ENGLISH, GRAMMAR & ACTION

[Guest random]

I lifted the paragraph below from another thread. I felt it was too important to ignore yet hidden away in the wrong thread. I should point out I'm guilty of what the author, Triatan, comments about. And I agree completely with him (for those where English is their first language). Little gesture like LOL are cool with me but someone who no longer spell the word "probably" using the Net shorthand of "prolly" or "address" using the Net shorthand of "addy" should be banned from the Internet in my opinion ... yikes IMHO

 

"Those of us who grew up learning spelling and grammar prior to the advent of computers in the schools have a responsibility to try to preserve the English language. The lack of knowledge of spelling and grammar on the Internet is appalling. It's not just a matter of typos. People really think that they are using correct English! So excuse me if now and then I (and others) can't resist correcting the abominable English that has run rampant on the Net and is becoming the norm. Eventually there won't be anyone alive who knows English at all!!!!!!!" Tristan

[guptasa1]

I consider myself to use pretty good grammar and spelling in my posts. Nevertheless, I do use the term "prolly" sometimes, not because I don't know how to spell "probably", but because I like the way it sounds (I think it's kind of cute.) and it gives off a more casual vibe so to speak. *shrugs* Just like most things on a forum, I think this is a very subjective matter.

[Prime Muscle]

"Eventually there won't be anyone alive who knows English at all!!!!!!!"

 

 

Just one quick question regarding the the individual that made this prediction -- is he the same dude that predicited the world would end with Y2K?

[Guest Tristan]

>Just one quick question regarding the the individual that made

>this prediction -- is he the same dude that predicited the

>world would end with Y2K?

 

Ironic that your sarcastic reply spells predicted as "predicited"!

 

That aside, it's a fact, not a prediction, that most people who grew up with computers get an F for their English. I said most, not all. You not only see it on the Net. It's all ovet the media. The people writing the captions and the ticker streams on the tube are the same people. Ten years ago, you infrequently saw a spelling error on the tube. Today, even on the national media, such as CNN or NBC, misspelled words are rampant. Why? The people who grew up without learning English are now employed writing this stuff. Just yesterday, the ticker on CNN said that health officials are asking people to "say" in their homes. Nobody at CNN probably even noticed. The same mistake was made on CNN a few hours later in a different context. Etc. etc. etc.

 

The problem is here now and getting worse. Saying that eventually there will be nobody left who knows English is in no way analogous to predicting the end of the world. On the other hand, it is analogous to saying that eventually nobody will be buying VHS tapes. In both cases, the trends are here and crystal clear.

 

Regards,

 

Nostradamus

[seaboy4hire]

OMG! Please Mary. Many of us use abverations of words cause well maybe someone doesn't type well or does not have a dictionary around to look up the spelling of a word. No one is perfect so get off your high horse and get over it. And if you are so perfect then maybe you should start up some spelling classes. Sorry guys but I really hate it when others rip on those who don't quite measure up accordingly to who evers standards. I know Im not perfect and I know others are not either and it just pisses me off.

 

Hugs,

Greg

Greg Seattle Wa [email protected]

http://www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/gregseattle.html

[+ deej]

>Eventually there won't be anyone alive who knows English at all!!!!!!

 

[blockquote]

"In America they havn't spoken English in YEARS!"

 

-- Henry Higgins

[/blockquote]

 

Language is constantly evolving (except in France ;-)). A resident of Colonial America wouldn't understand a word we say. Teenagers today have no concept of LP Recordings. Does anyone remember velcro tennis shoes?

 

Some of it is evolution in action, but I'll agree that careless usage and disregard for spelling is hastening that action.

 

I recently went through a parade of resumes looking for a mid-level programmer. The display of improper usage and bad spelling was just ludicrous in a candidate pool that should know at least how to drive a spell-checker. ;-)

 

A friend of mine is preparing a new college course titled "Effective Communication for Engineers". It's a pity this has to be offered at the college level and is probably the first time many of the students will learn the difference between your and you're, or to, too, and two.

 

But there you have it.

[seaboy4hire]

Deej I have two pairs of velcro tennis shoes. And no they are not from the 80's they are from this year actually and I love them and had been wanting a pair for a very long time....hehehehe.

 

Hugs,

Greg

Greg Seattle Wa [email protected]

http://www.male4malescorts.com/reviews/gregseattle.html

[dick_nyc]

I know exactly what you are saying. I did the same thing when I was interviewing a few years ago for a COBOL programmer. I had 10 resumes and 5 of them could not even spell COBOL which was the main reason they were being interviewed.

 

My take on this whole issue is that if people cannot write clearly, how is anyone going to pick up their project and carry it to the next level. Can you imagine a book of instructions for the users written by some of these applicants? The one good thing is that would always be a job for you because the users would be so confused they would be calling all the time for help.

 

Imagine having an escort read you the directions for doing something as written by these applicants. The mind boggles!!

[Guest Tristan]

>OMG! Please Mary. Many of us use abverations of words cause

>well maybe someone doesn't type well or does not have a

>dictionary around to look up the spelling of a word. No one is

>perfect so get off your high horse and get over it. And if you

>are so perfect then maybe you should start up some spelling

>classes. Sorry guys but I really hate it when others rip on

>those who don't quite measure up accordingly to who evers

>standards. I know Im not perfect and I know others are not

>either and it just pisses me off.

>

 

In addition to not being able to write a coherent sentence, you seem to also have a reading problem. You didn't understand a word I said. But that figures. You fit the profile. Your reply is a perfect example of illiteracy, not evolving changes in the English language. It seems the people who can't take what I wrote appear to be the most deficient. Well that figures.

 

I never said I was perfect, nor do I expect anyone to be perfect. I use abbrevations, acronyms, and chatspeak on the Net, but I know that's what they are.

 

But excuse me! We're NOT TALKING ABOUT TYPOS or LAZINESS IN LOOKING UP A WORD. We're talkiing about illiteracy. As deej points out in this thread (thanks deej - good example), many people don't understand the difference between basic words like "your" and "you're", or "to" and "too". I've noticed that mostly everyone writes "discrete" when what they mean is "discreet". (If you don't understand the difference seaboy, look it up in the children's dictionary. I would bet anything you use this word incorrectly.)

 

Yes, language evolves, but certain things remain constant. This includes the spelling of very basic words. So don't tell me to "get over it". I don't have to accept illiteracy. Rather, you should get some education and learn to read and write.

[Guest n6sorrel]

Many of us use abverations of words cause

>well maybe someone doesn't type well or does not have a

>dictionary around to look up the spelling of a word.

 

One may set the email configurations so as to use Word as your email editor.

 

It is quite useful for correcting spelling errors due to either careless typing or uncertainty.

 

There are limitations: I often disagree with the program’s suggestions for changing the structure of a sentence.

Moreover, it often accuses me of “wordiness” and of writing in a passive tense.

 

Bottom, yes. Passive, never.

[Guest EWC]

English: Ya Gotta Love It

 

We'll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes,

but the plural of ox became oxen not oxes.

 

One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,

yet the plural of moose should never be meese.

 

You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice;

 

yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.

 

If the plural of man is always called men,

why shouldn't the plural of pan be called pen?

 

If I spoke of my foot and show you my feet,

and I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?

 

If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,

why shouldn't the plural of booth be called beeth?

 

Then one may be that, and three would be those,

yet hat in the plural would never be hose,

and the plural of cat is cats, not cose.

 

We speak of a brother and also of brethren,

but though we say mother, we never say methren.

 

Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,

but imagine the feminine, she, shis and shim.

 

 

Some other reasons to be grateful if you grew up speaking English:

 

 

 

1) The bandage was wound around the wound.

 

2) The farm was used to produce produce.

 

3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.

 

4) We must polish the Polish furniture.

 

5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.

 

6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.

 

7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to

present the present.

 

8) At the Army base, a bass was painted on the head of a bass drum.

 

9) When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.

 

10) I did not object to the object.

 

11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.

 

12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.

 

13) They were too close to the door to close it.

 

14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.

 

15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.

 

16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.

 

 

17) The wind was too strong to wind the sail.

 

18) After a number of Novocain injections, my jaw got number.

 

19) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.

 

20) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.

 

21) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?

 

22) I spent last evening evening out a pile of dirt.

 

 

Screwy pronunciations can mess up your mind! For example: If you have a

rough cough, climbing can be tough when going through the bough on a tree!

 

Let's face it, English is a crazy language. There is neither egg in

eggplant nor ham in hamburger; neither apple nor pine in pineapple.

 

English muffins weren't invented in

England.

 

We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes, we find

that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square, and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig. And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers don't groce and hammers don't ham?

 

Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend?

 

If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them,

what do you call it?

 

If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught?

 

If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?

 

Sometimes I think all the folks who grew up speaking English should be

committed to an asylum for the verbally insane. In what other language

do people recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send

 

cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell? How can a slim

chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wiseguy are

opposites?

 

You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your

house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by

filling it out, and in which an alarm goes off by going on.

[bluenix]

One of the reasons English is now the world language, at least for business, is its incredible resiliency. It can and does absorb all manner of vocabulary from other languages; hence the "problem" with spelling.

 

People are only challenged by spelling because they try to apply a single rule, as if English were invented whole one day long ago. But England's invaders, such as the Vikings and the French, brought their languages with them, and many of their words remain in our vocabulary today. If memory serves (I refuse to look this stuff up), 'crag,' 'cliff' and 'thorpe' are Scandinavian words, while 'liaison,' 'attaché' and 'information' entered the language from the French. (A lot of diplomatic language is French, a remnant of French supremacy in diplomacy in the 19th Century.) Today, of course, many of the new words are Spanish, brought from Mexico. For example, while 'barrio' cannot yet be considered English, in a hundred years or so it will likely be synonymous with 'neighborhood.'

 

Meanwhile there are untold words we use every day that are not, in origin, English. 'Tycoon' is from the Chinese. 'Shampoo' is Indian. 'Barbeque' is... nobody knows for sure. A lot of our words entered the language as a result of trade, especially when we're talking spices (e.g. cinammon, tarragon, paprika) and other imports. Again, think resilience. It's no mystery why English works so well as the language of trade. Ditto when it comes to embracing and absorbing new technologies.

 

The concerns of those who fear a decline in language standards should relax. English is doing just fine.

[guptasa1]

Consider this. I don't know where it's originally from (got it from an IM profile), but it's neat and I thought appropriate:

 

"Aoccdrnig to a reschearer at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are; the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit too mcuh porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by itslef but, rahter, the wrod as a wlohe."

 

Pretty amazing what the human mind can do.

 

That said, seems like a lot of people here are a little harsh. In my opinion, the Internet is not a research paper. I write with fairly good grammar because that's what's easiest and most expressive for me, and I'm most comfortable writing this way. But when someone writes a different way, as long as I can still understand it and as long as I get the thought and it makes sense, it certainly doesn't bother me. Also, different people have different gifts. I've always been verbal, but I'm terrible at logical problems and math. I know some people who are brilliant with that stuff, but aren't particularly good writers. I really don't think there's anything wrong with that, and I don't think it's fair to judge a person based solely on their grammar or any other characteristic. Just my opinion.

[bluenix]

>"Aoccdrnig to a reschearer at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it

>deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are; the

>olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at

>the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can

>sitll raed it wouthit too mcuh porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do

>not raed ervey lteter by itslef but, rahter, the wrod as a

>wlohe."

 

Egg-ZACK-ly.

 

It's related to how the eye takes in a word. One of the reasons all caps is difficult to read is that the brain is forced to work harder to interpret what it's seeing when the normal ups and downs are eliminated.

 

IT CAN BE HARD TO READ GREAT AMOUNTS OF ALL CAPS LIKE THIS.

It can be hard to read great amounts of all caps like this.

 

The bottom parts of the lines are pretty even. It's the upper half of the writing space is where the differentiation is occurring.

[+ Charlie]

Most of the messages in this thread contain minor errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, sentence structure and vocabulary, including those by the originator of the thread. Do they bother me in the context of a message board? Not at all. Do they bother me in a formal presentation, like an editorial, letter of recommendation, or legal document? You bet! Do they signal the decline of civilization? I doubt it very much.

[Guest random]

>Most of the messages in this thread contain minor errors in

>spelling, punctuation, grammar, sentence structure and

>vocabulary, including those by the originator of the thread.

>Do they bother me in the context of a message board? Not at

>all. Do they bother me in a formal presentation, like an

>editorial, letter of recommendation, or legal document? You

>bet! Do they signal the decline of civilization? I doubt it

>very much.

 

Charlie I feel your summary is close to the mark. I noticed after my post all of the errors I had made. I do note that I'm guilty of making errors ... typos and intentional.

 

I feel that Tristan's point is valid. I look at his remarks not specifically related to this message center but all media. As has been pointed out in this thread national media (television, magazines, newspapers) seem to show little regard for our language. When I originally read his comments I felt he articulated what I was feeling pretty head on.

 

And I feel that some of your comments, along with others in this thread, express some interesting points about where we were and where we are ... and hopefully not where we're headed.

 

The evolution of man is natural though it doesn't mean evolution is always positive. I feel that those of us a bit older or of more knowledge have a certain responsibility to at least give the next generations a solid foundation to evol from .. whether that be spelling and grammar or how to hire an escort

[Guest pyell]

I'm....older than 40 and younger than 50....

 

Ever since I was a boy I've heard people moaning about the decline of proper spelling in the young. I don't think it's significantly worse than it was before.

 

Part of the problem is that more people are given the opportunity to parade their poor spelling and grammar. Thus bad English confronts us far more frequently than it used to. This doesn't mean that more people can't write good English, it just means that more bad writers get the chance to show how bad they are.

 

Once upon a time, for example, a secretary would type your letter. Now you type it yourself - and get it wrong.

 

Once upon a time you'd hire a signwriter to draw up a sign. Now you program your computer and printer - and hey presto, we get comprehensive bad spelling and misuse of apostrophe's (like that, for example) littering the roadside.

 

Once upon a time you might sit down and compose a letter to grandma thanking her for her birthday present, and it might be the only letter you'd write that month. Today you've probably typed a thousand words before you've even got round to reading this particular message, and you'll type another thousand before you go to bed.

 

Let's not forget that some quite proper English expressions were shortcuts to avoid writing things out in full. Like "let's", for example. Using LOL and other internet shorthand is in the same class.

 

And let's not also forget that we are quite capable of using several different versions of English as appropriate. Written English is quite different from spoken English, for example, as anybody who has tried to use a dictaphone or heard their words transcribed has discovered to their embarrassment. We can use very relaxed laid back English on the Net while using proper formal English in writing a resume.

 

Where people probably need training is in knowing what's proper English for a resume and what's chatty English for the internet. But this ain't too hard, dang nab it. LOL.

 

If nothing else, those with poor resumes won't get jobs, and maybe they'll start to work out how they need to improve. The marketplace can do part of the job of sifting out the poor spellers and the lousy writers.

 

The marketplace can also do a good job of putting the pompous and the pedantic in their place. The Academie Francaise has been trying to stem the flow of foreign words into French with spectacular lack of success for 200 years. Today French is acquiring more and more words and expressions from English, because the marketplace finds it easier to do so, and despite the splendidly futile gallic efforts of the Academie to stop it.

 

In short, English will survive and evolve. It's a living language. If it evolves in a way you don't like, you've probably got a choice of evolving with it or becoming a non-English-speaker!

[+ Charlie]

Bravo! (Not an English word, by the way.)

[Guest Merlin]

Many of the spelling and grammar rules are meaningless and arbitrary. Perhaps if the problem continues there will be a movement to simplify the language by eliminating the unnecessary complications. What purpose do the second l in spelling, m in grammar, s in meaningless, l in will, serve? Why is through not spelled thru? Eight could be ait. Do the differences between who and whom, may and can, etc really serve any purpose?

[guptasa1]

You make some good points, Merlin. English has some rather strange inconsistencies and arbitrary rules.

 

However, I would argue in the instance of "may" and "can", they do have a distinction. "May" implies permission, whereas "can" implies ability (though it can be used for permission as well...just not exclusively).

[Guest Tristan]

Guptasa1, you are right that we should not judge a person based solely on his/her grammar or spelling skills. I don't think anyone in this thread (including myself) is doing that. You make a very fine point that a person can be outstanding in one area and be very deficient in another area. I don't think anyone would question this. Just look at autistic people. Many of them show absolute genius in a specific area, such as Dustin Hoffman's incredible mathematical skills in the movie "Rainman", or some autistic people's musical genius. The same autistic people can barely function in the society. Many people are successful at doing something though they have limited formal education. I think the issue is one of trying to gain literacy because of all the benefits which accrue to a literate person. There are members contributing to this thread who have expressed this very clearly and with good examples.

 

Second, I agree that when writing on the Net, the English in an IM or chat room doesn't need to be at the level of a resume or treatise. In fact, formal English would for many obvious reasons not be practical or appropriate in an IM. Without the use of IMspeak, you couldn't have an IM without spending all day on it.

 

However, remember that the Internet is also a reflection of the larger society. I often find that the way a person writes on the Net turns out to be the way he writes everything off the Net.

 

Finally, I just want to thank the author of this thread for posting what has turned into one of the more stimulating discussions I have seen on The Lounge message board. I think we have a lot of very sharp members who are both articulate and humorous. Again, my thanks to all of them for taking the time to contribute their thoughts on this subject.

[bluenix]

>Many of the spelling and grammar rules are meaningless and

>arbitrary.

 

No, they're not.

 

>Perhaps if the problem continues there will be a

>movement to simplify the language by eliminating the

>unnecessary complications.

 

Oh, there have been plenty of moves to "simplify" English. The trouble is, such movements are typically led by people who do not care very much about language. And the people who do care -- writers and teachers, for instance -- reject these schemes, preferring to blunder on in their ignorance.

 

>What purpose do the second l in spelling, m in grammar, s in meaningless, l in will, serve?

 

Double consonants indicate that the preceding vowel is short, not long.

 

>Why is through not spelled thru? Eight could be ait.

 

Because such spellings discard the word's history, robbing it of lexical heft. 'Through' and 'eight' are two VERY old words. People have been spelling them that way for at least a thousand years. Which in my book makes YOU a shirker. ;-)

 

>Do the differences between who and whom ... really serve any purpose?

 

The differences used to serve a purpose when people understood the difference between subjective and objective. Now that they no longer do, by and large, 'who' is more and more becoming the single correct usage. Give it another generation or two and 'whom' will be finished.

[Guest pyell]

The difference between "may" and "can" is highly significant. I might be permitted to do something ("may"), but be physically unable to do it ("can").

 

It is a myth that English is largely irregular and illogical. Every language has its irregular verbs and illogical spellings. While English has more than some, the vast majority of English words are logically spelled and the vast majority of English grammar follows easily understood rules.

 

English is the world language in part because it is so versatile and flexible and has discarded many of the more pedantic rules of other languages. For example, in both French and German the form of the verb changes, sometimes dramatically, depending on whether I, you, they or we are doing the action. As well, there are several different common forms of verbs (in French, for example, -er, -re and -ir verbs, ditto in Spanish). In English there is but one change (3rd person singular takes "s" at the end) and only one common form of verb apart from the irregulars.

 

More dramatically, English has abolished gender in nouns. Gender almost invariably follows the gender of the object or person (with a few rare exceptions like a ship being "she"). But in German, for example, the word for a young girl is neuter gender ("das Madchen"), and French is equally absurd, with the gender of the noun often bearing no relationship whatever to the thing itself.

 

So English is substantially simpler to learn at its most basic level. Parodoxically, it is also without question the most subtle and refined in providing shades of meaning because of its vast vocabulary, enormously larger than for any other world language. To take a very basic example, in most European languages there is no difference between the present simple tense ("I vote"), the present continuous tense ("I am voting") and the present emphatic tense ("I do vote"). Yet in English, those three verb forms convey quite different meanings.

[Guest Merlin]

I am not the enemy of the English language you take me for. My point is that there are some more "pedantic rules" which can be "discarded". Many of the points you make are known only to specialists and practised by few. Most people use "may" and "can" interchangeably, for instance, without sacrificing clarity of meaning; the meaning is in almost all cases determined by the context. It has become a "pedantic rule". "Shall and will" is another. Fowler's English Usage, as I recall, said that one must be born in the South of England to understand the difference. Not one in ten thousand knows that the double consonants result from the pronunciation of the proceeding vowell. It is easy to remember the pronunciation; much harder to remember the spelling. English is the world wide second language of choice because it has been simplified in many respects as you have listed. But more simplification would make it even more easily adopted and more widely accepted. Archaic spellings are an easy simplification to make. Remember that this thread started with complaints that people are deficient in grammar and spelling. This, in large part, is the result of the persistent existence of complications do not contribute to clarity and which are known and remembered only by elite specialists.

[JamesK840]

This has developed into a surprisingly interesting thread. Two things:

 

This is a good easy to use reference for some of the rules being discussed, apparently most of us do not need them, but it's great for passing around...

http://www.thestranger.com/2002-09-26/ex9.html

 

Look in the Daddy's Place forum for Deej's IE spell-checker link, it's made it a lot easier for me to check my (atrocious) spelling before I post.

 

The only other thing I'd point out is the lack of ability to edit posts should earn everyone a little extra slack. I know I've noticed stupid mistakes right after hitting post quite a few times.