Grammar and Spelling

[brinzaulsschwul]

jst wt tll all use txt spk no gram

 

[TurkeyWithaSunburn]

jst wt tll all use txt spk no gram

O deer god know!
:biggrin1:

 

[nudeyorker]

My last post too... I would never humiliate someone by pointing out someone's errors in front of others or on the board, but if someone points something out with a degree of diplomacy in an effort to help you and you take issue with it then you are the one being pompous and judgmental. As I said earlier we are judged by the way we speak as well as all of the other issues judgements made in society. Why would anyone not want to be seen in the best possible light?

 

[Incocknito]

My view is:

I cannot respect or take seriously someone who writes poorly in the context of a serious discussion or debate.

It's not just that *I* cannot. The fact is that very few people will be inclined to a) read and b) seriously consider a poorly written piece of writing.

And my last post was my last post in response to mitchymo.

The truth is that I feel sorry for people who can't write properly. I am quite sure that if you took a proper look at mitchymo's posts he would be quoted and replied to (in a serious manner) far less than someone who is more verbose and literally "correct".

Although I mention mitchymo I am not limiting the scope to just him. There are many people who can't write at a certain "average" level.

submissivegirl: Yes, you are far from Perfect. But I can always jump on a plane.

See what I did there?

But seriously: it's late and I need to go to bed.

 

[DaveyR]

My last post too... I would never humiliate someone by pointing out someone's errors in front of others or on the board, but if someone points something out with a degree of diplomacy in an effort to help you and you take issue with it then you are the one being pompous and judgmental. As I said earlier we are judged by the way we speak as well as all of the other issues judgements are made in society. Why would anyone not want to be seen in the best possible light?

Well said.

I would never ever dismiss a post because of bad spelling or grammar.

I've known some extremely successful business men/women who would just about struggle to write their names. Nicer, genuine, more down to earth people you could never meet. Academically they struggle but common sense wise and business savvy they come into their own.

I've also known some academics who can runs rings round most people both verbally and with the written word. They've done fuck all that I see constructive with their lives though and see themselves as superior simply because they can communicate effectively and comfortably than most others.

Ignore the typos and poor grammar. Look beyond all that and read the real words behind posts. Most are a revelation :smile:

 

[petite]

Well said.

I would never ever dismiss a post because of bad spelling or grammar.

I've known some extremely successful business men/women who would just about struggle to write their names. Nicer, genuine, more down to earth people you could never meet. Academically they struggle but common sense wise and business savvy they come into their own.

I've also known some academics who can runs rings round most people both verbally and with the written word. They've done fuck all that I see constructive with their lives though and see themselves as superior simply because they can communicate effectively and comfortably than most others.

This expresses how I feel.

I am not persuaded by florid prose and a large vocabulary. I don't think knowledge and accurate practice of proper grammar and perfect spelling makes a person more educated or their opinions more valid, it just makes him more fastidious.

It is a pet peeve of mine when someone suggests that another person's argument merits no consideration if that person has made spelling or grammatical errors, or that a person who cannot spell must be uneducated or stupid. It's simply not true, and it is usually a petty complaint that sidesteps the actual matter under discussion.

I know several people who cannot spell at all who happen to also have extremely high IQs and challenging careers wherein they have become very successful, despite the handicap of not knowing whether "definately" should be spelled "definitely." I know many more people who can spell perfectly but who are not nearly as intelligent, creative, or insightful.

Ignore the typos and poor grammar. Look beyond all that and read the real words behind posts. Most are a revelation :smile:

I couldn't have said it better.

 

[BIGBULL29]

There is someone here who is quite well-liked who really insulted my intelligence a year or two before leaving the site for a while. He has a lot of intellectual and physical insecurities.

I don't think LPSG is really the place for correcting grammatical and spelling errors. Although those things are very important for clear expression of ideas, we aren't at the university, the journalist's office, etc. People take great offense to those corrections outside of the classroom (I do, and I have a MA in linguistics). Plus, the world is very anti-intellectual today, despite more kids going to university than ever (how ironic!).

The world is about money and convenience. People aren't interested in learning unless it betters their lives somehow: more money, better medical treatments, faster computers, etc. That's the way she is today. Learning for learning's sake is plain old silly in our modern world (wow, the Puritans really got their "practical" way in 2010:biggrin1.

 

[Mr. Snakey]

I have posted behind whom i considered the best and brightest on here. Spelling a word, and seeing they spelled a word different than i did. So i would change my spelling because they must be right. Well, they were wrong. This has happened countless times. I did not have time when i was a kid to get a proper education. Or at least what i consider a proper one. So i set off on what has become a wonderful journey for me. I have a lust for life other men my age haven't. Every day i try to learn something new. If not i consider it a wasted day. I am currently reading 3 books at the same time. When i get bored with one i go back to one of the others. Its wonderful for the mind and so much fun. It only bothers me if i spell something wrong. Not if others do. We focus too much on grammar and spelling when it comes to judging a person. My best friend is from Naples Italy. His father gave him $500.00 and sent him to America. His father knew he was too kind hearted and good natured to fit in the business his family were into. That was about 25 years ago. Toady he is retired and worth millions. He started his own (honest) business and retired. He cannot read or write. Other than his name and a few words. I got a phone call from him. He wanted to get a part time job to keep busy. He asked if i would fill out the application for him, as he cannot read or write. I was more than happy too. So there i sat on a computer at the nearby Walmart. He got the job. He came by Memorial Day with some Cuban cigars for me.

 

[HazelGod]

Those rules usually work, but what about "fewer miles?" It seems to me that miles are measured rather than counted, but somehow "less miles" doesn't sound right.

Distance is measured, but discrete units of distance (miles, inches, etc.) are counted. So one would say less distance, but fewer miles.

Another situation that trips people up is determining subject/verb agreement when the subject uses a collective singular or a fraction of a whole, such as a percentage.

 

[slurper_la]

^ you used the correct "discrete" (another pet peeve of mine)

if only I could find you so agreeable in the politics forum :tongue:

 

[Viking_UK]

Well said.

I would never ever dismiss a post because of bad spelling or grammar.

I've known some extremely successful business men/women who would just about struggle to write their names. Nicer, genuine, more down to earth people you could never meet. Academically they struggle but common sense wise and business savvy they come into their own.

I've also known some academics who can runs rings round most people both verbally and with the written word. They've done fuck all that I see constructive with their lives though and see themselves as superior simply because they can communicate effectively and comfortably than most others.

Ignore the typos and poor grammar. Look beyond all that and read the real words behind posts. Most are a revelation :smile:

Yup, spot on, mate.
I have some clients like the academics you describe, who use flowery language to disguise the fact that they're not really saying anything of substance. They aim to distract and to obfuscate by use of long and unfamiliar words. It's the literary equivalent of sleight of hand. The linguist in me can appreciate it up to a point, because using language well is an art in itself, but it really grates on my scientific side, which prefers precise, concise, unambiguous statements.

By the same token, I also work for people who aren't very good at expressing themselves, and while that side of the job can be more challenging, it can also be very rewarding. Those clients also tend to appreciate what I do more than the flowery ones whose prose I decimate.

My real bugbear is people using words incorrectly, especially when they're trying to make themselves seem more intelligent or more important. The usual culprits for this are coppers. It's bad enough watching them on TV, but have you ever read a police report? Some of them are just laughable!

I can understand where Incocknito's coming from when he says he finds it hard to respect people who don't use language properly, but I don't think you can dismiss someone out of hand because they're not well educated or have poor linguistic skills. A lot of the time, the ideas are in there, but they just have trouble expressing them. There are a few posters on here whose posts are difficult to read, and which I often have to re-read to make sure I've understood them, but they're worth the trouble. There are other posters whose posts are just as hard to read but definitely aren't worth bothering with. It's just a case of figuring out whose posts merit the effort.

 

[798686]

I'm with Petite, Nudey and Cunning on this one. Who gives a shit as long as you understand the meaning?

It's helpful to know the basic rules (which you can then break with impunity) but it's not everyone's forte, so what ya gna do?

 

[Incocknito]

I just want to point out that what I said about a poorly written piece vs an at least competently written piece is a fact. It's not my opinion. And I am not saying it to be mean or dismissive or anything negative. My posts here have been (at least intended as) informational.

Even if it's true that a handful of you really take onboard badly written posts (in the context of a debate or discussion), the majority of people don't. Because the majority of people want to read something that is comprehensible.

If a reader has to struggle to understand an article in a newspaper, he is less likely to finish reading that article and thererfore the entire newspaper. One way newspapers try to encourage people to continue reading is to break the stories up into small paragraphs as opposed to large paragraphs which sometimes can look like daunting "walls of text". The words used are generally short and simple to understand.

Likewise if someone starts reading you the news in a scouse accent most people are less inclined to trust or take seriously that person. Whereas a newsreader speaking in perfect "Queen's English" is simply by association and the connotations of proper parlance more trustworthy/believable.

These are just facts of language. I am only pointing them out in the hope that some of you will put a little more effort into your writings (in the context of a debate or discussion, remember).

And I'm quite sure Nudeyorker was on my side.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

I just want to point out that what I said about a poorly written piece vs an at least competently written piece is a fact. It's not my opinion. And I am not saying it to be mean or dismissive or anything negative. My posts here have been (at least intended as) informational.

Obviously true.

And I'm quite sure Nudeyorker was on my side.

Of course he was. As was I.

 

[flame boy]

As I see it, if someone takes the time to be polite and point out an error to you - it's done out of respect. I wouldn't chastise someone for simply showing me the mistake I've made and how to correct it. If they did in public i'd be a little bit embarrassed but it's not the end of the world.

I know how grateful I was when Hhuck helped me out in the past with a few itty-bitty-ditties I've screwed up with either prose or grammar and I've been nothing but thankful for his help.

I do agree however that there is a difference between a one off typo and a continued writing error. It doesn't change what is being said, this is true, but it does change how others perceive what is being written. Ultimately it doesn't matter, but it's nice when people show they care.

Anyone else reminded of this? :tongue:

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

I just want to point out that what I said about a poorly written piece vs an at least competently written piece is a fact. It's not my opinion. And I am not saying it to be mean or dismissive or anything negative. My posts here have been (at least intended as) informational.

Oh come now, simply calling something a fact does not make it one. It's at least clear that some, indeed quite a few who've posted in this thread don't take quite such an uncompromising view on poor writing as you do, that surely disproves your contention no?

Even if it's true that a handful of you really take onboard badly written posts (in the context of a debate or discussion), the majority of people don't. Because the majority of people want to read something that is comprehensible.

You can call it "a handful" for rhetorical purposes but really you're speculating on proportions to prove a point. I could just as easily call it "several" or "more than just a few" or some other suitably useful quantity.

There's a reasonable degree of latitude between what is comprehensible and what is incomprehensible, I think within that latitude one's willingness to read on depends on things like content, intention, the likability of the writer, the nature of the discussion, and a broad range of other variables. Ultimately this makes generalisation about what people are prepared to read and what they're not prepared to read somewhat vague and probably also rather subjective.

If a reader has to struggle to understand an article in a newspaper, he is less likely to finish reading that article and thererfore the entire newspaper. One way newspapers try to encourage people to continue reading is to break the stories up into small paragraphs as opposed to large paragraphs which sometimes can look like daunting "walls of text". The words used are generally short and simple to understand.

Newspaper English is hardly a good model though. Indeed purists excoriate on the appalling influence Newspapers have had and site them as a cause for a proposed decline in the standards of modern written English, and you might say that the laziness of the reader is hardly an impetus to good writing. It's worth remembering that many see Newspaper English as the nadir of the written form.

Likewise if someone starts reading you the news in a scouse accent most people are less inclined to trust or take seriously that person. Whereas a newsreader speaking in perfect "Queen's English" is simply by association and the connotations of proper parlance more trustworthy/believable.

That's highly disputable. The BBC, Advertising companies, and others have done a good deal of research in to viewer/listener response to regional accents, the results are surprising actually. Northern English accents are often associated with honesty, clarity and plain speaking, the degree of this response seeming to increase as one goes further north, ending in Scotland whose accents are often used to advertise Banking and Financial services due to the (granted somewhat clichéd) association with prudence and parsimony as well as honesty etc.

Contrastingly "posh" accents and southern English accents often have connotations of dishonesty and condescension which listeners respond to less well.

And then there are regional variations in response to different regional accents which put grand generalisation even further beyond reach.

My point being that accents are a complicated area to make broad judgements about. As is reader response to "poorly" written English.

These are just facts of language. I am only pointing them out in the hope that some of you will put a little more effort into your writings (in the context of a debate or discussion, remember).

And I'm quite sure Nudeyorker was on my side.

Again, making some rather broad and extremely contentious and highly personal generalisations regarding what you think other people are willing to read, or how you presume others respond to certain things does not constitute a disquisition on the "facts of language", as you describe them.

 

[HiddenLacey]

*snip*

Anyone else reminded of this? :tongue:

That's it I'm ordering the t-shirt today:tongue: The next time I go to NY I'm just going to point to my t-shirt when someone doesn't understand me. Of course I'll also wear a hat that says I'm from the dirty south, please forgive my accent.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

I know how grateful I was when Hhuck helped me out in the past with a few itty-bitty-ditties I've screwed up with either prose or grammar and I've been nothing but thankful for his help.

Thank you, flamey.
But mitchymo is a different sort.
I think he should whoever traumatized him out to the woodshed and give them a good pHhucking.
Don't you?:tongue:

 

[dreamer20]

bigbull29 vs bigbull29:

.

I don't think LPSG is really the place for correcting grammatical and spelling errors. Although those things are very important for clear expression of ideas, we aren't at the university, the journalist's office, etc...

...the guys that we tortured at Abu Ghraib were not terrorists.

The guys whom we tortured

The word "guys" is a colloquialism; the word "whom" belongs strictly to formal prose; to combine the two words in one phrase is incompetent writing. What I wrote, "the guys that we tortured," was both correct colloquial English and good style. Your would-be correction is crap.

:biggrin1:

 

[B_VinylBoy]

I have some clients like the academics you describe, who use flowery language to disguise the fact that they're not really saying anything of substance. They aim to distract and to obfuscate by use of long and unfamiliar words.

That's one of my biggest gripes as well. Or worse, trying to use sophisticated scribe to convey a rather hateful thought like it's supposed to make it less severe. Although I think we've all taken shots at someone for a typo or wrong use of a word, most spelling and grammatical errors on a message board can be easily excused. But I will say it's extremely ironic and comical when someone talks about their intellect on a post, and the very statement they make is saturated with them.