English has become a lost art...

[nautilus]

I think this settles things once and for all.

Although I have somehow managed to stop myself from commenting on the "lolz y ru at org?????" in World of Warcraft, I thought I'd be safe reading a nice technical document regarding T.38 (FAX over VoIP).... when I saw this:


If one of the UDP forms of T.38 is used, it is common for each packet to contain a copy of the main data in the previous packet. This is an option, but most implementations seem to support it. This forward error correction scheme makes T.38 far more tolerate of dropped packets than using VoIP. It requires two successive lost packets to actually loose any data. The overheads in T.38 are so big, the extra data sent in each packet is hardly noticable. If two successive packets are lost, T.38 will still have trouble. However, if that is a common occurance, the network is probably quite bad, and VoIP performance will be poor.

Loosing a packet in a T.38 stream does not cause the modems to loose sync. This means two successive lost packets should only corrupt a section of an image. If the optional FAX error correction (ECM) mode is used, there is a good chance that with a retry or two, a perfect image will be transferred. Not ideal, but functional.

...the casual observer may notice the overzealous use of the word "loose", with little regard to the fact that the most appropriate word to use in its place in many cases would be "lose".

Now, I'm not an English major, I have maybe a grade 8 level in the language, but it seems that many people who speak it exclusively still can't manage to spell or properly use the simplest and most common of words; including highly-skilled IT professionals.

What's the deal?

[daynah]

The "deal" is we're moving down from Nabokov to using slang like "What's the deal?" No offense, we all do it. I can't spell offense.

Read "Lolita" by Vladimir Nabokov, come back, and tell me about English. He is not a native speaker of English. The first chapter says this...

"Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta.

"She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita.

"Did she have a precursor? She did, indeed she did. In point of fact, there might have been no Lolita at all had I not loved, one summer, a certain initial girl-child. In a princedom by the sea. Oh when? About as many years before Lolita was born as my age was that summer. You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style.

"Ladies and gentlement of the jury, exhibit number one is what the seraphs, the misinformed, simple, noble-winged seraphs, envied. Look at this tangle of thorns."

There's more wrong than "loose" and "lose." Beauty is gone.

[matthew]

Now, I'm not an English major, I have maybe a grade 8 level in the language, but it seems that many people who speak it exclusively still can't manage to spell or properly use the simplest and most common of words; including highly-skilled IT professionals.

What's the deal?
Methinks that many have forsaken the mother tongue in favor of a vulgar, abased version. Truly, one might find the occasional wit who, perchance, may enjoy linguistic aptitude, and an adept manner of expression. For each of these, however, 'tis quite likely that one will discover many whose form of self-expression is less than ideal. Oftimes, such literary excursions are either difficult to follow, or painful to the eyes and the ear.

Having said this, we should note that there are many skills with which one may be endowed. Some are gifted writers. Others may paint or create beautiful tapestries with music. Still others have technical insights and abilities that most have no hope of achieving. Each one has his special talent(s), and each his weakness(es). Let us endeavor to lovingly aid those who stumble in one area, in the hopes that our faults will be kindly endured in our moment of failure.

[nautilus]

Slang I can accept. Mistakes, too.

But isn't "lose" rather common?

I don't use words like "palate" in my daily vernacular, if that's how you spell it, so in my opinion that's not so bad...

In the end, I suppose that's what it really is; a shade of gray.

Some people consider having 50% proper grammer and 25% proper spelling to be acceptable levels for a technical document.

Maybe I am being stubborn, because in reality at least 95% of that document is written in proper English...

The first time I had the pleasure of experiencing "u r" was a couple weeks ago when I saw Hackers. (Yeah, it's about time..) and I think ... maybe, that's where it all began..

I can't be sure, though.

(This is also interesting... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy#Illiteracy it really is fading away.)

[daynah]

Methinks that many have forsaken the mother tongue in favor of a vulgar, abased version. Truly, one might find the occasional wit who, perchance, may enjoy linguistic aptitude and an adept manner of expression. For each of these, however, 'tis quite likely that one will discover many whose form of self-expression is less than ideal. In many cases, such literary excursions are either difficult to follow or painful to the eyes and the ear. That said, there are many skills with which one may be endowed. Some are gifted writers. Others may paint or create beautiful tapestries with music. Still others have technical insights and abilities that most have no hope of achieving. Each one has his special talent(s), and each his weakness(es). Let us endeavor to lovingly aid those who stumble in one area, in the hopes that our faults will be kindly endured in our moment of failure.

Bubble/curly girl/man/eunuch, I had a US history teacher who would make the class read the original words of our forefathers and ask us, "What did -insert random black slave's name here- mean when he said "-obscure old timey phrase with everything spelled wrong-?"

And everything they said then was a sentence about two pages long. They were so bored from lack of internet that they wouldn't... just... shut... up... AH! I don't care what you say, George Washington. Close your mouth; your teeth smell!

I hated that class.

[ComplexNumber]

Methinks that many have forsaken the mother tongue in favor of a vulgar, abased version.i agree.


if one is speaking on an international forum(or in anything that is to be read by the public), there is no excuse for not making the effort to make one easily understood. there is no excuse for laziness and slovenliness, and i think that its important to encourage the speaking of proper english and the elimination of leet-speak.

[matthew]

Slang I can accept. Mistakes, too.

But isn't "lose" rather common?
...
The first time I had the pleasure of experiencing "u r" was a couple weeks ago when I saw Hackers. (Yeah, it's about time..) and I think ... maybe, that's where it all began..

I can't be sure, though.I love a well-written document, book, essay, etc. Good writing inspires me and it is what I aspire to (I happen to be a writer). If I had my preference, I would insist that all writing be done well, including technical manuscripts, manuals, and so on. Unfortunately, the realistic side of me has been forced to concede that this would eliminate a large amount of adequate documentation.

When I have time and the ability to do so, I have offered to help people rewrite, or at least edit, their work. Much like the example you cite, there is a lot of documentation that seems to have been written by people with less-than-stellar English skills. These days, that can often be attributed to English being the writer's second, third, or even fourth language.

I agree with your basic premise. My goal was to redirect it slightly in the direction of a possible solution. I try to be content if I can understand what I am reading, and I try to help when possible.

[Redache]

tolerate

that annoyed me.

I also get sick of seeing poor English thrust upon the world. English isn't my first language but I still speak it better than most of the people I know. It's mainly down to environment, a huge amount of colloquialism survives in the English language and it grows year on year. Now with the birth of the digital generation and the modern image of geekdom/Crash car stars it becomes a cool thing to tolerate. I mean I am known for overusing slang sometimes but I can also resort to a much more formal string of thought.

It's also down to colloquialism being a larger part of our literature.

The main problem with technical documentation is that a lot of the companies that produce these texts aren't English native, most are either Taiwanese,Chinese or Japanese so there are always grammatical effigies present.

I have a PC Chips Motherboard and their website drives me insane with the grammatical errors but it's what we have to live with.

[aysiu]

Poorly written English is like bad acting. Sure, you may get your point across eventually, but you're not doing so efficiently, and you're not exactly enticing your audience to pay attention to what you have to say.

[Adamant1988]

Methinks that many have forsaken the mother tongue in favor of a vulgar, abased version. Truly, one might find the occasional wit who, perchance, may enjoy linguistic aptitude, and an adept manner of expression. For each of these, however, 'tis quite likely that one will discover many whose form of self-expression is less than ideal. Oftimes, such literary excursions are either difficult to follow, or painful to the eyes and the ear.

Having said this, we should note that there are many skills with which one may be endowed. Some are gifted writers. Others may paint or create beautiful tapestries with music. Still others have technical insights and abilities that most have no hope of achieving. Each one has his special talent(s), and each his weakness(es). Let us endeavor to lovingly aid those who stumble in one area, in the hopes that our faults will be kindly endured in our moment of failure.

Haha, I can't help but feel the sarcasm flowing from the quoted post. You, matthew, have received a cool point.

[matthew]

Bubble/curly girl/man/eunuch, I had a US history teacher who would make the class read the original words of our forefathers and ask us, "What did -insert random black slave's name here- mean when he said "-obscure old timey phrase with everything spelled wrong-?"

And everything they said then was a sentence about two pages long. They were so bored from lack of internet that they wouldn't... just... shut... up... AH! I don't care what you say, George Washington. Close your mouth; your teeth smell!

I hated that class.My house is quiet. My kids are sleeping. The only sound I hear is that of my fingers caressing my computer's keyboard as I prepare my response to your post, a post which caused me to disturb the tranquility of my home with laughter just moments ago.

Thanks for the reality check! I hope the style of this post is a little more appropriate for my audience. :)

Daynah, I've been thinking about it and I've decided I like you. You're witty, intelligent and helpful. Thanks for being a positive addition to these forums.

[nautilus]

I'd say he was just circumlocuting, but what do I know? :)

[jgrabham]

"Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta.


How romantic (being sarcastic by the way)

[matthew]

I'd say he was just circumlocuting, but what do I know? :)Ouch! First my editor, and now you...#-oThat's what I get for reading so much 18th and 19th century literature.

[Nils Olav]

I find it tolerable when the mistake is from phonetic interpretation. Like: four and for, then than, too and to, wen and when, thay as they, and so on. Also I find abbreviation more practical in many cases.

[diskotek]

judging Nabokov's book is quite useless i think... because most of the authors are playing with words... i think this is visible in all languages (by the way sorry for my poor english, it's not my mother tongue, i'm trying my best, yo man!)

language can be deformed-deconstructed etc, i believe... (also with puctuations -right spelling?)

last pages of James Joyce's Ulysses have no punctuation. and it's mostly accepted as one of the best books (they said..)

note: this post was only about making critics about Nabokov's work. i can not say anything towards internet slang. it's different culture, and it should be discuused in a different situation with many inner-dynamics.

[AlanRogers]

Each one has his special talent(s), and each his weakness(es). Let us endeavor to lovingly aid those who stumble in one area, in the hopes that our faults will be kindly endured in our moment of failure.Eloquently put, but the first principle of solving any problem is the perpetrator admitting, or perhaps even knowing, that they've made a mistake to start with. Any help on your part, without this foundation, is bound to be fruitless.


*I*f one is speaking on an international forum (or in anything that is to be read by the public), there is no excuse for not making the effort to make one*self* easily understood. *T*here is no excuse for laziness and slovenliness, and *I* think that it*'*s important to encourage the speaking of proper *E*nglish and the elimination of leet-speak.You use such wise words yet destroy credibility with your grammatical errors, which I have taken the liberty of correcting in your quoted post above. Then, to finish with the very vernacular that you are railing against, is the death rattle of an expiring argument. You could have used some choice and eloquent insult but instead, you chose to lower your standards to those of thine own enemy. Poor show.


Poorly written English is like bad acting. Sure, you may get your point across eventually, but you're not doing so efficiently, and you're not exactly enticing your audience to pay attention to what you have to say.Succinctly put, as always. I know not your background Aysiu but your posts are consistently easy to read, poignent yet succinct, and always of the highest English standard.


I find it tolerable when the mistake is from phonetic interpretation. Like: four and for, then than, too and to, wen and when, thay as they, and so on.To which I would also add my own pet hates; they're, their and there; where and wear; here and hear; too, to and two.


Also I find abbreviation more practical in many cases.Agreed, subject to the above caveat and correct use of the apostrophe, another frequently commited literary crime.

As you may have gathered, this thread has hit upon a personal bete noir of mine and, whilst some have hypothesised as to the cause of the problem, I suspect that it is far simpler than mere language barrier. Indeed, as one Welsh poster replied, English is not his first language, yet he still makes considerable (and applaudable) effort.

As I see it, the problem is three-fold:

In those countries where English is actually taught as a first language, rarely is English Grammer included and English Literature, from which so much can be gained, is often an elite class, if taught at all.
In those countries where English is a secondary language, grammar is often taught as part of the mother tongue, and I regard grammar as the skeleton of all languages.
In this day and age of internet, digital television, digital versatile disc and video cassette, simply reading a book is no longer fashionable, too much like hard work and unnecessary. Parents aren't helping either; we're two generations into this problem, in my humble opinion.Regardless of the language, structure plays an important part. If you can't recognise the definite article, future conditional tense or a conjunction in your own language, what hope do you have of recognising it in any other?

Now, lest I be shot down in flames as a pompous bigot, I went to such a school and came out with poor English qualifications; I just chose to better myself since. Indeed, I learned more grammar in my French lessons than I was ever taught in English, in which I was forced to take pilot exams for the new system (GCSE, which should give away my approximate age to UK members) which meant that I could not earn better than an average grade, even had I wanted to. I am now and have always been an avid reader, and not just internet fora!

In closing, what's my point in all this verbosity? Simply that there's no valid excuse. Even my late brother, who suffered from acute Dyslexia and was nearly expelled from school because of it, did the Times crossword daily in an effort to better himself.

[AlanRogers]

.

[jfinkels]

[...]
Succinctly put, as always. I know not your background Aysiu but your posts are consistently easy to read, poignent yet succinct, and always of the highest English standard.

This is why I try to avoid criticizing other people (excluding this post...nothing personal, Alan haha). I am a proponent of the Golden Rule: do unto others...

I agreement with your statement about Aysiu, he seems to have consistently excellent posts. I hope to emulate his style.


[...]
Indeed, I learned more grammar in my French lessons than I was ever taught in English, [...]


I learned my grammar from Latin. I learned no English grammar in my school. America stinks :P

[mips]

I read some things and I cringe. Bad use of language leaves the impression that the person is lazy & sloppy. Similair to someone who owns a nice pair of leather shoes but they are always dirty.

I'm no angel, I constantly leave out entire words in my sentences but that is because my brain works faster than my fingers can type.

[AlanRogers]

I am a proponent of the Golden Rule: do unto others...Touché, mon ami! And the preacher has his soapbox kicked from under his feet. Oh, how the mighty do fall. Yes, I can laugh at myself and No, I'm not perfect either; I just strive to improve.

I learned my grammar from Latin. I learned no English grammar in my school. America stinks :PI'd have loved that opportunity. Latin is a fantastic language for insulting.

[tom56]

I think sometimes people can be too elitist with language. Certainly, I've never understood where people get the idea that English is "traditional" or that its debasement is a modern occurence. English started as a common vernacular and was the language of peasants. Chaucer was revolutionary in bringing it to the court (palace, not judiciary) but prior to that it was considered vulgar. As for the "modern" slaughtering of English, some of the greatest English-language texts could be considered to be just that. Consider "The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman" with it's constant return to the conversational style, or even total abandonment of the language (e.g. when Corpral Trim waves his stick, the motion is drawn on the page, or the blank page for the reader to insert his own description of Widow Wadman's beauty).

EDIT: However, it must be said that poor grammar is never something I can cope with. ;) ;)

[aysiu]

While I appreciate the compliments on my writing style, I don't think I'm really that good at writing. When I read the likes of C.S. Lewis (non-fiction), Sarah Vowell, Carol Clover, Susan Brownmiller, George Orwell (non-fiction), and Malcolm X, I'm in awe of their command of the English language.

The one thing I can say about my writing is that it is usually grammatically correct. That did not, however, come from good schooling. I wasn't taught grammar at all in elementary or secondary school. Nor was I, as an English major, taught grammar at university. It wasn't until I was an English teacher and forced to teach my high school students grammar that I learned the rules myself. I had a gut instinct before ("this sounds correct"), but I didn't actually know the rules.

In many ways, I'm a little sad that I know the rules. I believe the best writing comes from an instinctual sense of what "sounds" good rather than what is technically correct. My wife, for example, is an excellent writer, but she wouldn't be able to explain the proper times to use further in place of farther or what the dictionary differences are between compose and comprise. Excellent writing and an intuitive sense of what "sounds good" come from voracious reading, not rule memorization.

Sadly, as an English teacher, I saw too many students who loved to memorize grammar rules and word definitions but who did not delight in reading a variety of styles of writing.

[DoctorMO]

It's an interesting subject, I could for instance raise the number of complex words in my posts in order to compress meaning and add subtly, flare and style; I admit to being the very lowest of English users being a programmer forces you into the world of rules and reasons; while English seems to have left those behind half the time.

The end result though of these complex machinations is that I limit my potential audience to those who have to have been educated or have experienced English to a much high level than if I used simpler and less demanding words.

I'm reminded at this point of how terrible my English really is, forcing Firefox to correct 15 of the words above in order to save my tepid memory for other uses.

I kind of like the quality of a good written piece, matthew your first post made me grin.

[aysiu]

I love pages like this one:
Grammar myths debunked (http://www.ucsc.edu/currents/01-02/04-15/rules.html)

[AlanRogers]

The end result though of these complex machinations is that I limit my potential audience to those who have to have been educated or have experienced English to a much high level than if I used simpler and less demanding words.A very good argument. Here in the UK, it is alleged that the average reading age is 8 years old and that, to appeal to the majority, you have to pitch your level at that of a Sun (http://www.thesun.co.uk) reader. I guess the US equivalent would be something like the National Enquirer? Should I really lower myself to those levels? That's a rhetorical question; better to be thought a snob than open one's mouth and remove all doubt!

[freakavoid]

Sure it has. If a tool is so widely in use one cannot expect it to be aesthetically pleasing and spotless anymore. It's merely there to be practical. Hence it cannot be considered an art either.

If it wasn't for the example in the original post I probably wouldn't be writing this post; but it in fact reveals the very essence of my point. Besides it's dominance in many other areas English has become the language of the technical world now. And therefore it's never certain that the person who writes a document such as the one referenced here, no matter how well educated he might be, has the will or the means to handle the English language as an art and not as a bare tool of communication.

To be more specific: the particular mistake that was pointed out is a result of one cryptic aspect of english: it's spelling. I, having a mother tongue of a completely different language family, have never understood why the same phoneme has to be represented by at least half a dozen different spellings in the written language. (Precisely like loose, lose, lucy etc.)

It is of course clear to me that the metaphor of a living organism fits very well when describing a language and the spelling must stay the same for backwards compatibility but there are others out there, like German, which came along an equally long path in time and didn't turn into a monster in this subject like English or French (with the reforms taken into account of course).

Anyway, my point is not that English is inferior to others in any way. In fact I like English, I am grateful that Nabokov didn't continue to write in Russian (likewise to Beckett choosing French :)) Like I said earlier this situation is simply part of the trade off in process of becoming the global language (the language of internet none the least). And it is completely normal for a language with so many traps in it.

It's almost morning now. Time to shut up for me.

[Belyel]

I find it tolerable when the mistake is from phonetic interpretation. Like: four and for, then than, too and to, wen and when, thay as they, and so on. Also I find abbreviation more practical in many cases.

I find the phonetic mistakes less tolerable than most because they are so heavily emphasized in schools. However, probably 80% of the people with whom I interact on a daily basis cannot use the proper "your/you're" or "its/it's" in a written sentence. It is only due to laziness.


I read some things and I cringe. Bad use of language leaves the impression that the person is lazy & sloppy. Similair to someone who owns a nice pair of leather shoes but they are always dirty.

I'm no angel, I constantly leave out entire words in my sentences but that is because my brain works faster than my fingers can type.

I agree 100% with the point that bad language makes the writer/speaker seem lazy and sloppy. If the author/orator does not care enough to craft a correct statement and sentence, why should I care enough to try to understand what he/she is saying?

[frup]

I think it has something more to do with habit than anything else.

[DoctorMO]

Imagen the subject in terms of a technical drawing; when we speak to each other casually we are drawing crude sketches of ideas on the back of receipts and envelopes; when we wish to convey knowledge for legal of scientific reasoning we draw complex isometric and plan drawings with everything measured, marked and confirmed using standard terms. When two teenagers talk with all that slang they are painting big bold shapes that only hold meaning amongst them old generation, normally in red or green finger paints; as they get older they learn to use pencils and write in script but the slang comes with them being refined and then added to the language.

The point is that whilst we share common visual references for drawings (that looks like a tree, or a man) we don't have the same thing for language so every line must be understood by those viewing the information.

In the art of misspelling my wife remarked that while courting she had been taking an English degree in which some of the writings of old authors and even those of new authors became easier to understand the most messages I misspelled, or used incorrect or abnormal grammar. It was her theory that my bad English allowed her reading to be less discriminatory and able to see connections where others could not see. A sort of language stretching exercise.

[BoyOfDestiny]

I think this settles things once and for all.

Although I have somehow managed to stop myself from commenting on the "lolz y ru at org?????" in World of Warcraft, I thought I'd be safe reading a nice technical document regarding T.38 (FAX over VoIP).... when I saw this:



...the casual observer may notice the overzealous use of the word "loose", with little regard to the fact that the most appropriate word to use in its place in many cases would be "lose".

Now, I'm not an English major, I have maybe a grade 8 level in the language, but it seems that many people who speak it exclusively still can't manage to spell or properly use the simplest and most common of words; including highly-skilled IT professionals.

What's the deal?

It may not be his or her mother tongue...

lose, like lose a dollar
loose, like belt that hasn't been buckled...
would of, should be would've (would have)
alot (not to be confused with allot), should be "a lot", it's two words (this one seriously gets me.)
virus, the plural is viruses.
grammer, should be spelled grammar.

One funny typo (well for some) I had on my website a while back is that I spelled the word humor as humour... :) A lot of forum posters around here using British English: dialogue, colour, etc... (Cheers! ;) )

Anyway, I guess English will continue to change, different dialects, pronunciations, added words, grammars, etc...

P.S. Despite all this, if people would just know "a lot" is two words. I'd ask for nothing more.
:popcorn:

[frup]

Imagen the subject in terms of a technical drawing; when we speak to each other casually we are drawing crude sketches of ideas on the back of receipts and envelopes; when we wish to convey knowledge for legal of scientific reasoning we draw complex isometric and plan drawings with everything measured, marked and confirmed using standard terms. When two teenagers talk with all that slang they are painting big bold shapes that only hold meaning amongst them old generation, normally in red or green finger paints; as they get older they learn to use pencils and write in script but the slang comes with them being refined and then added to the language.


Whats more important architectural plans or the building (the understanding)? As long as the information is there the building can be built even if the plans, sections and elevations etc. etc. have the odd wobbly line. These days we have AutoCAD etc. Which I guess is like the spell check of the technical drawing world. l0lz

Whats is valued more sketches by Frank Gehry, the hardline drawings his monkey has done or the actual building. Is the work of Frank Gehry better than Picasso. Is Impressionism better than Expressionism blaah blaah blaah. I can handle bad spelling and grammar and often do it badly myself. It's a matter of taste I guess.

[bwhite82]

What is quite comical at times is seeing folks point out the grammatical and/or spelling errors of others, while making errors themselves while doing so. :D

Oh yeah, and the "loose/lose" is really bothersome.

[frup]

It can be helpful getting pointed out. I must have spelled prove proove from the time I began using it until I was 15. Spell checking in firefox great too. Any habitual mistakes I make I am constantly reminded of.

[Bezmotivnik]

What is quite comical at times is seeing folks point out the grammatical and/or spelling errors of others, while making errors themselves while doing so. :D
It's funny how that works, but if you ever make a blunder, that's when you'll do it.


Oh yeah, and the "loose/lose" is really bothersome.
It's not as bad as these epidemic problems:

"Your" for "you're"...

Using present tense as past tense: "She bake a cake for her sister yesterday."

...and [drumroll!] the Number One WORST, MOST PERVASIVE OFFENSE AGAINST ENGLISH GRAMMAR:

USING "THEIR" AS A THIRD PERSON SINGULAR!

"If you ask somebody what their opinion is..."

It's his if the gender is indefinite, or his or her. It is NOT "their."

[Bezmotivnik]

Oh, and let's not forget apostrophizing plurals.

How hard can it be not to do that?

[PartisanEntity]

Good language is one of my pet peeves. Of course we all have lazy days, and we might misspell a word or two from time to time, however I find it quite annoying when native speakers do not have a good command of their own language.

[fuscia]

the best way for an artform to die is to stop changing [ah]ballet[/choo!1]. contemporary activity is usually rife with far more crap than gems, but it is the gems that last (even 'competant' doesn't last). so, don't worry.

[gaspar]

Not only english, but also portuguese (and maybe other languages too, who knows...).
That´s why I spend more time reading and posting in ubuntuforums than (then?) in the brazilian forum...:rolleyes:

[tom56]

Oh, and let's not forget apostrophizing plurals.

How hard can it be not to do that?

But grocer's English is what makes Britain great!

Where else in the world can one buy "Fresh farmers's potato's"?

[tom56]

Good language is one of my pet peeves.

Technically, based on the rest of your post, you mean "bad language is one my pet peeves".

Ask a pedantic question, get a pedantic answer... :)

[Zimmer]

The improper use of the verb concede, usually by football commentators and newsreaders, has been driving me potty for the last 30 years.
My old English Master would reach for his toy cap gun and fire wildly at any boy uttering such phrases as "West Ham conceded defeat". (It pained me to have to type that...).

[celsofaf]

Not only english, but also portuguese (and maybe other languages too, who knows...).
That´s why I spend more time reading and posting in ubuntuforums than (then?) in the brazilian forum...:rolleyes:

Exactly so. :)

Generaly, I notice English is rather well writen in public forums as compared to the way Portuguese is. But what I don't get is: I have never, ever been to any English-speaking country, and only had less than two years of English classes; still, sometimes I think I can write English better than "natives"... I realy can't get that many people (who were born "with" English) purpousely confuse their/there/they're, were/wear/where, you/your/you're, than/then and a few others. For me, together with other obvious stuff, this is lack of will to be understood, maybe even lack of will to be taken seriously.

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[celsofaf]

I just want to know whether I got you right... :D


The improper use of the verb concede, usually by football commentators and newsreaders, has been driving me potty for the last 30 years.
My old English Master would reach for his toy cap gun and fire wildly at any boy uttering such phrases as "West Ham conceded defeat". (It pained me to have to type that...).

Would the proper meaning of "West Ham conceded defeat" be something like "West Ham won" (that is, West Ham gave the other team the "right" to lose), and the implied (or wanted) meaning be something like "West Ham lost"?

[dbbolton]

i'm not convinced that english ever was an art.

[fuscia]

i'm not convinced that english ever was an art.

sure it is. it's like a collage.

[dbbolton]

sure it is. it's like a collage.
a collage that was made by tearing apart other beautiful works :'(

[PartisanEntity]

Technically, based on the rest of your post, you mean "bad language is one my pet peeves".

Ask a pedantic question, get a pedantic answer... :)

Hehe yes that's right! :)

[Zimmer]

I just want to know whether I got you right... :D



Would the proper meaning of "West Ham conceded defeat" be something like "West Ham won" (that is, West Ham gave the other team the "right" to lose), and the implied (or wanted) meaning be something like "West Ham lost"?

Exactly... annoying, isn't it? Grates on the brain like fingernails down a blackboard.
The worst part is that they extend it to the rest of the commentary. "...conceded a free kick...conceded a penalty...conceded possesion.." etc. etc.

They love the sound of the word. Pretty soon I reckon the dictionary will change the meaning of the word to reflect common ( how apt) usage.

[crispingatiesa]

That is the price to pay for becoming a lingua franca. The more it spreads the more noise it incorporates.

It just the way it is. After latin became the standard in the Roman Empire it forked in many different dialects which are today's modern romantic languages, could we just to image what ancient romans were thinking about those "barbarians" destroying latin?


PS: My mother tongue is not english

[zubrug]

And all english speaking people should dress alike!

[luizfar]

Exactly so. :)

Generaly, I notice English is rather well writen in public forums as compared to the way Portuguese is. But what I don't get is: I have never, ever been to any English-speaking country, and only had less than two years of English classes; still, sometimes I think I can write English better than "natives"... I realy can't get that many people (who were born "with" English) purpousely confuse their/there/they're, were/wear/where, you/your/you're, than/then and a few others. For me, together with other obvious stuff, this is lack of will to be understood, maybe even lack of will to be taken seriously.

:confused: :confused: :confused:

I totally agree with you. I don't get how native English speakers confuse you and you're. As an English learner, I have many other more complicated things to worry about.

Besides, not just English, but every language is always changing.
Internet contributes a lot for that, people are lazy to type every keys, so 'u' is easier than 'you'. The same word has the same problem in Portuguese: 'vc' is far more common than 'você'. In Portuguese it doesn't annoy me anymore... but in English it just makes learners more confused and, what is even worse, makes us write like that without the knowledge that it's wrong.

Sorry for English mistakes :) (At least I have the excuse that I'm not a native English speaker ^^ )

[userundefine]

Shortening words and abbreviation on the internet isn't much of a problem, IMO. In French, "c'est" gets often replaced as "c", "d'accord" can get shortened to "dak", and many other examples. I think this originated with SMS, which is understandable since you want to say as much as you can in a fixed limit. English isn't alone in the phenomenon.

[fuscia]

I don't get how native English speakers confuse you and you're. As an English learner, I have many other more complicated things to worry about.

you meant your and you're, yes? if you did, then those two words are homonyms. in another language, french, for example, second person possesive isn't so close to the second person conjugation of the verb to be; meaning that "votre table" is less likely to be confused with "vous etes". there are a lot of errors made with homonyms, by americans, at least. someone studying english, as a second language, is much more likely to be careful of such distinctions as they have not reached the level of indifference inherent in a native speaker.

[Sef]

Not only english, but also portuguese (and maybe other languages too, who knows...).
That´s why I spend more time reading and posting in ubuntuforums than (then?) in the brazilian forum..

Than is correct. Than is used to state a preference. Then is used to showed that something happened after something else.

[fredbird67]

As the son of a now-retired high school English teacher, stuff like this really irks me no end. What's even worse is when I see errors like this on NEWS websites! Sheeesh!

[futureproof]

If the meaning of the speaker/writer is understood by the recipient then I can't see what the problem is. English is not Latin, it is a living lanuage that is changing all the time, grammatical rules and spellings are bound to change. There is no need to stick to rigid language rules. The next step will be to start on accents, can you imagine how it would be if we all spoke RP?

[st0n3cutt3r]

Wow. Awesome!

I just came to the forums specifically to post a thread on this topic after yet another encounter with my ex-girlfriend whom I am keeping in contact with mainly to remind myself of why I have high standards when it comes to girls I am willing to date.

"your retarded" "...and you're an idiot."

If I had to point to one thing that has contributed the most to this plague of grammar failures, it would be arrogance.

"Why is this so hard for people?" It certainly isn't; they just don't care.

This is clearly a radical approach, but even when you ridicule people for their misuse of words and low-quality grammar, they still don't care because clearly they are better than you, and you are just some kind of idiot with nothing better to do with your time than bug them. (Probably not too far from the truth if you think that anything can be gained from reasoning with them.)

I am not perfect. I do not attempt to convince other people nor myself of it. Quite frankly, I would not be surprised if there are grammatical errors in this post. I can't even remember if it's 'bad grammar' or 'poor grammar', but I'll look it up before I'll use either.

And as to using u or ur *shudder* even I have been known to abbreviate things like that, although not usually you or your/you're, but things like 'gonna' when I'm talking to my friends because I feel like being silly.

The difference is doing it by choice and knowing the rules, as opposed to doing it out of ignorance.

[popch]

If the meaning of the speaker/writer is understood by the recipient then I can't see what the problem is. (...) The next step will be to start on accents, can you imagine how it would be if we all spoke RP?

What is an 'RP' ?

[Arkenzor]

I didn't read the whole thread, but I as a french speaker can't help but think you people are pretty lucky. MMORPG talk has already taken over most french-speaking forums/irc channels/IM services/whatever. It's also become almost unusual to read a french news post or article without a single spelling mistake these days.

BTW, everyone says it's english's fault :P.

[SupaSonic]

It's not just the English language really. It's happening with Russian, Estonian and I'm sure pretty much any language in the world.

You can't stop it. Language does not have a constant state. It's an ever-changing living thing. 100 or 200 years from now probably people will consider leetspeak a romantic and poetic style of the old days.

Look at what I was taught at school. Take the word(s?) "ain't" for instance. I don't think there are (m)any schools that teach English as a second language that explain this word, despite it being very common in everyday speech.

It's up to everyone to speak the language they consider adequate. For better or for worse, many people consider r0flmao lolz adequate.

[PartisanEntity]

It's not just the English language really. It's happening with Russian, Estonian and I'm sure pretty much any language in the world.

You can't stop it. Language does not have a constant state. It's an ever-changing living thing. 100 or 200 years from now probably people will consider leetspeak a romantic and poetic style of the old days.

Look at what I was taught at school. Take the word(s?) "ain't" for instance. I don't think there are (m)any schools that teach English as a second language that explain this word, despite it being very common in everyday speech.

It's up to everyone to speak the language they consider adequate. For better or for worse, many people consider r0flmao lolz adequate.

Yes and no. For example the spoken dialects in many Arab countries differ quite a lot and have changed over time, but written Arabic, no matter which Arab country, has not changed, it's still the same Arabic you find in the Quran which was conveyed about 1400 years ago.

It’s quite funny actually, if two Arabs from different countries try to communicate in their local spoken dialects, they will have trouble understanding each other, but if they switch to proper Arabic they will speak the same language.

It is similar in German, speaking in a Viennese accent or dialect sounds terrible and few will understand it, but speaking proper German will get you understood in Germany, Lichtenstein, Switzerland probably as well.

So I really think it depends on the language. English seems to be very flexible and 'free flowing' that’s why it changes so rapidly.

[Forrest Gumpp]

The difference is doing it by choice and knowing the rules, as opposed to doing it out of ignorance.

Like what I strive to do in this here place! And like what I so much admire even the more so among non-native English speakers.

And, while we're at it ('e sez, beginning 'is sentence wiv a conjunction), re 'than' vs 'then': when in New Zealand, the explanations are to be transposed.

Example: Graffiti seen in West Auckland (Bondi): Q: What's a hindu?
A: Lays iggs, stupid! Ivery one knows thut!



Jest a lettle but uf Entupodean Englotuxtuphony. An example of the phenomenon of the progressive semi-random substitution of the vowels, a consequence of the effect of increasing latitude and the Coriolis effect upon English speaking communities in the southern hemisphere. Particularly severe south of latitude 34 degrees S, and east of 152 degrees E longitude.

Venture into this region and you're only safe if you're a Trappist monk!

[Visti]

To put it bluntly, this whole argument is completely redundant. Language is ever-evolving and the English language in its current form is actually quite new. Especially compared to other languages. So to state that your generation's English is the status quo and thus the correct and only English is simply close-minded.

The only languages that die are the ones that don't evolve to allow new expression when needed. Seriously, go back a few hundred years and try talking to the people there. They are also speaking English. Just to give you an idea, here's a little quotation from original English Beowulf:


Ða wæs on burgum Beowulf Scyldinga,
leof leodcyning, longe þrage
55
folcum gefræge (fæder ellor hwearf,
aldor of earde), oþþæt him eft onwoc
heah Healfdene; heold þenden lifde,
gamol ond guðreouw, glæde Scyldingas.
ðæm feower bearn forð gerimed
60
in worold wocun, weoroda ræswan,
Heorogar ond Hroðgar ond Halga til;
hyrde ic þæt wæs Onelan cwen,
Heaðoscilfingas healsgebedda.
þa wæs Hroðgare heresped gyfen,
65
wiges weorðmynd, þæt him his winemagas
georne hyrdon, oðð þæt seo geogoð geweox,
magodriht micel. Him on mod bearn
þæt healreced hatan wolde,
medoærn micel, men gewyrcean


I bet when what they spoke evolved into what we speak now, they thought their language was dying, but that's just not true. Language evolves for a reason - to keep up with what needs to be said. Plain and simple.


Ninja-edit: reading closer, I see that my point has been brought up already. Kudos!

[popch]

To put it bluntly, this whole argument is completely redundant. Language is ever-evolving and the English language in its current form is actually quite new.

I do not know how others feel about this, but I do not care all that much what the language will be like in this forum in - let's say - two hundred years from now, or what it would have been two hundred years ago, had there been such a thing as an internet and a forum and Ubuntu, back then.

I am more concerned about the use of language as a means of communication here and now.

For me, it is simply a matter of courtesy to write in a manner which can be understood by the greatest number of members with the least effort.

People who try to seem to be witty by writing incomprehensibly will fully succeed in one and not quite half in the other: they will not be understood, and they will seem to be half-wits, to wit.

[BDNiner]

languages change, the english we speak now is very different for the language 100 years ago.

[UBUSNAFU]

If somebody makes a typo or gramatical error in a forum discussing Ubuntu and other topics I see no problem with that. If I had wanted prose I would go to a fora dedicated to that purpose. I would also check everything I typed very closely given that most of my forum posts always end up with that little "Last edited" line at the bottom.

Neither do I object to the occasional mistake by somebody who is far more comfortable with a vastly different language. As has been mentioned I have known many of them to be far more careful than people who have English (Whatever) as their native language.

What I cannot tolerate is a trained professional who is getting paid for their abilities making gross mistakes. Websites and technical documents come to mind immediately. Part of the job is proofreading and knowing how to run the spelling and grammar checker. The other side to this is what it says about the companies and their values. If I visit a major corporations employment page and their position descriptions look like they were written by a drunken spider that fell in the inkwell and crawled across the page then I am not going to have much confidence in them at all. Likewise if I receive a resume littered with mistakes it is not likely to get looked at before it's short trip to the shredder.

Of course a living language will change. Fair suck a tha sauce bottle mate. But there is a very big difference between using it to yarn amongst ya drunken mates at tha pub and trying to impress your message upon somebody else. That is just plain lazy and self defeating.

My 2c anyway.

[handy]

I have no knowledge of the rules of grammar, & also I am a phonetic speller, who's spelling has improved dramatically over the decades; though I still have dreadful trouble with double letters in words as they usually make no logical sense to me.

I usually try very hard to communicate my meaning as best I can, though my discourse also usually suffers from circumlocution.

With admiration & respect I view the writings of the masters, though I am not hung up on judging other peoples efforts, I know I have no right.

The only writing that I find difficult to deal with is an ambiguous question in the forums.