobTheEdit: Hell yeah Ruben.

Quote by Jackal58
I met Jesus once. Cocksucker still owes me 20 bucks.
#5
You either make a request for a joint inspection or you request a joint inspection, you don't request for a joint inspection. It's "A request for _____" or "I request a _____." Sounds kinda weird to say it otherwise.

"Fire safety of the place" sounds unprofessional, as does "generally okay".

I personally think "Please find attached the photo documentation and site layout." sounds better than the current order of clauses.

But hey, I ain't your boss
My God, it's full of stars!
#7
Quote by diofan88
tense agreement in the first sentence. you cant use a gerand and the past tense in the same sentence it is either one or the other.
Uh what, you absolutely can.

We were conducting and we noticed. There's no problem there.

when you're using therefore it has to be set up as such .... I am dumb; Therefore, I shall fail my classes.


You don't have to use a semi-colon to use the word therefore.
My God, it's full of stars!
#8
Yeah, your boss sounds like a dick.

Your grammar seems better than most of the people I work with.
Come back if you want to
And remember who you are
‘Cause there's nothing here for you my dear
And everything must pass
#9
Quote by Dreadnought
Uh what, you absolutely can.

We were conducting and we noticed. There's no problem there.


You don't have to use a semi-colon to use the word therefore.


i was taught a bit differently in the sense that you'd revert it all to past tense. i've had it drilled into me that way in college, but to each his own. same with the semi colon, just the way i was taught how to use it and have continued to use it at UCLA w no issues what so ever.
Quote by JacobTheMe
JacobTheEdit: Hell yeah Ruben.

Quote by Jackal58
I met Jesus once. Cocksucker still owes me 20 bucks.
#10
your letter sounds slightly 'bossy' to me.. if there's one thing the boss can't take its being bossed around by his employees..

that and safety of the place the only things i noticed..


did he say it like that? 'your grammar sucks'? because i'm pretty sure you didn't deserve that
Quote by psyks
You are filthy.
#11
We were conducting our outside drill at [removed], and we noticed that the fire safety of the place can be improved. Therefore, I would like to request for a joint inspection with [removed] on Friday, 09/05/2014. Please find the photo documentation and site layout of the area in the attachment.

As mentioned earlier, the company's past records in [removed] shows that their premises are generally okay. They were issued notices in 2008 for staircase obstruction and improper housekeeping, but these were complied with. Therefore, the company has generally been compliant with our notices and should not be considered a recalcitrant offender.


A few thoughts :-

I think the first sentence would read better with 'could' instead of 'can'.

'Generally okay' is informal and is probably too vague in the context of business and fire safety.

Your use of 'complied with' ends the sentence with a preposition, which some old-school grammarians don't like.

You may be using 'therefore' too often. The second instance is certainly superfluous; it does not describe a cause and effect.
#13
In the title you spell grammar with three m's, so yeah it's pretty shit soz brah
#14
To be honest guys, I don't think he's actually looking at what you guys are pointing out. He mentioned that my tenses were everywhere, which I don't think is the case.

Quote by vince1991
did he say it like that? 'your grammar sucks'? because i'm pretty sure you didn't deserve that

He didn't say it word for word, but he said the equivalent in a local slang.

Quote by BossPlayer
In the title you spell grammar with three m's, so yeah it's pretty shit soz brah

#15
okay.. just revert back to 18th century english and consult the pit before sending any more e-mails, not after.

shit will be alright


<<

>>
Quote by psyks
You are filthy.
#17
The only things I have a problem with are the stilted wording and the gratuitous used of "therefore," which are both style and not grammar issues.
#18
The first sentence is badly worded, and "for" ruins the second sentence. Apart from that, it's shit.
#19
There's really no need for the 'for' after 'request'. And by that, I mean it shouldn't be there. You don't request for something. You request something.

Surely you can find a more suitable word than 'okay'.

'... but these were compiled with.' - This makes no sense whatsoever.
Last edited by Jonagorn at May 7, 2014,
#20
Quote by Jonagorn
'... but these were compiled with.' - This makes no sense whatsoever.

The notices.

They were complied with by those they were issued to.
#21
I wouldn't classify it as terrible, but if I were your boss and I was having a bad day I'd probably say the same thing to you
#22
While conducting our outside drill at [removed], we noticed that the facility's fire safety could be improved. I would like to request a joint inspection with [removed] on Friday, 09/05/2014. Please find attached the photo documentation and site layout

Past records in [removed] show the company's premises to be adequate. They were previously issued notices in 2008 for staircase obstruction and improper housekeeping. These issues were addressed and corrected. The company has been compliant with our notices and should not be considered a recalcitrant offender.


Something like ^^^^ that would be better. (I'm certainly no grammarian.)
Last edited by jugglingfreak at May 7, 2014,
#23
TS, this is not the songwriting forum.....
My Soundcloud

My beginner rig:

Epiphone Goth G-400 SG
Line 6 Spider IV (Don't judge me, I was young and stupid)
Stagg SW203N
Yamaha APX500
#24
I think its also worth noting that grammar only has 2 m's, I think I have found your problem, you're making UG's signature error, not proof-reading
#26
Quote by Bad Kharmel
I think its also worth noting that grammar only has 2 m's, I think I have found your problem, you're making UG's signature error, not proof-reading



I think it's ironic I proof-read my UG posts more than any other stuff. It's sad, really.
#28
Well, you're typing how I imagine you would normally talk. That's fine for personal emails, but it's probably bugging your boss.
#29
Quote by Lord_Doku
The notices.

They were complied with by those they were issued to.

It's clearly not finished, like I said, it doesn't make sense. You can't end a sentences with 'with', it needs a direct object after it.
Last edited by Jonagorn at May 7, 2014,
#30
Your boss is correct.

Use of passive voice, marginal word choices etc.

It's technically adequate but stylistically poor.


That being said, I've seen far worse from senior managers and more than a few executives...
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at May 7, 2014,
#31
Quote by triface
We were conducting our outside drill at [removed], and we noticed that the fire safety of the place can could be improved. Therefore, I would like to request for a joint inspection with [removed] on Friday, 09/05/2014. Please find the photo documentation and site layout of the area in the attachment.

As mentioned earlier, the company's past records in [removed] shows that their premises are generally okay. They were issued notices in 2008 for staircase obstruction and improper housekeeping, but these were complied with. Therefore, the company has generally been compliant with our notices and should not be considered a recalcitrant offender.
That's what I noticed to sound wrong. I might have missed something, but I don't think that unless you're supposed to be perfect in grammar, "you suck" is a bit harsh.
Not sure if a sig is a necessity.
#33
Needs, more, commas.

Originally Posted by Me, obviously
We were, conducting, our outside, drill, at [removed], and we, noticed, that the, fire, safety of, the place, can be, improved. Therefore, I would, like to, request, for a, joint inspection, with [removed] on, Friday, 09/05/2014. Please, find the, photo documentation, and site, layout, of the, area in the, attachment.

As mentioned, earlier, the company's, past records in, [removed] shows, that their, premises are, generally okay. They were, issued, notices in 2008, for staircase, obstruction, and improper, housekeeping, but these, were, complied with. Therefore, the company, has generally, been compliant with our, notices, and should not, be considered, a, recalcitrant, offender.



#34
We were conducting our outside drill at [removed], and we noticed that the fire safety of the place can be improved. Therefore, I would like to request for a joint inspection with [removed] on Friday, 09/05/2014. Please find the photo documentation and site layout of the area in the attachment.

As mentioned earlier, the company's past records in [removed] shows that their premises are generally okay. They were issued notices in 2008 for staircase obstruction and improper housekeeping, but these were complied with. Therefore, the company has generally been compliant with our notices and should not be considered a recalcitrant offender.


While conducting our outside drill at ___, we noticed the fire safety at the location could be improved. I request for a joint inspection on 4/20/blazeit. Please find the photo documentation and site layout of the area in the attachment.

As mentioned, the company's record in ____ shows that the premises are not as shitty as your face. THey were issued notices in 2008 for sucking cow dick and improper housekeeping, but these were complied with. The company has been compliant with past notices and should not be considered a grammatically infantile bitch.
This is why I don't like arguing on the internet.
Quote by damian_91
If only you could back that statement up.
Quote by Zombee
Wolfgang's Philadelphia Study. Look it up yourself.
Quote by damian_91
No need to, absurd generalizations aren't my thing.