Is spelling old fashioned?

[mithrandir (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by DJDD

hey, thanks. Is the author an Australian? published by UNSW Press so there should be no "ize's"- realize, capitalize, prosthelytize...

I like reading books like this- it may satisfy my inner pedant...

Taken from the title page:

"Mark Tredinnick is a poet, essayist and writing teacher. He lives in Burradoo, in the highlands southwest of Sydney. ..."

My earlier quote is from the back cover.

Also "The Little Red Writing Book" and, to appear in 2009, "The Little Black Book of Business Writing"

[OneOfOne (Trevor)]

Originally Posted by Screwdriverone

Ha HA!,

Oh, and DON'T get me started on incorrect placement or bad spelling when it comes to apostrophes and plurals!
Chris

I always laugh when I see CD's and DVD's.

My wife did an assignment for Uni a few years ago and put in apostrophes in a number of places, I believe correctly, and the lecturer crossed them all out , eg.

"the web page's home page", I believe this is correct?

The other is putting 's at the end of words ending in an "s" already, like...can't think of one, maybe like (changed to Omaroo's suggestion)... "all of the dogs's toys", should be "all of the dogs' toys"?

[Omaroo (Chris Malikoff)]

By running a quick and dirty analysis on the direction of each response, I come to the conclusion that the TV show was full of it, and did not portray an accurate state of affairs as far as the common man sees it. Our language is still near and dear to us. It makes us who we are, it is the underlying backbone of our culture and it allows us to communicate with one another on unequivocal terms.

It's clear that 95+ percent of us are of the opinion that it's unnacceptable to simply "not care" how it's used and maintained. It is one of the things that we should really care about, and not let slide into disarray. It is not a waste of time to learn it properly. It is essential to have standards.

I don't have kids. If I did, I'd be telling any teacher instructing them that it's unimportant to spell properly to go and get a job they're really capable of. Teaching isn't one of them.

[Omaroo (Chris Malikoff)]

Originally Posted by OneOfOne

I always laugh when I see CD's and DVD's.

My wife did an assignment for Uni a few years ago and put in apostrophes in a number of places, I believe correctly, and the lecturer crossed them all out , eg.

"the web page's home page", I believe this is correct?

The other is putting 's at the end of words ending in an "s" already, like...can't think of one, maybe like... "the peoples's judgement", should be "the peoples' judgement"?

Trevor - I was taught this way... right or wrong. I believe that your wife's lecturer was wrong.

Generally, if the noun is singular, the apostrophe goes before the 's':

The dog's toy.

If the noun is plural, the apostrophe goes after the 's':

...all of the dogs' toys.

However, if the word is pluralised without an s, the apostrophe comes before the s:

He entered the men's room with an armload of people's clothing.

[DJDD]

This is a great thread, which has not descended to flaming...

Originally Posted by OneOfOne

The other is putting 's at the end of words ending in an "s" already, like...can't think of one, maybe like... "the peoples's judgement", should be "the peoples' judgement"?

But (is that ok?) it is now ok to use either:
the Jones' dog
or
the Jones's dog

, which is a rule that has changed since I was at school.
Perhaps there never was a rule and both have always been correct; we were simply forced to use the first one and told the second was incorrect, making it a rule by common usage. Perhaps Mark Tredinnick's book will give me the answer.


Regarding Latin rules that have been forced upon English:
I first came across this fifteen years ago when a friend submitted her PhD thesis in which the first line contained a split infinitive, "To boldly go..." (she was a fan Star of Trek). One of the examiners crossed it out. The "rules" had changed, however, and it was okay to use split inifinitives again, although the examiner did not know that...

[OneOfOne (Trevor)]

I didn't get a chance to check this thread until this morning, as fast as I could skim my way through the responses, the thread was getting longer. I think both sides of the argument are presenting some interesting views, I don't know if the "other side" will sway my opinion though (sorry for the emoticon...).

It is great that no-one (or is that noone....eeeww!) has begun to degrade the thread into verbal abuse either, thanks for that (oops, there goes another one).

Well, I have to do some work!

[AstralTraveller (David)]

Like you Trevor I'm behind in following this thread. So I'll just comment that IMHO the use of emoticons and common abbreviations is acceptable in a setting such as this. The judicious use of emoticons allows the transmission of body language and so gives the dialogue a more conversational flavour. One can also relax - but not abandon - the rules of grammar, just as people do in a conversation. Of course other writing calls for the correct use of language. I can assure you that my thesis is totally devoid of emoticons.

Likewise, back to the salt mines.

[beefking (Nathan)]

The interesting thing about the US spelling of words ending in "-our" is that their way, "-or", was the dominant spelling when the American colonies were settled.

In the years after this, the fashionability of French things increased in England, which led people in England to modify their spelling to a more French style, hence "-our" and the adoption of many French phrases into standard english.

so, strictly speaking, the Americans are correct, and we are the victims of fashion who debased the mother tongue.


edit: erm... actually, that could be completely wrong or only partially right. wiki "Noah Webster", the man who wrote the eponymous dictionary. He didn't like the rules of spelling, so he wrote a spelling guide that changed them. It looks like a lot of the differences between American English and English are due to the subsequent popularity of his spelling guide.

[Fossil (Jonathan)]

Smee again.
A real pet hate of mine is the overuse, or incorrect use, of 'like'. Listening to the (mainly) younger generation makes me wonder if they put their brain into gear before their mouth. For example: I went out, like, for a walk and, like, went to the shops to, like, get something to eat, like, you know, and the guy behind the counter was, like, really weird...'
Also, as mentioned by others above, one has to wonder how people make it through school, let alone university. I was once in the collections office of the Australian National University in Canberra when fees were being collected. There was this student re-enrolling and was writing a cheque. I was floored when he turned to me and said "Excuse me mate, do you know how to spell 'hundred'".
I know I am far from perfect, and I am often guilty of incorrect grammar or punctuation, but I do try to ensure that I am as clear and unambiguous as I can be.

[FredSnerd (Claude)]

I was gonna do one of those emoticon things but it took me an age to draw (no where near as good as your ones I might add) and then trying to transcribe it into the puter and then animating it. I just had to give up I'm affraid. Oh no, inks running out

[Screwdriverone (Chris)]

Originally Posted by Screwdriverone;

Oh, and by the way, I have just trademarked and registered the letter A as the new name I have for Aluminium, so every time someone uses the letter A or a, I will get a royalty.

I thought if you can have Alumium (20c for you) then every A is MINE!

Alum-etc was just too hard to say, so A it is from.....................NOW!

I have spoken (or written to be more precise)

Heed my words!

Chris

Originally Posted by MrB

In th-t c-se, I'll be removing the '-' from '-lumium'.
No roy-lties from me!
H-h-h-!

Ha™ Ha™ Ha™ Ha™ Ha™, nice one.....wa™it a™ second!

A™ha™! I GOT you Simon, pa™y up, there is 2 a™'s in Ba™a™der in your signa™ture and one A™ in WA™ on your loca™tion at the top right.

Tha™t's $0.60 RIGHT THERE! a™nd tha™t's just for one post! sta™rt counting them up....

I ta™ke BPA™Y, VISA™, Ma™sterca™rd, Money Order or direct credit, but plea™se a™dd 3% for Pa™ypa™l !

Da™mn, I a™m going to be rich, RICH I tells ya™! Fa™bulously wea™lthy Woohoo!

Cheers

Chris

[Miaplacidus (Brian)]

A meditation on the benefits of pedantry...

I suspect that somewhere in here we are talking about respect.
Do we occupy a middle ground between divinity and beast? If so, surely it is through our capacity for abstract thinking. We’re pretty good at manipulating things, but what makes us special is our particular talent for manipulating symbols. People here have made the point that computer programming is very unforgiving of misspellings and poor syntax. So, too, is mathematics. So, too, I imagine, are the calculations that engineers use to design buildings and build bridges. If my interlocutor is imprecise in spelling and grammar, what else am I to deduce but that they are lazy and uncaring, and perhaps that I ought not to trust whatever they build with the language? If I receive a letter written in crayon and besmirched by dirt, it is difficult to believe I am respected. (On the other hand, if it comes from a 5 year old I might be delighted.) What does it say about someone who thinks it is unimportant if others have to work harder to understand what they are saying? An FU if ever there was.

If I try to learn a foreign language, how else is my teacher to assess me but by my ability to spell words and use grammar correctly? And naturally I would expect to gain extra credit for demonstrating a refined vocabulary, a vocabulary by which I can convey increasingly subtle meanings, meanings that are more precise, that possess nicer and finer distinctions, and allow a closer understanding of what I am struggling to communicate. Am I entitled to consider myself better than another student who cannot do these things quite so well? Well, yes, I imagine I am.

But then, it is also partly a question of how we measure success. Some people consider their language skills sufficient if they can order beer and get laid. A Maserati can achieve the same thing, and the comparison is not entirely frivolous since language is also a vehicle. Where do you want to go? Do you just want to get laid, or are you looking for a soul mate? Who is to say which is the higher purpose?

In India, the relationship between a musician and his instrument is deeply personal. Ravi Shankar was almost physically sick when he saw Jimi Hendrix deliberately destroy one of his beautiful guitars on stage. Would the world be a better place if everybody shared Ravi’s reverence for their means of expression? Well, I tend to think so. But did Jimi create something wonderfully liberating and new through his sacrilegious disrespect, his deconstruction of pre-existing prejudices and expectations? Well, again, I like to think so. (“Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself?”) But as an ad for bass guitars once had Billy Sheehan pretending to say “You’ve got to know the rules before you can break them.”

In life, in literature, sometimes there is a point to doing the hard thing, and even in making it harder than necessary. But usually, I believe, it is our human duty to make things easier for others to understand. “Speak clearly, write well, do the best you can. Make the effort so that others don’t have to. Act your age.” When is this advice ever invalid?

[renormalised (Carl)]

In response to the last post's caption, this thread will not die because it goes right to the heart of our very being here...communication. Being able to say what we mean as concisely as we can and to convey our thoughts and feelings in a positive and understandable way.

I think we can all say we've done a pretty good job so far

[DJDD]

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

A meditation on the benefits of pedantry...
...

In life, in literature, sometimes there is a point to doing the hard thing, and even in making it harder than necessary. But usually, I believe, it is our human duty to make things easier for others to understand. “Speak clearly, write well, do the best you can. Make the effort so that others don’t have to. Act your age.” When is this advice ever invalid?

enjoyed your post... respect...

[matt]

Originally Posted by renormalised

In response to the last post's caption, this thread will not die because it goes right to the heart of our very being here...communication. Being able to say what we mean as concisely as we can and to convey our thoughts and feelings in a positive and understandable way.

I think we can all say we've done a pretty good job so far

Indeed, Carl.

I really do believe a measure of maturity and how reasonable an individual is, and that of the group/s to which they belong, is just how well they can agree to disagree.

You can learn a lot about people not by just how well they get along when they share the same opinions and values, but at those times when they hold quite opposing views.

I may not share the same opinion as others, on occasion, but I'll respect their right to hold, and express, an alternate opinion.

This has been a great thread.

[Octane (Humayun)]

Brian,

Can I just say that it is an absolute pleasure and joy to read your posts?

I have thoroughly enjoyed each one of your 802 posts, and, no doubt will enjoy the rest to come.

Thank you, sir.

Regards,
Humayun

P.S. If there is one thing that really annoys me, as far as language is concerned, it is the use of the term^ "tweet(s)" in reference to the vermin that is Tw*tt*r.

^ I use the word "term", loosely.

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

A meditation on the benefits of pedantry...

I suspect that somewhere in here we are talking about respect.
Do we occupy a middle ground between divinity and beast? If so, surely it is through our capacity for abstract thinking. We’re pretty good at manipulating things, but what makes us special is our particular talent for manipulating symbols. People here have made the point that computer programming is very unforgiving of misspellings and poor syntax. So, too, is mathematics. So, too, I imagine, are the calculations that engineers use to design buildings and build bridges. If my interlocutor is imprecise in spelling and grammar, what else am I to deduce but that they are lazy and uncaring, and perhaps that I ought not to trust whatever they build with the language? If I receive a letter written in crayon and besmirched by dirt, it is difficult to believe I am respected. (On the other hand, if it comes from a 5 year old I might be delighted.) What does it say about someone who thinks it is unimportant if others have to work harder to understand what they are saying? An FU if ever there was.

If I try to learn a foreign language, how else is my teacher to assess me but by my ability to spell words and use grammar correctly? And naturally I would expect to gain extra credit for demonstrating a refined vocabulary, a vocabulary by which I can convey increasingly subtle meanings, meanings that are more precise, that possess nicer and finer distinctions, and allow a closer understanding of what I am struggling to communicate. Am I entitled to consider myself better than another student who cannot do these things quite so well? Well, yes, I imagine I am.

But then, it is also partly a question of how we measure success. Some people consider their language skills sufficient if they can order beer and get laid. A Maserati can achieve the same thing, and the comparison is not entirely frivolous since language is also a vehicle. Where do you want to go? Do you just want to get laid, or are you looking for a soul mate? Who is to say which is the higher purpose?

In India, the relationship between a musician and his instrument is deeply personal. Ravi Shankar was almost physically sick when he saw Jimi Hendrix deliberately destroy one of his beautiful guitars on stage. Would the world be a better place if everybody shared Ravi’s reverence for their means of expression? Well, I tend to think so. But did Jimi create something wonderfully liberating and new through his sacrilegious disrespect, his deconstruction of pre-existing prejudices and expectations? Well, again, I like to think so. (“Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself?”) But as an ad for bass guitars once had Billy Sheehan pretending to say “You’ve got to know the rules before you can break them.”

In life, in literature, sometimes there is a point to doing the hard thing, and even in making it harder than necessary. But usually, I believe, it is our human duty to make things easier for others to understand. “Speak clearly, write well, do the best you can. Make the effort so that others don’t have to. Act your age.” When is this advice ever invalid?

[Miaplacidus (Brian)]

Thanks Humayun, Djdd.

Actually, although I have qualms, I don't doubt we're heading towards a post-literate society. It is all too easy to imagine a time when the last Reader — some quaint, comical, professorial figure — having finally failed in the years-long rear-guard action against the erosion of his university funding, is ultimately rolled up into the unpopular Cultural History department of some 22nd century university (the occasional PhD student still comes to penetrate the wisdom of Homer Simpson). All the world’s books having finally have been scanned into a pixel, they are quickly forgotten, never to be read again except by an incurious machine.


(No doubt they scoffed when someone suggested abandoning latin.)

And if anyone thinks this is too pessimistic, consider something I read about only last year. (It sounds a bit premature to me, I must admit, but not totally implausible.) Supposedly there is already emerging in history departments worldwide a potential problem. The newest students entering university are unable to read original documents written in plain English simply because they were written in cursive script. But don’t despair! Apparently there is a technological solution on the horizon, and before long we ought to be able to translate into typed text the hand written scribblings of such historical figures as Maggie Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

Phew!

P.S. I guess they were never going to use the word Twit.

[Omaroo (Chris Malikoff)]

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

The newest students entering university are unable to read original documents written in plain English simply because they were written in cursive script.

Are you implying that current school kids are not taught good old "running writing" as part of their standard curriculum any more? I can't believe that, surely!

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by Omaroo

Are you implying that current school kids are not taught good old "running writing" as part of their standard curriculum any more? I can't believe that, surely!

As far as I know, Chris, that's the case.

[Lee]

Originally Posted by Fossil

Smee again.
A real pet hate of mine is the overuse, or incorrect use, of 'like'. Listening to the (mainly) younger generation makes me wonder if they put their brain into gear before their mouth. For example: I went out, like, for a walk and, like, went to the shops to, like, get something to eat, like, you know, and the guy behind the counter was, like, really weird...'

I agree.... the other one I really dislike now is "yeah", when it is used at the end of a sentence after a short pause..... I think it means they have forgotten how to talk, or run out of words to use!

"I went out, like, for a walk and, like, went to the shops to, like, get something to eat, like..... yeah... "