<p>That source hardly merits consideration <a href="1a">(referring to the reply to my post.)</a></p>
<p>The source is the same one <a href="2">which</a> writes that the form <a href="3a,%20b">'brung,'</a> <a href="5"></a><a href="4">as in,</a> the past tense of 'bring' is <a href="6">OK</a> as well <a href="1b">(they note that highly educated speakers use the term, but it is not standard in formal writing.)</a></p>
<p>Here is where my opinion differs from that of Bartleby's: By referring to <a href="8">someone as a </a><a href="7">highly-educated speaker</a>, I am noting that their speech sounds nearly identical to <a href="8">their</a> <a href="3b">'formal writing.'</a> In a perfect world, there would be no distinction between spoken and written grammar whatsoever.</p>
<p>My point is, if <a href="11">one's goal is </a><a href="9">to simply get by</a> with the English language, meeting the mark of coherence, college may not be the best place for <a href="10">him/her</a>.</p>
<p>1a: Since the words inside the parentheses are a phrase, the period should go outside the parentheses.
1b: This is an independent clause within the parentheses, and thus, the period should go inside the parentheses. In addition, there should be a period after "as well" and "they" should be capitalized.
2: The relative clause beginning with "which" is a nonrestrictive clause and therefore should begin with "that." (This is the rule, but in reality, using "which" for a restrictive clause is very common and is acceptable.)
3a: Double quotation marks should be used rather than single quotation marks, unless you are following British grammar and usage. But if so:
3b: Whereas American grammar dictates that commas should always be placed inside quotation marks, British grammar requires that the comma be placed outside the quotation marks.
4: There should not be a comma after "as in."
5: There should be a comma after "bring" because you have a comma after "brung," thus indicating that you have a nonrestrictive appositive.
6: Since you're talking about speech being equivalent to formal writing, "OK" obviously does not belong.
7: "Highly-educated" does not need to be hyphenated. You should hyphenate words such as "well-dressed," "ill-prepared," or "better-designed" when they precede the noun. However, they are not hyphenated when they follow the noun. In addition, adverbs that end in -ly are never hyphenated. (This is a paraphrase of what the MLA handbook says, by the way.)
8: Since you've used "someone," which is a singular noun, you also need a singular possessive adjective, which would be "his." I don't follow this rule all the time, but formal writing requires one to be more stringent.
9: A split infinitive is a no-no in formal writing. There is no logical reason why you shouldn't use a split infinitive, since this rule is based on Latin grammar, where it's impossible to split an infinitive, but the rule in formal writing is to avoid it.
10: Using "him/her" is both technical and lazy and should be avoided. You could easily replace this with "him or her," but see below:
11: Since you used "one's," the proper pronoun to use at the end of the sentence should be "one," not "him/her" or any other variant. (There is some disagreement about this rule. Some say that using "him" or "her" is acceptable, while others say that only "one" is acceptable. Personally, I see nothing wrong with using "him," and that's my preference, but this is a rule you should know about when writing.)</p>
<p>You should have at least heard of "profligate" (excessive), as in "profligate spending," for example. I think "profligate" is a fairly common word used in writing, especially in news reports and such. "Verboten" is a German word meaning "forbidden." I've never heard of this word used in speech, and I would usually use "forbidden" anyway. However, "verboten" has a connotation of "fobidden by authority," (e.g., "Bible study was encouraged, while dancing was verboten in Puritan society.") which is not found in just "forbidden." "Riparian" (relating to a riverbank, e.g., "riparian woodlands") is a word I have never heard in speech or seen in writing, although I do know this word. (This happens with many words; I would never use "anon," for example.</p>
<p>Formal writing and everyday speech will never be the same because all words have connotations. There are many words that will be used only in writing because they are seen as being too formal; using them in everyday speech would be seen as pretentious. I could say, "At seven in the evening, I go for my everyday stroll." Compare that with, "At seven in the evening, I go for my quotidian perambulation." Other words will be used in writing but not in speech because they are archaic, such as "anon." You'll find that in general, Latinate words have connotations of being formal, pretentious, educated, etc., whereas Germanic words have connotations of being visceral, simple, down-to-earth, etc. Compare "everyday stroll" with "quotidian perambulation" above, or something like "He killed himself" versus "He committed suicide."</p>