Diageo Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Since I got Firefox 4, the spell checker stopped working. Any suggestions?
Cube Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Since I got Firefox 4, the spell checker stopped working. Any suggestions? Last time I used Firefox you needed to install a Dictionary/Language Pack to use the spell check. Is that still the case?
Jonnas Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Does the dictionary appear installed when you double click? That's pretty much all I know about mine, they're there when I check my dictionaries
Diageo Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Last time I used Firefox you needed to install a Dictionary/Language Pack to use the spell check. Is that still the case? I don't know, but there's a box in the options that says "Check spelling" and I thought ticking it would be enough, but it isn't, clearly.
EEVILMURRAY Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 And, i'll join Ramar if "lyk" gets in. Can't stand that word either. And "woot" and "smexy".
chairdriver Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 I don't see what's so wrong with <3. It's a symbol just like "I" is, or "A" is. Lol words really well as a word. It's really succinct, and is often more descriptive than "That clip is really funny". I never think of it as "laughing out loud" -- that feels really forced and rigid and shit -- it's definitely its own entity.
ReZourceman Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 But no one actually says lol and omg out loud do they?
EEVILMURRAY Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Lol words really well as a word. It's really succinct, and is often more descriptive than "That clip is really funny". I never think of it as "laughing out loud" -- that feels really forced and rigid and shit -- it's definitely its own entity. But saying "lol" is rigid and shit. You don't say "lol". You actually laugh.
chairdriver Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 But saying "lol" is rigid and shit. I don't believe your opinions though, so...
MoogleViper Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 I don't believe your opinions though, so... What he said was fact.
Cube Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 I don't see what's so wrong with <3. It's wrong because it is less than three.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Jeez, you guys are being old and grumpy. The addition of these words simply reflect how the language is being used. But I guess every generation hates the language of the next. As we laugh at the vocabulary of old people, so will youngsters laugh at our outdated vocabulary.
MoogleViper Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 The addition of these words simply reflect how the language is being used. When was the last time you saw someone use ttyl? Have you ever heard anyone say it?
ReZourceman Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 When was the last time you saw someone use ttyl? Have you ever heard anyone say it? Young'uns say it I believe.
MoogleViper Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Young'uns say it I believe. I'm pretty sure they don't though. Why would they when "cya" is so much easier to type? (And reflects what you actually say.)
chairdriver Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Surely it's more a case of being able to look up the definition of it if you see it written down?
Retro_Link Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Jeez, you guys are being old and grumpy. The addition of these words simply reflect how the language is being used. But I guess every generation hates the language of the next. As we laugh at the vocabulary of old people, so will youngsters laugh at our outdated vocabulary.We then, lets just throw our language over to the chavs and include 'innit' and 'pruk' aswell.
MoogleViper Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 Surely it's more a case of being able to look up the definition of it if you see it written down? But there are loads of much more commonly used initialisations that aren't in the dictionary. FTW for example (which I assume isn't in the dictionary).
chairdriver Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 We then, lets just throw our language over to the chavs and include 'innit' and 'pruk' aswell. How very right-wing... I don't really understand this snobbery. Use words you want to use. I'd prefer to have the option to look up the definition of pruk if I needed to. Language is a living organism. Deal with. I hate the concept of having to appeal to Oxford to check whether a word is proper or not.
heroicjanitor Posted March 28, 2011 Author Posted March 28, 2011 Jeez, you guys are being old and grumpy. I don't mind new words so much as new symbols. Needlessly complicates a language. We have the alphabet we don't need an actual drawing of a heart... Goes against the language in a fundamental way.
Jonnas Posted March 28, 2011 Posted March 28, 2011 But saying "lol" is rigid and shit. You don't say "lol". You actually laugh. Then why don't you type "hahaha"? Besides, most of you are ignoring the fact that "lol" isn't necessarily used in place of a laugh, it is used as a quicker, more flexible alternative for "laugh" ("Man, I lolled so hard", or "That was lol worthy")
Recommended Posts