Alton Towers/Merlin Typos & Grammatical Errors

[Zeock]

I think I might have noticed another one (albeit admittedly a very finicky one) in the Oktoberfest email I received from Alton Towers today:

I’m probably being overly pedantic, but shouldn’t “its family fun and thrilling frights for all” be “it’s family fun and thrilling frights for all”?

You are not being overly pedantic. You are definitely correct.

 

[s_g_k]

I think I might have noticed another one (albeit admittedly a very finicky one) in the Oktoberfest email I received from Alton Towers today:

I’m probably being overly pedantic, but shouldn’t “its family fun and thrilling frights for all” be “it’s family fun and thrilling frights for all”?

Yes it should. It’s is short for it is, so in that sentence, it should definitely be “it’s”.

 

[NuttySquirrel]

I think I might have noticed another one (albeit admittedly a very finicky one) in the Oktoberfest email I received from Alton Towers today:

I’m probably being overly pedantic, but shouldn’t “its family fun and thrilling frights for all” be “it’s family fun and thrilling frights for all”?

Unfortunately Alton Towers' marketing team seem to have made a conscious decision to simply cancel the apostrophe - in a highly misguided attempt to stay relevant. I don't think it's a mistake unfortunately.

Sorry I suppose that should be "its a mistake..."

 

[Zeock]

Unfortunately Alton Towers' marketing team seem to have made a conscious decision to simply cancel the apostrophe - in a highly misguided attempt to stay relevant. I don't think it's a mistake unfortunately.

Sorry I suppose that should be "its a mistake..."

Really? That's a bit stupid from Towers. However, I am pedantic about SPaG, so this will bother me more than most.

 

[rob666]

The voluntary optional apostrophe was raised (and then shot down) by me about a year ago.
The apostrophe is now optional outside the classroom and newspaper style guides.

 

[Squiggs]

Except it's not.

Just because there are people who get it wrong, doesn't make it optional. No matter how many people are getting it wrong.

It's the equivalent of saying the speed limit is optional on the motorway, just because a lot of people speed.

 

[rob666]

We had the same discussion months ago.
I see an awful lot of incorrect use, all the time, and I don't see any grocers being prosecuted, despite the evidence!
It really isn't a crime.
More and more people, organisations and firms are dropping the punctuation mark.
When people lose the ability to spell and check their two/three/four letter word writing fully, the correct use of punctuation falls further down the list.
Wish I could find the original article from one of the sunday big papers.

 

[Zeock]

'Petroleum', not 'Petrolium'.

 

[dave___]

'Petroleum', not 'Petrolium'.

I reckon they’ve gone for the “foreign sounding” spelling with that one

 

[Zeock]

Both of these errors were at LLW.

'Though', not 'Through'.

Incorrect usage of 'it's'.

 

[Dave]

Except it's not.

Just because there are people who get it wrong, doesn't make it optional. No matter how many people are getting it wrong.

It's the equivalent of saying the speed limit is optional on the motorway, just because a lot of people speed.

That assumes language is static which it isn’t. Otherwise the vowels wouldn’t have shifted and English would still have genders.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

I'm convincing myself that "Find Your Fearless" should be "Find You're Fearless". You can't possess fearless, you can possess fearlessness and you can be fearless, which means you are fearless, so you can find you are fearless.

 

[Alastair]

I'm convincing myself that "Find Your Fearless" should be "Find You're Fearless". You can't possess fearless, you can possess fearlessness and you can be fearless, which means you are fearless, so you can find you are fearless.

For once I disagree! Although I agree that pedantically the grammar isn't quite correct here, I think "Find You're Fearless" looks even weirder while the intent of the current incarnation without the apostrophe is quite clear to me.

 

[Alsty]

The whole slogan doesn't make any sense gramatically. I think what they're going for is "fearless" as a noun, to find something within yourself that you didn't know you had, a bit like "your find voice". Except fearless isn't a noun, it's an adjective. Who knows.

 

[jon81uk]

In the context of the slogan they are using fearless as a noun, a state that you can possess, like finding your zen, or your cool, or your swagger, or your inner peace.

Therefore although not historically used as a noun, in this context it should be your and not you're.

 

[Matt N]

I agree with @jon81uk on this one. I took it to mean “finding the fearless version of yourself” or something along those lines.

Adjectives are often used as nouns in that kind of context (for instance, I’ve heard “find your happy” in TV adverts before). It’s not expressly grammatically incorrect, in my view.

 

[Tom]

It’s a bit like “find your inner kid” or something similar.

If it needs explaining or isn’t immediately clear/captivating, it’s a pretty weak slogan. But maybe the general public will get it, and that’s mainly what matters.

 

[Zeock]

Even if it is grammatically correct, it is definitely confusing. I originally thought that they were using 'fearless' as a noun, which is still quite weird in my opinion.

 

[Tom]

Could be quietly dropped, like many Conservative Party slogans over the years.

 

[Alsty]

Anybody want a vegan bra?