Thread: Textspeak, poor grammar and a general grump.

Originally Posted by bbshriver

I think the above offense was due to improper translation from Swedish into English. Our parent company is Swedish, and that article seems to have originated in Sweden. Still, one would expect relatively proper grammar.

Perhaps...that sounds more like Engrish though. I've known many a Swede, and they all had excellent grammar. Who knows

Originally Posted by gregs656

I'll be interested to see what happens with written English, it is entirely possible that the teaching of it will change.

Teaching of English has already changed. The trendy, modern approach is to declare that English is a living language (as opposed to a fixed or "dead" one) and conclude that the rules aren't really so important. Instead of teaching the rules, practicing them, then testing understanding, children are encouraged to write things, then discuss how they feel about what they've written.

When the people teaching English are of the opinion that there is no such thing as "correct" English, is it any surprise that illiteracy rates are constantly going up?

Edit>

Failure to teach three Rs 'damaging economy'

Research undertaken by Cambridge University as part of the Primary Review has found that failure to teach children the three Rs at a young age is damaging the British economy. The Telegraph reports that productivity lags as much as 25% behind economic competitors, such as Germany, France and the US because workers lack basic reading, writing and numeracy skills. Researchers say that thousands of children from poor homes are being let down by the state education system which exacerbates inequalities as government policies which give parents a choice of schools benefit affluent families who are better at playing the system.

(Telegraph, 18 January 2008)

Firms are forced to teach teenage workers the 3Rs

The Telegraph reported that companies are being forced to give teenagers remedial lessons in English and maths because they leave school with such a poor grasp of the three Rs.

The CBI surveyed more than 500 companies with 1.1million employees. They found that 52% of employers are dissatisfied with the basic literacy of school leavers and 50% with their basic numeracy, but 92% are satisfied with their IT skills. Half of employers said some teenagers were ‘unable to function in the workplace’ claiming they cannot make simple calculations in their heads, speak in an articulate manner or understand written instructions.

(Telegraph, 20 August 2007)

When did this change? I graduated high school in 2003, and all through school I was certainly taught that english had definite rules. I view it much the same as music.

There's "proper" music, and then there's Jazz. (ignore other stuff for now). "Proper" music follows strict rules and guidelines, while Jazz is generally improvised, *however* to get really good Jazz you still need to know the rules and know what can be changed and what can't. Just randomly banging on a piano doesn't count as Jazz... it's just noise. Same goes for language, there are acceptable ways to depart from "proper" English, but you have to do so within certain limits.

I'm fond of making up words, based on general rules. For instance, one of my favorite made-up words is "inceed" as in the opposite of "exceed". Makes sense to me, and most others.

Originally Posted by Rajagra

Teaching of English has already changed. The trendy, modern approach is to declare that English is a living language (as opposed to a fixed or "dead" one) and conclude that the rules aren't really so important. Instead of teaching the rules, practicing them, then testing understanding, children are encouraged to write things, then discuss how they feel about what they've written.

When the people teaching English are of the opinion that there is no such thing as "correct" English, is it any surprise that illiteracy rates are constantly going up?

Originally Posted by bbshriver

I'm fond of making up words, based on general rules. For instance, one of my favorite made-up words is "inceed" as in the opposite of "exceed". Makes sense to me, and most others.

Reminds me of how people from India say to "prepone a meeting." (Opposite of postpone.) I don't object to things like that. As long as it is logical and you can work out what it means after scratching your head for a minute or so.

First, I'm a spelling and grammar freak. That being said, I've had to loosen my grip on the idea that everyone else should hold to my standards when it comes to the two. This thread has made me truly laugh as I've read (and mentally corrected) everyone's posts. I think I gave up the fight about the time "fishes" somehow became an accepted plural of fish.

Overall, language is about communication, and as long as the ideas are properly conveyed, then they've served their purpose. With that being said, here's some good humor for you (no offense meant by any of it):
__________________________________________________ __________________
The definition of English: a language that lurks in dark alleys, beats up other languages, and rifles through their pockets for spare vocabulary.
__________________________________________________ __________________
Arocdnicg to rsceearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pcale. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit pobelrm. Tihs is buseace the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
__________________________________________________ __________________
The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5-year phase-in plan that would be known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, 's' will replace the soft 'c'. Sertainly,this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard 'c' will be dropped in favor of the 'k'. This should klear up konfusion and keyboards kan have one less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome 'ph' will be replased with the 'f'. This will make words like 'fotograf' 20% shorter!

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expected to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double leters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent 'e' in the languag is disgrasful and it should go away.

By the 4th year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing 'th' with 'z' and 'w' wiz 'v'. During ze fifz year ze unesesary 'o' kan be dropd from vords kontaining 'ou' and similar changes vud of kurs be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.

After ze fifz yer ve vil hav a rali sensibl ritn styl. Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evriun vil find it ezi tu undrstand ech ozer.

Zen Z Drem Vil Finali Kum Tru!

Dude, I so know what you mean. The one I hate most because it's so prevalent is the misuse of 'then' and 'than'.

I read, "I would rather eat then go hungry", and my brain starts to hurt. Personally I would rather go hungry first and then eat.

The Society for the Promotion of Good Grammar

X

Originally Posted by 12stones

First, I'm a spelling and grammar freak. That being said, I've had to loosen my grip on the idea that everyone else should hold to my standards when it comes to the two. This thread has made me truly laugh as I've read (and mentally corrected) everyone's posts. I think I gave up the fight about the time "fishes" somehow became an accepted plural of fish.

Group of same species = fish. Group of different species = fishes.

Some of my other pet peeves are mistaking: venomous with poisonous, irony with coincidence, and literal with figurative.

How about other language rules that are common in English? I only speak English fluently but after visiting Italy I've found that usually a word ending in i is plural. For example, you would order one panino or two panini. "Paninis" is like saying "sandwicheses". Ending vowels are also pronounced, so provolone is "pro-va-lo'-nay" and calzone is "cal-zo'-nay". Of course my knowledge of that language is pretty much limited to food. Perhaps someone who speaks the langauge can clarify and/or correct.

One major problem English speaking people with a poor grasp of grammatical rules encounter is the difficulty learning another language.
If you can't differentiate between an adverb and an adjective, or know the difference between the perfect and imperfect tense in English, you are going to struggle with another language.
In Europe speaking another language can boost your job prospects. My daughter works for a large international accounting firm and speaking a second language is seen as virtually essential when moving up the career ladder.

Originally Posted by Quick Orange

Perhaps...that sounds more like Engrish though. I've known many a Swede, and they all had excellent grammar. Who knows

No No No. There is actually only on minor mistake in that sentence. Change "gets" to "get" and you actually have a pretty smooth, stylistically complext sentence.

Engrish (which, by the way, I always think I'm tired of seeing until a new ridiculous t-shirt comes along) would be something like:
"Problems are appear at the time of mistake persons obtaining them informations."

The bane of my existence...

I work with a group of tech editors. When I'm bored I give the same passage to each editor and then pass it on to the next.

Then I sit back and watch them edit their own mistakes all day long.

The only time I had this much fun was when I was in the Air Force and I would ask a group of pilots if a fly in the ****pit increased fuel consumption while it was flying.