Frenchy68 0 #26 September 24, 2004 QuoteI also think that people are so lazy nowadays that they downplay it Bingo. I am actually wondering how long before "you're" is dropped from the American English language, to be consolidated under "your". I see that "misspell" more often than I'd care to... Nick PS: I know, I still need to work on my $^%^^)grammar. I hate non-native tongues... "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,064 #27 September 24, 2004 wot he sed.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #28 September 24, 2004 QuoteI agree, it is a nicety for formal communication, but it's simply not critical if the message is clearly expressed and formatted. Many of the rules of grammar and spelling are archaic leftovers from a time when all discourse was handwritten and needed better rules to force legibility and clarity. I disagree that rules of grammar are "archaic" or at all no longer necessary. In the paper the other day, a woman was quoted saying, "Now I don't have nobody to help me." Without any other contextual information, what do you think she meant? Clearly, the empirical meaning of her statement is that she is no longer without someone to help her: she now has someone to help her. But we know that "ebonically speaking," she was saying, "There is no one to help me." This kind of deterioration -- encouraged by people like you who claim falsely that rules to prevent it are "archaic" -- means that now, people treat interpersonal communication with an "anything goes" attitude, and consistency be damned. In this way, we can end up with misunderstandings between writer and reader, or speaker and listener. In the extreme, we end up with dialects so distinct that speakers of one cannot understand or be understood by speakers of another. QuoteThe nature of this medium means a number of those rules are unnecessary or erroneously applied. Paragraph structure is a good example, without knowing the exact conditions, resolutions, etc that your message will be displayed on following standard block paragraph structure can cause less understanding, not more... This sentence is a perfect example. You did not break up two separate thoughts with a period, and if read to oneself in the manner in which it is typed, the whole sentence ends up sounding "breathless." There is nothing archaic or unnecessary or hard-to-understand about good, classic paragraph structure. You group sentences that are linked by a common thought together in a paragraph. Change the thought, and you should change the paragraph. Written on the page, the smaller paragraphs are easier to keep one's place in while reading; neater to look at; less daunting to read; better organized for easier comprehension. QuoteLanguage adapts to the environment and cultural influences, the users who cannot (or will not) adapt generally scream about how the 'sky is falling', because the rules they have grown accustom to are changing. This seems to be the common "defense" of letting rules of grammar and speech deteriorate: "it's an adaptation." An adaptation to what?! LAZINESS? That's all it really comes down to. People don't have the patience or the work ethic to express themselves properly, because it takes effort to learn how to in the first place, and then more effort to do it all correctly. An excuse like that is just a way for those who write incorrectly to claim that those who expect people to write correctly are "making a big fuss over nothing." Often this excuse is offered indignantly, in a cynical attempt to put blame for the problems on the people who hold the standards of proper language use up, rather than where it belongs: on those who fail to communicate according to the logical, sound, established and preferred rules for communation. QuoteHow many have seen a telegraph message? Did you understand it? Did it conform to the rules of grammar had it adopted its own that applied to the specific medium. Specious. If all of us posted our understandable messages here in "telegraph-speak," would they be pleasant to read? Would there be much style to them? How artistic could a novel be if the writer was lazy enough to resort to such spartan technique? It seems to me that the effort made to be an apologist for bad syntax could easily be used to get it all right. It's funny, but you are using decent grammar, spelling and syntax in order to defend the lack of it. Why? What is the BENEFIT of not communicating according to useful, helpful rules that have existed for so long? If we are going to make a change to how we do things, isn't it incumbent on those who push for the change to explain and clarify just why the change is even necessary? Show us why it's BETTER to not differentiate between "your" and "you're," between "there" and "their." What is the utility in stripping language of these eminently useful and important differentiations?: It's only in the recent generation or two that people have really gotten so lazy in their communication, I think. It used to be a point of pride, to be able to craft a decent letter. Read some of the books that contain letters from soldiers of the Civil War, World War I, World War II... and compare them to the e-communications of Gulf War I and II vets... There is a startling difference. The latter read like journals from an ADD ward in a children's hospital. Some I have seen published in newspapers seem to contain nary a coherent thought or passage. I have a friend who now lives out of state. She's in school for criminal justice. She called me the other night asking for help with her grammar homework! She could not determine the subject and verb in some of the simplest sentences you can imagine! She did not even seem to understand what a verb even is! I think it was news to her when I said, "A verb is an action word -- it tells that something has been done." It was difficult for me to conceal my derision that she could be 36 years old and never have learned this stuff. Oh, but she likes to go out "clubbing"! I may not be old (33) but I feel I can identify more with my dad's generation, filled with dismay at the intellectual priorities (or lack of them) of younger generations. I think that more and more kids are being permitted to just not care about school and learning, and to get out of school essentially not knowing jack shit. But they can tell you who's won the recent Hip Hop awards, and which celebrity is fuckin' which other celebrity. Do you remember the handful of mean, bullyish, dumb kids in your classes who made fun of the kids who got good grades and learned their school lessons? I think that their mentality has been asserted more strongly in recent years, and now it truly has become unpopular to be smart in our primary schools. The mentality that it is "cooler" to be less smart now has the upper hand. QuoteApostrophes? How often do you misunderstand a sentence because of the presence or absence of an apostrophe? Again, what is the call for NOT using them, that you want us to abandon what was accepted for so long? You're the one seeking the change. You're the the one who has to make the defense, the argument for it. Quoteps. For all the geeks out there, what does this page really look like without your browser to format it for you… code is the one place that level of precision is required, simply because without the communication breaks down….humans are far more adapatable. That's irrelevant. You might as well ask what good a radio broadcaster's grammar does you since without the radio to process the broadcast transmission into sound coming from a speaker, we'd never understand him. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #29 September 24, 2004 It's important when the communication is important. Boobie threads? Prob'ly not a big deal. How to resuscitate someone wearing a full-faced helmet? Probably a little more critical. Most stuff is somewhere in between, imho. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #30 September 24, 2004 if that is the case you should have had one EXTREMELY long block paragraph, as you continued to address the same thought and issue throughout. Instead you recognize (and even admit) the nature of on screen display vs written text makes 'proper' block structure very difficult to read, so you broke your thoughts into shorter (and technically incorrect) paragraphs for readability. If you were writing a term paper would you have formatted your post in the manner you did? Not very likely, you recognized and adapted the ‘rules’ of grammar to this medium I don’t see a single indentation in your entire post… why not?? Lazy? Its a concession, and adaptation to the medium, if you refuse to make it, you will often be ignored by the bulk of readers who do not wish to strain themselves because the writer does not understand the new requirements. There are several posters on here who seem to refuse to create line breaks. While their posts may be well thought out and informative, the way they chose to present them (while technically correct for the few that indent) makes for difficult reading, thereby obscuring the message. what we are adapting to is the medium. how many instances of incorrect capitalization did you use for emphasis??? why? Internet conventions. You completely miss the point in the telegraph example. The changes there are to the nature of the medium, not for tradition. As any medium becomes more widespread so will its conventions.. SMS will have a serious affect on language, much to the dismay of the traditionalists. The browser formatting example is important because mistakes in CODE here (bold, italics, url etc) can completely change the meaning and inflections of the words, as does the addition or omission of a simple smiley at times. However those who understand the conventions of HTML/XML etc can read the source document and understand EXACTLY how it will look once interpreted. Those unfamiliar with those conventions will have difficulty comprehending the most basic message expressed without this medium to interpret it. Don’t believe me? Try reading the forums viewing only the source documents for an entire day…… QuoteParagraph structure is a good example, without knowing the exact conditions, resolutions, etc that your message will be displayed on following standard block paragraph structure can cause less understanding, not more... this sentence is missing a comma, one word needs to be plural and one word need to be removed to be technically correct, It is not missing a period. It is a continual thought, written in the manner I tend to speak, (I like long sentences and can complete them without sounding ‘breathless’ as you imply, if you cant I can suggest a good running program to help.) however you clearly understood the meaning even if you disagreed with its structure. Over the net, elements of grammar and punctuation are used to express subtle meanings and express personality. Slavishly attempting to apply arbitrary rules misses the point. there is little wrong with following ‘perfectly’ correct grammar and spelling. however dismissing an argument, focusing on the means of delivery or perceived errors instead of the subject under discussion, again, completely. misses. the point. Contrary to your assertions, I am not advocating a change in anything. I am [I]accepting[/I] that conventions change based on the mediums used. Insisting on archaic [I](and many, but not all are archaic and outdated. Before you disagree perhaps you should research the reason standard capitalization forms were adopted to begin with?) conventions solely with the reasoning of "we've always done it this way, why change?" limits and ignores the full benefits and capabilities of the new medium. By beginning from 'scratch' and only applying what is useful and necessary to the new medium you remove the constraints of outdated paradigms. It is called progress. Building on the rules and conditions of the past, discarding that which has little or no benefit, instead of slavishly following them. Some will remain intact, some will change, and some will disappear completely. What you misunderstand is that it is happening wither you like it or not…. As the forms and medium of expressions change so does language. You can whine and scream and cry about ‘correctness and tradition’ all you like, but in the end it wont affect a thing. That which is most effective survives and propagates, that which does not is left behind… Do we still speak Old English? It had its own rules and conventions as well, so far distanced from what we use today that many students simply cannot read Chaucer without someone to translate, until they learn and adapt to the older conventions. As I summarized (and you ignored) you must first learn the rules to understand WHY they exist (clarity of communication) and understand under what conditions they are irrelevant. Apostrophes themselves are concessions to ‘laziness’ as you put it. Why do you use them at all?? Oh yea, you were taught they were acceptable from the start. As language adapts future generations will be taught many of the developing conventions in use now, those that withstand the test of culture and time. by the way.. another nice straw man argument. By creating situations and examples and attributing them to me with no knowledge whatsoever of what that I DO and DO NOT support or encourage, you abstract my position in a manner that makes YOUR points indefensible, and yet little of what you mistakenly assume and attribute to me actually applies.. and you wonder why few bother with a point to point debate with you??____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #31 September 24, 2004 What's funny to me - or perhaps sad - is that there are some folks who actually take the time to get good at grammar, syntax, spelling and punctuation for work, but get lazy elsewhere. It's not a chore when it becomes "normal" or habitual. Me? Sometimes I care, sometimes I don't. I admit it galls me no end when someone with a higher education (unlike me) can't figure out where the apostrophe goes, or who doesn't use "you are" contracted properly (you're/your) and the ever present pestering there/they're/their. I don't have a college degree, and yet I understand those basics. Then again, I've been known to have entire paragraphs consist of one sentence...a huge no-no if one is being technical. It does convey the feeling behind what I am trying to say, however, and thus I will use it as an effective technique when I'm writing. (And I'll admit, sometimes I talk like that, too). Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #32 September 24, 2004 QuoteFurthermore, it is so easy to understand different wordings like f. e. Irak, Iraq, Iraque! What does it mean in fact? You know what I'm talking about. That's absurd. You're saying that proper spellings of even things like proper names don't matter? How about if the DMV spelled your name wrong on your license? Or the hospital spelled your kid's name wrong on a birth certificate? What if your mail got sent to 125 Smyth St. instead of your house at 125 Smith St.? The simple fact is, THERE IS ONE CORRECT NAME AND INFINITE INCORRECT NAMES for all of these things! IT IS NOT HARD TO JUST LEARN THE RIGHT SPELLING OF THE NAME AND USE THAT! What could possibly be the argument for it being okay to spell "Iraqi" as "Iraki," "Iraqui," or "Iracqui"??! Is it EASIER?! All you're doing is making excuses for not learning something. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GravityGirl 0 #33 September 24, 2004 Toadally impotant. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Peace and Blue Skies! Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #34 September 24, 2004 Quoteif that is the case you should have had one EXTREMELY long block paragraph, as you continued to address the same thought and issue throughout. Absolutely false. There are many aspects of the one overall "theme" of GRAMMAR that were touched on. If you can't understand this notion, I am certainly not going to be able to (nor am I interested to) teach it to you here. QuoteIf you were writing a term paper would you have formatted your post in the manner you did? Not very likely, you recognized and adapted the ‘rules’ of grammar to this medium Would you care to elucidate which "rules of grammar" I modified in order to make my post? If I had been writing this to you on a sheet of paper, I would have formatted it the exact same way. There were no rules of "grammar" adapted or modified or broken. QuoteI don’t see a single indentation in your entire post… why not?? Lazy? You don't see them in business letter format, either. I guess no business letters are grammatically correct. "Thrust, meet Parry." My lack of indents (and yours) has far more to do with the fact that this program is not set up to accept a tap of the Tab key in order to accomplish it. But as I said earlier, paragraph indents are one of the least essential trappings of good grammar. It satisfies the purpose to simply place a line space between paragraphs. QuoteIts a concession, and adaptation to the medium, if you refuse to make it, you will often be ignored by the bulk of readers who do not wish to strain themselves because the writer does not understand the new requirements. Do you see where you should have used a period in this sentence rather than a comma? Quotehow many instances of incorrect capitalization did you use for emphasis??? why? Internet conventions. Were your failures to capitalize here intentional? The "internet convention" where I capitalized extra stuff is not, to me, a "grammatical mistake" akin to screwing up subject-verb agreement, verb tenses (brung, drug instead of dragged, snuck instead of sneaked, "Who you IS?" instead of "Who are you?") and others. There is no comparison. QuoteQuoteParagraph structure is a good example, without knowing the exact conditions, resolutions, etc that your message will be displayed on following standard block paragraph structure can cause less understanding, not more... this sentence is missing a comma, one word needs to be plural and one word need to be removed to be technically correct, It is not missing a period. It is a continual thought, written in the manner I tend to speak, (I like long sentences and can complete them without sounding ‘breathless’ as you imply, if you cant I can suggest a good running program to help. You are again incorrect. Even in your explanation, you failed to punctuate correctly. First of all, here is a correction of your original quote: "Paragraph structure is a good example: without knowing the exact conditions, resolutions, etc that your message will be displayed on following standard block paragraph structure can cause less understanding, not more..." All I did was substitute a colon. The first phrase points to the next ones in that sentence, requiring a colon, not a comma. From your defense of the first runon sentence is this runon sentence: "this sentence is missing a comma, one word needs to be plural and one word need to be removed to be technically correct, It is not missing a period." Corrected: "This sentence is missing a comma; one word needs to be plural; and one word need to be removed to be technically correct. It is not missing a period." I separated long items in a list with semicolons, and I placed a period where it belonged after "correct." owever you clearly understood the meaning even if you disagreed with its structure. Over the net, elements of grammar and punctuation are used to express subtle meanings and express personality. Slavishly attempting to apply arbitrary rules misses the point. there is little wrong with following ‘perfectly’ correct grammar and spelling. however dismissing an argument, focusing on the means of delivery or perceived errors instead of the subject under discussion, again, completely. misses. the point. QuoteContrary to your assertions, I am not advocating a change in anything. I am [I]accepting[/I] that conventions change based on the mediums used. Insisting on archaic [I](and many, but not all are archaic and outdated. Are you accepting that we won't use the term "media" as the plural form of "medium" anymore? And your next sentence contains no predicate. (i.e. it's just a sentence fragment) QuoteApostrophes themselves are concessions to ‘laziness’ as you put it. Why do you use them at all?? Oh yea, you were taught they were acceptable from the start. Apostrophes change the meanings of words from one thing to another. Discard the apostrophe, and you risk discarding the difference between one word's meaning and another. I just typed WORD'S. I didn't type WORDS. "WORDS" is the plural of "word" while "WORD'S" is the possessive of "word." You see no reason to use that apostrophe? Quoteby the way.. another nice straw man argument. By creating situations and examples and attributing them to me with no knowledge whatsoever of what that I DO and DO NOT support or encourage, you abstract my position in a manner that makes YOUR points indefensible, and yet little of what you mistakenly assume and attribute to me actually applies.. and you wonder why few bother with a point to point debate with you?? That is itself a strawman, since MANY here FREQUENTLY "bother with a point-to-point debate" with me. By the way, you should have had hyphens in "point-to-point." -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ripple 0 #35 September 24, 2004 Quoteif that is the case you should have had one EXTREMELY and you wonder why few bother with a point to point debate with you?? My sentiments exactly. By the way, PJ, point-to-point is a form of horse racing http://www.pointtopoint.co.uk/ and protocol http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/ppp.htm. English language is more flexible that you seem to realise. Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #36 September 24, 2004 QuoteYou don't see them in business letter format, either. I guess no business letters are grammatically correct. "Thrust, meet Parry." Quote My lack of indents (and yours) has far more to do with the fact that this program is not set up to accept a tap of the Tab key in order to accomplish it. OMG!!! you mean the rules change based on audience and medium?? say it isnt so.... “[I]mal-pare'[/I], meet the point instead" I dare you to turn in a formal paper using the same conventions and paragraph structure applied [I]in that post,[/I] to any college professor... QuoteDo you see where you should have used a period in this sentence rather than a comma? COULD, have. not should. It was written and expressed in exactly the manner i intended. Since i was the one writing, it conveyed my thought exactly as I intended. [I](with the occasional typo, which must be forgiven by anyone with sense, unless you really meant “owever” )[/I] i consciously choose to use the elements of punctuation and grammar, in a manner that someone not slavishly tied to "THIS WAY AND NO OTHER !!!" will "hear" and comprehend the subtle meanings. Something you still fail to understand and apparently never will, simply because you cant get past your 'rules'. It is very similar to someone who looks at a Van Gogh and states " the colors are wrong". apostrophes are useless, as are colons and semi colons for the most part. If you are incapable of reading text that lacks them and accurately determining meaning, your basic language skills need work. by the way... nice failures in coding. Your inability to correctly use this interface and medium interferes with the clarity of your post, as it confuses who said what.... of course since you clearly do not understand the evolving conventions applied to internet discourse very well, you might not notice the differences in tone or meanings implied either… ps. check the definition of "Straw man fallacy" you missed that one too.... edit argggg proxy errors are SUCH fun.. had to fix MY formating since i'd pasted the wrong version.....____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peregrinerose 0 #37 September 24, 2004 QuoteI think it is very important. I also think that people are so lazy nowadays that they downplay it, and even criticize those who do think it's important, to cover for their inability or unwillingness to do the work, to learn to get it right. I was just waiting for PJ to dive in here That's why I started this thread, so he possesed a location to vent his grammatical and spellicular issues. But I do agree. I fail to tolerate sloppy grammar/spelling. Even though my spelling often lapses and I have an amazing tendency to invent words as needed, I do express every effort to provide a favorable literary impression. It works, I've won every creative writing contest I've entered from HS on. The best writing advice ever received emerged from an English teacher that would fail us automatically for using linking verbs (is, am, are, was, were, see, seeing, been, seem, appear, remain, stay, etc.). It made all of us more aggressive and sturdy writers, a habit that I tend to engage in today. Even in this post, nary a linking verb exists. Jen Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peregrinerose 0 #38 September 24, 2004 QuoteThis sentence is a perfect example. You did not break up two separate thoughts with a period, and if read to oneself in the manner in which it is typed, the whole sentence ends up sounding "breathless." There is nothing archaic or unnecessary or hard-to-understand about good, classic paragraph structure. You group sentences that are linked by a common thought together in a paragraph. Change the thought, and you should change the paragrap I confess that this also tends to comprise my writing style. Typically, my brain runs in a constant run-on sentance that leapfrogs from one topic to the next. I find it difficult to reel in the mental babble to type coherently. Jen Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallRate 0 #39 September 24, 2004 This might be a repost...found it on BobandTom.com... The pweor of the hmuan mnid Aoccdrnig to rscheearch codnutced at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are tpyed, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit oedrer. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? FallRate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,064 #40 September 24, 2004 QuoteThis might be a repost...found it on BobandTom.com... The pweor of the hmuan mnid Aoccdrnig to rscheearch codnutced at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are tpyed, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit oedrer. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? FallRate As a gdraudte of Cmabdrige, I haev to agere wtih taht alansyis. However, it is a bloody pain in the neck to read it even if it can be understood. IMO, consistently poor spelling and grammar (as opposed to the occasional typo or trailing preposition) is a sign of sloppy thinking.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #41 September 24, 2004 I was wondering if there is a correlation between adrenaline junkies and bad spellers because the spelling on this site is some of the worst i've ever come accross. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #42 September 24, 2004 dont visit many gaming sites do you?? those people are developing new languages....____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #43 September 24, 2004 QuoteQuoteYou don't see them in business letter format, either. I guess no business letters are grammatically correct. "Thrust, meet Parry." Quote My lack of indents (and yours) has far more to do with the fact that this program is not set up to accept a tap of the Tab key in order to accomplish it. OMG!!! you mean the rules change based on audience and medium?? say it isnt so.... “[I]mal-pare'[/I], meet the point instead" I never said that we don't make changes that are appropriate. You are taking that to the extreme, though, and saying that rules go out the window! Deciding not to indent is nowhere near on the level of saying, "We don't need apostrophes," or "It's not necessary to differentiate between 'your' and 'you're'." Would you care to comment on something RELEVANT? QuoteQuoteDo you see where you should have used a period in this sentence rather than a comma? COULD, have. not should. No, your sentence called for the use of a period, otherwise it was badly constructed. QuoteIt was written and expressed in exactly the manner i intended...i consciously choose to use the elements of punctuation and grammar, in a manner that someone not slavishly tied to "THIS WAY AND NO OTHER !!!" Whatever, dude. You do it wrong, but claim that you intended to do it that way so it makes it not an error. Sure. QuoteIt is very similar to someone who looks at a Van Gogh and states " the colors are wrong". Ohhh! Now, since you make it clear that you are creating a legitimate new form of art, you are totally correct! Carry on! Quoteapostrophes are useless, as are colons and semi colons for the most part. If you are incapable of reading text that lacks them and accurately determining meaning, your basic language skills need work. LOL. Okay, I cans see that this is useless; you simply cannot or will not understand what you refuse to understand. Like it's my biggest priority to get you there... Nope. Time to go flying. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #44 September 24, 2004 QuoteQuoteThis might be a repost...found it on BobandTom.com... The pweor of the hmuan mnid Aoccdrnig to rscheearch codnutced at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are tpyed, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit oedrer. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? FallRate As a gdraudte of Cmabdrige, I haev to agere wtih taht alansyis. However, it is a bloody pain in the neck to read it even if it can be understood. IMO, consistently poor spelling and grammar (as opposed to the occasional typo or trailing preposition) is a sign of sloppy thinking. While it works as they state, that never was a study at Cambridge. That was debunked in a newspaper story I read. They disavow the study, but acknowledge the bizarre truth to the premise. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #45 September 24, 2004 Quote Furthermore, it is so easy to understand different wordings like f. e. Irak, Iraq, Iraque! What does it mean in fact? You know what I'm talking about. That's absurd. You're saying that proper spellings of even things like proper names don't matter? No. That was you. How about if the DMV spelled your name wrong on your license? Or the hospital spelled your kid's name wrong on a birth certificate? What if your mail got sent to 125 Smyth St. instead of your house at 125 Smith St.? Quote Wow. Now I'm getting the wind up, right? Re-read my post. I clearly said: "In biz, it's different" The simple fact is, THERE IS ONE CORRECT NAME AND INFINITE INCORRECT NAMES for all of these things! IT IS NOT HARD TO JUST LEARN THE RIGHT SPELLING OF THE NAME AND USE THAT! Quote Oh man, I am happy there's a small pond between us And so many over there are armed.... What could possibly be the argument for it being okay to spell "Iraqi" as "Iraki," "Iraqui," or "Iracqui"??! Is it EASIER?! Quote Yes, for me it's fully OK : "Iraki", as: that's my German language, PJ. And my husband surely prefers "l'Irak", as he's French All you're doing is making excuses for not learning something. *** Me? Don't get me started dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rebecca 0 #46 September 24, 2004 Now you see that? Michele, I would NEVER have guessed you don't have a college degree - I would have guessed a Lit. or English liberal arts degree. It's because of the way you write with clarity and elegance, and because you don't distract your readers with errors. Conversely, I'm sure there are plenty of degree holders on this site who've fooled me too! (I've met MBAs who couldn't string a few sentences together to form a complete thought. Sad, but y'all just remember to think before you ever judge someone based on their degree(s) or lack thereof.) you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 333 #47 September 24, 2004 Six munce ugo I cudn't spell "skidyver", and now I are wun! My main complaint is that I read so much bad grammar/spelling, that, when I see something used correctly, I sometimes doubt it. So many posts use "your" when they mean "you're" that correct usage looks strange. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdweller 0 #48 September 24, 2004 me Find it reely anoyying wen peoples dont chek ther gramers and speelings------------------------------------------------------ "From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #49 September 24, 2004 Quote(I've met MBAs who couldn't string a few sentences together to form a complete thought. Don´t hijack this thread!!!! We are not talking about Bush this time!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #50 September 24, 2004 Quote Don´t hijack this thread!!!! We are not talking about Bush this time!!! You do not unterstand, stranger! It's their president ! dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
