If that title made you cringe, you’ll probably agree with most of what I am about to say. If you’re wondering what the fuss is about, then you probably have something to learn, so read on.

In fact, if the title doesn’t bother you, you definitely have something to learn. My 14-year-old kids can manage it. So can you. There are three words in the English language that are arguably homophones (more on that later) and which seem to be misused with regularity by many. Perhaps the arrival of the internet is showing something that has always been there. I believe it’s getting worse.

Their is the possessive form of the personal pronoun they. It is not to be confused with the adverb there which tells you where something is. Now I do not expect many people to know what pronouns, adverbs etc are (though really, most should) and I admit to checking myself on the adverb fact before committing to the page. But I do expect that everyone should know how to use those two words correctly. They are very, very common in our language.

I’m not going to give a lesson here. If you don’t know which is which, go and look them up. While you are at it, check out the following pairs of words:

your, you’re

were, we’re

well, we’ll

I’m sure there are more on the list. These are just the obvious ones. If you are right now defending yourself by saying “I know how to use them but sometimes I just get it wrong” then you need to learn to check your own work. I do. I have to! Here’s one that I know very well how to deal with but often catch (and correct) in my own typing when I’m in full flow.

“There’s plenty more fish in the sea.” should, of course, be “There are plenty more fish in the sea.”

I am sure there are others like that but I cannot think of them at this time.

Hang on, didn’t I say at the start there were three words that get confused? Their, there and what? Well of course I am referring to they’re. But I am of the opinion that it is not a homophone for their or there. Properly enunciated, it is a different sound where the ‘y’ is clearly voiced. Heated arguments during a Pictionary game aside, this failure to understand the true sound of a word, even if enunciated poorly, gives rise to one of the grammar transgressions that most frequently occurs.

You should have learnt in school that should of is not a valid construct in an English sentence. I totally understand that the contraction should’ve leads to this confusion. If you leave it as a contraction nobody will ever notice. Just please do not enunciate of with all the clarity of a prim, upper class English schoolmarm.

I make no claim to have perfect grammar myself. English is a complex language, which is why we should all at least try to get the basics right with regularity, that we might have the time and mental capacity to understand the finer points. These are not fine points. Getting them wrong is simply coarse. Readers please feel free to point out my grammar errors (not including the title, please!) in the comments. It’s the only way I’ll learn.