[Closed] Decline in writing standards

I blame internet forums 😆

"affect vs effect" - to be honest I struggle with this one. Generally you affect an effect, yeah? Though you can also effect an effect. But you effect a change? And affect a personality disorder?

Its a homonym which is explained quite well at yourdictionary.com

Quite honestly it scares me how poorly people write these days. Simple words used incorrectly - affect vs effect, bought vs brought and so on. Sentence construction that borders on a paragraph. Don't get me started on comma's'''''''

Quite honestly it scares me that you don't know the difference between a comma and an apostrophe, but there you go.

I'm sure the rest of the gramer (sick 🙂 ) police will be along soon to complain about your verbless blairite phrasing "Sentence construction that borders on a paragraph".

commas ARE apostrophes , remember I am upside down to you .... 😀 And it was written ironically ....

If such things worry you enough to start a thread about it on an mtb website perhaps you need to take a break. Isn't there a sheep around you can vent your obviously easily built-up stress on (or in)?

The one thing I do detest is people writing in text speak, even on this forum

IE- c u l8r m8

🙄

an mtb website

Ok is there a reason why it's not 'a mtb website'?

Ok is there a reason why it's not 'a mtb website'?

Coz it,s "an em tee bee", not "a em tee bee"

because the sound of 'm' begins with a vowel.

Ah you see I still read mtb as mountain bike, not 'em tee bee', so I would say 'a mtb website'.

Strictly speaking, it should be 'a mtb website' because you should write sentences that include abbreviations as though the term was not abbreviated. You would not write 'an mountain bike website' so you shouldn't write 'an mtb website'.

I'm with NZCol on this one. The standard of writing is getting worse and worse. Exam results might be getting better, but what about the level of knowledge and skill that kids are actually gaining?

One of the reasons that I've done as well as I have in my career is because I can write correctly, producing well thought out and articulated documents. In every company I've worked in, this has been remarked on as a rare skill which, while flattering, I do find to be rather depressing.

Do not get me started on something as basic as the correct use of the words 'there', 'they're' and 'their'.

people don't read books. if they did, they'd have more experience of how things are written.

It doesn't matter. Communication is more important than "writing standards". So long as the meaning is clear, it's fine.

And "an mtb website" is actually an accepted style because of how you pronounce the letter m.

Strictly speaking, it should be 'a mtb website' because you should write sentences that include abbreviations as though the term was not abbreviated. You would not write 'an mountain bike website' so you shouldn't write 'an mtb website'.

That's entirely debateable, for example this (admittedly Canadian) style guide follows the practice shown above: http://archive.idrc.ca/books/edit/sg07e.html

Unless its for a job as an english teacher, a journalist or something similar, or the meaning was completely lost I wouldn't really be caring.

Were they engineers? They're not genetically predisposed to accurate spelling or grammar.

Submission day here at work and I'm being driven mad by colleagues writing 'myself' and 'yourself' in documents rather than 'me' and 'you'. It doesn't make you sound clever, it makes you sound like a footballer.

NZCol - Affect and effect are not homonyms.

Strictly speaking, it should be 'a mtb website' because you should write sentences that include abbreviations as though the term was not abbreviated. You would not write 'an mountain bike website' so you shouldn't write 'an mtb website'.

Strictly peaking that is complete tosh.

The generally accepted method of choosing 'a' or 'an' before an abbreviation in modern english is based on verbalising the abbreviation, especially when discussing matters involving abbreviations that all parties privvy to the conversation understand the full meaning of, such as 'MTB' in this instance

The other method (word verbalised) looks and reads awkwardly.

MTB is not an abbreviation of Moun Tain Bike. It stands for the archaic "Multi Terrain Bike"

It might be possible that one or two of them could be dyslexic which would let them off I think :)- probably not all four though!

Were they engineers? They're not genetically predisposed to accurate spelling or grammar

I'll have to object to that comment! All the engineers I studied with were perfectly capable of spelling and grammar. Unfortunately many of the ones I tutor/deal with now are incapable of stringing a sentence together properly. While some on here suggest it's unimportant unless you're an English teacher or similar, I'll have to disagree. The number of times I've come across sentences that were completely ambiguous due to the punctuation is quite scary. The whole lower level education system now seems to lean towards "don't be negative, you'll upset them, so long as the meaning is there the details don't matter". This is a mistake IMO, teach good habits from a young age allows them to be carried forward into adulthood - we're very poor at re-learning these basic skills later (such as degree level). It's about time the education system stepped up to the table, admitted it's failings and sorted them. Instead they claim higher and higher pass rates while eroding course content and brushing over the details. I'm far from perfect, in fact I'm sure there's a mistake or two in here but in my forum posts I rarely pay particular notice to spelling and grammar, but in anything written for my job I would be embarrassed if it left with ANY mistakes.

coffeeking - Any chance of spliting all that up into smaller chunks? 😉

The way I write and the way I think are very closely connected. I'm not sure whether my thoughts would be any use if I couldn't write well.

sooty - no, that's a perfectly acceptable paragraph size, but I suppose I could split it at "The whole lower..." if you like? 😆

A few things:

I'm being driven mad by colleagues writing 'myself' and 'yourself' in documents rather than 'me' and 'you'. It doesn't make you sound clever, it makes you sound like a footballer.

I'm a lawyer. The written word is our tool, and yet the number of my colleagues who do this is extraordinary. Naturally, each trainee of mine receives a quick lesson in "me, myself and I" before I let them loose with things like email, let alone documents or letters.

Quite honestly it scares me how poorly people write these days.

I'm not sure that there has been a decline as such. Rather, I suspect that there are more people who, as a result of the changes in the way we communicate, have the opportunity and requirement to write more than they would have had in a similar job say 40 years ago.

4 reports written by 4 people

Which, of course, should be written [b]four[/b] reports written by [b]four[/b] people....

🙂

How much of it can be blamed on spellcheckers? If you are used to using one as I am then sometimes the wrong word sneaks through as in affect and effect as this is not picked up by the spellchecker

So, it is a mtb forum or an mtb forum?
I though you could not have two vowel following each other (an apple and a bus) so I always though it was a mtb...
Am I wrong again?

How much of it can be blamed on spellcheckers? If you are used to using one as I am then sometimes the wrong word sneaks through as in affect and effect as this is not picked up by the spellchecker

Peoples reliance on spelling checkers, yes, they assume they're always going to catch the fault and get lazy, instead of learning the correct words for the correct location.

juan - that is a very debatable topic that I'm sure a lot of English tutors would argue over. 99% of the UK public would go with "an MTB forum" because, as said earlier, the choice between a and an is done based on the vocal representation of the next word.

ChrisF - I thought they were ? We debated it at work today, my proof reader then resorted to Google to prove they were and the results seemed to sugest they were classed as one. However i felt they didn't meet the rules. Anyway, there's some nice grammar rules here http://www.yourdictionary.com/grammar-rules/affect-effect-grammar.html

Sorry for the delay, I was out rooting sheep because, and lets be honest, there's nothing else to do in NZ. <---- Look I used a comma there as well...

I'd like to thank you for your contribution, I'm off to buy the bottle of wine I brought today.
😀

[i]"an MTB forum"[/i]

The confusion can be avoided by referring to it as "[u]a[/u]toss-pit". 😀

I'm off to buy the bottle of wine I brought today

Now that's grammatically correct nonsense!

I've done a fair bit of proof reading in the past as well as writing for magazines and it drives me mad correcting basic things like their/there/they're.
My previous career was in chemical engineering and honestly, some of the technical documents I've seen are cringe worthy in how bad the grammar and spelling is. The usual response, even from my senior managers, was simply "Oh, you get the meaning of it, stop worrying"

Grrr

rolfharris - Member
It doesn't matter. Communication is more important than "writing standards". So long as the meaning is clear, it's fine.

I agree with NZ Col, even if he is a sheep rooter.

But, silver lining, it is very easy to write a stunning report these days, as most of what comes across execs desks is exactly the dross to which you refer. All you need is a basic command of english and the ability to express a concept with less than 30 words, and success is yours !

I say let the standards continue to slip, they allow anybody into university these days there has to be some way of separating the wheat from the chav.

The usual response, even from my senior managers, was simply "Oh, you get the meaning of it, stop worrying"

To be fair [b]if[/b] the meaning is clear, any time spent modifying these documents is time (and money) wasted - assuming we're talking about technical documents for internal use only.

there has to be some way of separating the wheat from the chav.

It shouldn't be at the job level though. But you're right, it's not hard to shine when those around you are so dull.

separating the wheat from the chav.

That's very good (I hope).

I stopped buying Singletrack magazine because of the poor standard of writing in it.

Bizarrely I always internally vocalise "mtb" as "mountainbike" when I read it. So to me "a mtb forum" actually makes perfect sense, but I can see that those who read it as "em-tee-bee" would prefer an "an".

And no, effect and affect are not homonyms:

[b]homonym[/b] [b][i]noun[/i][/b] a word with the same sound and spelling as another, but with a different meaning, eg [i]kind[/i](helpful) and [i]kind[/i](sort).
-- [url= http://www.chambersharrap.co.uk/chambers/features/chref/chref.py/main?query=homonym ]Chambers[/url]

Sorry for the delay, I was out rooting sheep because, and lets be honest, there's nothing else to do in NZ. <---- Look I used a comma there as well...

Missing apostrophe in let's. Tsk, tsk.

Communication is more important than "writing standards".

In my experience this is usually said by those who struggle to communicate.

Were they engineers? They're not genetically predisposed to accurate spelling or grammar.

You should try working with Maths graduates.

Why thank you.

I bemoan the decline in original thought more than standards of writing.

There was a funny and very topical piece on the radio last week from the guys that did Peep Show, about a new service called "i-reckon". To save you the hassle of thinking you can download all your views and opinions direct from the internet. All neatly sorted and searchable by author, theme etc. It even had a shuffle function...

as a product of the current education system, please don't shoot me down.. but I'd appreciate some answers on a current sentence I'm stuck on:

a group of sheep were gathered
a group of sheep was gathered

'were' sounds nicer. but I'm thinking it's 'was' as 'group' is a singular noun?? (I really don't know what I'm on about)
and I got an A in Higher English.. 🙁

this is all about whether you think a group of sheep is a count noun or not. by that i mean can you count the constituent parts of the group.
if its a count noun then its were
if its not then its was

i think sheep could go either way because a big mass of sheep is hard to count! although of course to go to sleep you count sheep so who knows.

a flock of sheep were on the road
a flock of sheep was on the road - i think its this one
some sheep were on the road - this is definitely right