English language

[silentC]

I would hazard a guess that for the majority of us, it is too late -we are already set in our ways. I've been known to edit my posts when I spot a spelling or other typo. After years of reading other people's emails, I am used to translating their/there/they're, your/you're, of/off, its/it's, to/too, were/where, XXXX/beer.

It's a shame that the focus on grammar and spelling that we grew up with isn't there today but perhaps this is an acknowledgement that there are things which are more important for our kids to learn.

My personal pet hate is "should of", "could of", "would of". Despite that though, when someone says or writes it, I know what they mean and I don't bother pointing out their mistake because they're unlikely to change their ways as a result and they'll just end up thinking I'm a smart .

[Rocker]

I have six nephews and nieces, all of whom hold science degrees from British universities, but none of whom can write a paragraph without some egregious error of spelling or grammar. I think the rot set in during the Sixties, when their teachers were being trained and fed with the latest fad from America, to the effect that spelling and grammar were unimportant, so long as a pupil could write creatively.

This foolish idea produced a whole generation of students who could write creatively, but were unable to express their ideas with sufficient clarity for their readers to be certain of their intended meaning.

I spent my adolescence learning Latin and Greek. Although most people these days would regard this as a waste of time, when a student should be learning things with a more practical application, I think that the mental discipline acquired in mastering these languages was valuable, as well as providing an insight into the derivation of many English words. Once you have learned the intricacies of the ablative absolute and the gerundive attraction, a Unix manual no longer presents an insuperable challenge.

I have a feeling that some people in this forum deliberately write with scant attention to spelling or grammar because they feel that it gives their writing a certain larrikin quality. Uh oh; I think I am beginning to exhibit some of that pompous asininity that causes Aussies to refer to some of us as Pommie b*astards. So I had better desist.

Rocker

[silentC]

... some people in this forum deliberately write with scant attention to spelling or grammar because they feel that it gives their writing a certain larrikin quality

This harks back to the days in the playground when anybody who spoke properly, showed any interest in school work, or ever did their homework was branded a sissy or teacher's pet, had their lunch stolen and was never invited to accompany the older boys when they went down behind the Home Economics building for a cigarette.

No other languages were offered in my school. We were taught a few Indonesian phrases in Social Science but that was it. Most of our teachers were hippy-types and were barely older than ourselves, in fact some of my teachers went on to marry some of my fellow students - after a suitable period of course. The only English teacher of any note was Mr Gilmour, who would quote Shakespeare and Wordsworth at us - but you only got him in the advanced class.

Latin was declared a dead language well before my time but I took a course in it myself as an adult - all forgotten now of course.

It's hard to recall where I learnt what I know of English grammar but I'm fairly certain it wasn't in secondary school.

[Grue]

PROPOSED FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATION ACT

1000.A

No pilot or pilots, or person or persons acting on the direction or suggestion or supervision of the pilot or pilots may try, or attempt to try or make or make attempt to try to comprehend or understand any or all, in whole or in part of the herein mentioned Federal Aviation Regulations, except as authorized by the Administrator or an agent appointed by, or inspected by the Administrator.

1000.B

If the pilot, or group of associated pilots becomes aware of, or realizes, or detects, or discovers or finds that he, or she, or they, are or have been beginning to understand the Federal Aviation Regulations, they must immediately, within three (3) days notify, in writing, the Administrator.

1000.C

Upon receipt of the above mentioned notice of impending comprehension, the Administrator will immediately rewrite the Federal Aviation Regulations in such a manner as to eliminate any further comprehension hazards.

1000.D

The Administrator may, at his or her option, require the offending pilot, or pilots, to attend remedial instruction in Federal Aviation Regulations until such time that the pilot is too confused to be capable of understanding anything.

[Bob Willson]

From Rocker

This foolish idea produced a whole generation of students who could write creatively, but were unable to express their ideas with sufficient clarity for their readers to be certain of their intended meaning.

Quite so, and it is this inability to express themselves clearly and concisely that is the crux of the matter. It is all very well to blithely state that it doesn't matter if one uses ‘there’ instead of ‘their’, but in certain instances it really would matter, as a particular sentence could be read both ways, have them both make sense and yet the reader may well obtain the exact opposite of the intended meaning.

Rocker, your erudition is showing badly when you use words such as ‘egregious’ and ‘gerundive’. You’d better stop it or you will go blind.

Quite seriously though, when I first came to Australia in 1966, the language I used was looked on scornfully by most Aussies and I was accused of talking with a plum in my mouth etc.

Talking with a plum ….. or with a plumb. Hmm different spelling but they sound the same, so either one must be acceptable.

ps I now write all my replies to this forum in Word and then cut 'n' paste. Hopefully no more embarassing boo-boos.

[silentC]

Bob,

How about 'aplomb'? That would be better, wouldn't it?

[silentC]

... in certain instances it really would matter, as a particular sentence could be read both ways ...

I should also like to point out that in English, this is entirely possible even when the correct words and their spellings are used.

[Christopha]

Bob was illiterate, but ran a mildly profitable country store anyway. He was okay with numbers, and never forgot a face, and could keep accounts by drawing small pictures of the items.

One day a customer came in, and Bob said, "Hey, you were in here ten years ago and you left without paying for the merchandise. Grabbing a notebook off the shelf and leafing through it, he came to a page and pointed. "Here! You bought a dozen grinding wheels on May 27th."

The customer was alarmed and confused. He explained that he'd been there once ten years before, but had never bought grinding wheels anywhere, and what would he be doing buying them here, far from home?

One of the regulars leaned over and looked in the book. "Bob, you idiot! Can't you read your own writing? Those aren't grinding wheels. They're donuts!"

[Iain]

Bobb Willlson, a good read, Death Sentence by....................oh someone who was Paul Keating political speech writer.
He launches into great detail on the systematic destruction of English as a language by governments and corporations.
And my pet hate HERO only applicable to sporting identities who kick a goal or get blown up in Bali

[AlexS]

Was never much good at anything at school, but had one absolutely inspiring teacher, Peter Finnane, who was not only a great teacher of English, but a philosopher, imparter of ethics and builder of confidence (and a pretty good writer in his own right). Forty years down the track, there are still many of us who think of what he would have advised whenever we write something.

And all this in a run down state school.

[echnidna]

If the words Your and You're confuse you then what about,
yore,
yaw,
your oar and
youall

[Christopha]

.

[silentC]

Notwithstanding the above, here is a web site that some may find interesting: http://www.wordspy.com/. The definition of 'man cave' is appropriate....

[Bob Willson]

Originally posted by silentC
Notwithstanding the above, here is a web site that some may find interesting: http://www.wordspy.com/. The definition of 'man cave' is appropriate....

So how did the man cave make such a transformation? The experts said there are several factors at play: more disposable income, better gadgets on the market for trading up, keeping up with the Joneses and the post-9/11 cocooning factor.

So are we now seeing the start of Isaac Asimov's 'Caves of Steel' scenario, in which he portrays the whole of the human race living underground as it is far to risky to expose oneself to the agoraphobiac conditions up top?

[silentC]

the whole of the human race living underground

Oh no, only the men. The women will be busy running around trying to comfort each other because their partners wont come out of their caves anymore. Or in my wife's case, playing golf, which probably wouldn't be the same underground