Somethink annoying

Oriented is OK by me yeah, no? Look it up, it’s perfectly valid and is generally prevalent, over ‘orientated’, in technical and scientific literature.

Ignore the American who think ‘orientated’ isn’t a word, this is a good pedantic discussion:

http://inluminent.com/2003/05/08/its-oriented-not-orientated/

seeking to eschew certain rules of punctuation

hmmm, does *anyone* know what a semicolon means ? I don’t 🙁 It seems to me punctuation is open to creative use as much as any other part of written language 🙂

The suggestion that legal language leads to clarity is hilarious :o)

There have been several occasions on internet forums where bad spelling and/or punctuation have lead to misunderstandings.

There have been several occasions on internet forums where correct spelling and/or punctuation have lead to misunderstandings.
🙂

if it werent for punctuation abuse we would be without the great ; ) or indeed more common : ).

Not to mention the hilarious : P

Punctuation: Enriching our online existences since 1991

Evolution innit.

What have you started here Dez!;)

There are only two that I can think of, and they may have been already mentioned. One is schedule pronounced ‘skedule’ and the other is the letter ‘h’ pronounced with a hard ‘h’as in hat, if that makes any sense.

Australian soaps are to blame for ‘skedule’ IMO.

and the other is the letter ‘h’ pronounced with a hard ‘h’as in hat, if that makes any sense.

apparently not – it which contexts ?

What have you started here Dez!;)

Its cos I’m so middleclass 😉

To concentrate on these trivia is to deny the basic point of language, which is communication, not conformance

Communication goes out of the window if two people are not following the same rules; even in general discussion and talking the meaning of sentences can be completely obvious or utterly vague depending on how you structure your sentence. This might lead to more social contact and laughter but it does not improve communication. The prime example is the mixture of linux and windows – software engineers write the drivers for windows. Linux bods deconstruct the language the drivers use and try to reconstruct it so Linux can use that hardware too – but generally they miss bits, bugger up the odd rule and make their own implementations of things – this is fine if you’re making your own hardware but when you come to plug your webcam into a linux box it is a matter of plug and pray – sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, but more often than not only part of the potential of the item is available. The same goes with communication between humans, if we degrade our communication by removing rules that make its foundations, we limit our potential to communicate complex matters.

One more, for the road….

I bought a tyre. NOT I brought a tyre. Come on, I know they sound the same, but they are two totally different words and the one you’re mis-using is even longer to type (or say)!

I blame yoda…………………

Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will.

Lifted from a current ebay ad.

I think the man has a point.

hi

you a biding on a dd32 doble wall front disc wheel. The wheel has some marks onit, but nothink of any damage as you can see in the pictures. Its a disc wheel and is a good light wheel to go on any 26inch bike.

take a look at my othere items!

thanks for looking

Simon, ‘h’ as in saying the letter ‘h’ – a b c d e f g h etc. Pronounced ‘aitch’ and not ‘haitch’.

We’re all pedantic here! ;0)

Unless that ebayer is under 6, or has recently moved to Britain from overseas, or is not very fluent in English, I’d say that is absolutely appalling. Bloody Hell. How can someone’s use of language be so bad?

Communication goes out of the window if two people are not following the same rules;

Disagree. Everyone has different rules, for language and everything else too. Obviously this impinges upon understanding, but we have enough flexibility to muddle through most of the time. Some rules make more difference than others, as “don’t talk with your mouth full” is much more important than ‘no apostrophe in “its” when referring to something belonging to a thing’

Pronounced ‘aitch’ and not ‘haitch’.

I quite like ‘haitch’ and ‘skedule’, though I choose not to use them myself :o)

Disagree. Everyone has different rules, for language and everything else too. Obviously this impinges upon understanding, but we have enough flexibility to muddle through most of the time. Some rules make more difference than others, as “don’t talk with your mouth full” is much more important than ‘no apostrophe in “its” when referring to something belonging to a thing’

But, as you say, you have to muddle through and it only works “most of the time”. I’m not disagreeing about talking with your mouthful, but i’d not say it was more or less important – we should strive to do things correctly if we wish to be taken seriously. Obviously correct is dependent on your context, so using legal description in a north-east youthclub wouldnt get you very far, but that is only because the people at the club do not follow the rules prescribed (hopefully) in primary school. But likewise, the “dumbing down” of the language due to adoption of lazy alternatives makes it less likely that the average person can understand anything *”more” than banter online or in a pub. *by more I mean complex use of our language such as, but not limited to, legal or academic use for example.

At some point we have to take it to extremes and say where does it end, when we regress back to grunts because we can’t be bothered forming correct sentences? Sure, there are bigger problems in the world, but that doesnt mean we have to stop trying at the smaller ones.

But likewise, the “dumbing down” of the language due to adoption of lazy alternatives

I suspect people having been moaning about this since they felt grunting was being devalued. Times change, get over it 🙂

Has no-one here heard of Hart’s Rules?

Sometimes people must be precise, but they meet the limits of language, and argument over meaning is then inevitable. My point is that the even most finely honed cutting edge use of language is not the cure some think it is. Legal language is archaic, as recognised by Lord Woolf and the reforms he put into place. That’s not always a useful criticism, though. Experts’ terminology is often impenetrable to others.

Sometimes gist is more important than specific detail. It’s a question of register. Despite their professed level of literacy, few people are comfortable with, or able to, step out of their own register. Who is a better linguist, the specialist/one trick pony or the generalist/master of none? (rhetorical question alert)

I think people have probably always worried that we’re ‘all going to hell in a handcart'(™Daily Mail). I also think there’s no basis for saying so. In this context, literacy levels are rising. So called ‘dumbing down’ is what made English the language it is today. It has followed an organic dialectic process whereby elements of different languages were simplified in order that everyone could communicate. (eg Norse met Saxon, and lost the bits of words they didn’t have in common, kept the bits they did..have. etc)This led to maybe the real advantage of English per se over other languages; it’s flexibility and the ease with which it can evolve.

Yes, but this ISN’T evolution, or the addition of extra languages and their advantages – it’s degredation from within. If you think literacy levels are increasing I fear you dont have much contact with the current university level youth?

Times change, get over it

What a silly attitude.

What a silly attitude.

oh, you can say that in grunts then ??

uggh.ughhhh ug ugh. 🙂

uggh.ughhhh ug ugh. [:)]

ah, but surely you meant, “uggh.ughrrhhhg ug ugch.” ??

I’ll check that wheel out on Ebay. Sounds like a bargin.

I think you’ll find that’s a grocers’ rr you’ve added there simon.

Looking anecdotally at university students’ literacy is no measure of trends.

As late as 1841, 33% of all Englishmen and 44% of Englishwomen signed marriage certificates with their mark as they were unable to write (government-financed public education became available in England in 1870)

I wasn’t talking about the addition of extra languages and their advantages, but something quite different. Each language in the process would encounter ‘degradation’, as perceived by its speakers. They would probably also say this wasn’t evolution. I don’t take a position on whether ‘sumfink’ represents an evolutionary step, in the same way that a Galapagos Islands finch couldn’t take a position as to whether its chick’s slightly different beak represented one. We’re in it and too close to it to have such an overview.

As late as 1841, 33% of all Englishmen and 44% of Englishwomen signed marriage certificates with their mark as they were unable to write

an interesting statistic, but I wonder how one could tell in retrospect if something is a ‘mark’ or a signature, given the typical illegibility of most signatures ?

We’re in it and too close to it to have such an overview.

I don’t think so – it’s easy to recognise many traits and Americanisms that have become part of everday English speak eg, “Cool” “nerd”, or more recently “my bad” (which isn’t going to go away, unfortunately!)

“Somethink” & “nothink” are just moronic though.

(Actually I’m not that bothered by “sumfin” or “sumfink” as that’s usually down to regional accent. Like what I’ve got.)

it’s easy to recognise many traits and Americanisms that have become part of everday English speak

just because they’re nominally American does not make them intrinsically bad. Language is essentially the fashion of grunts – where the fashion originates hardly matters. Also many ‘Americanisms’ are in fact fossilised Elizabethan Englisisms…

I know I am going to annoy SFB with that but hey I don’t really care.
As foreigner I have bee in situations where my poor english and very bad knowledge of the grammar have made me look daft, or even worth, made me buy stuff I didn’t really wanted or get a service I wasn’t looking for.
I am most annoyed by people (french or english lets face it) that butcher the language under the so wrong excuse to sound cool, or to be an anarchist (a bit like you SFB). Grammar and other language rules exists for a purpose, make the communication between being easier. The same way traffic rules exist to make the journey easier.

You all could ask people who have meet me, and I am sure they all would be able to tell you a very shameful story where I said something and they understood something else.

So I am sorry SFB and others but grammar is useful, and do serve a purpose.

Looking anecdotally at university students’ literacy is no measure of trends.

I would say that looking at (supposedly, by definition) the better educated percentage of a society for a trend in literacy is a perfect measure of trends – it is the place where the standards should have fallen the least. Regardless of perceived worth, these people should be better able to string together a sentence in their mother tongue than anyone. Its hardly anecdotal, its from a few years of working with them in a couple of institutions reviewing and marking their work. It’s reached the point where the majority of incoming chinese students are now more capable of writing a technical paper, with fewer mistakes in grammar, than the English students.

I’m all for the incorporation of new words from other areas, and to some extent I’m happy with local “mis-use” of the language, but in written form the rules exist to maintain a backbone on which evolution can run its course. But evolution does imply improvement, redusing ar sentenses and grammer t ummmm a ummmm fingy where whathizface cannt say what ee meens cz iz basic language skillz ave gone is not improvement, even if it does convey a basic “gist” of a sentence.

Anyway, I’m bored of this argument now. Have a nice day, all! I am fascinated by what “service” you accidentally bought, Juan! 🙂

just because they’re nominally American does not make them intrinsically bad.

I didn’t say they were bad, I use them myself (Except “my bad”!)

You all could ask people who have meet me, and I am sure they all would be able to tell you a very shameful story where I said something and they understood something else.

I know one… “I’d rather stay here looking at you”: I’m sure you meant something else!! 😀

yes surely when was that BTW?

Southampton General. To the receptionist… 😆

ROFL yes remember now 😉 but that is what I meant she was very pretty 😉

I know I am going to annoy SFB with that but hey I don’t really care

you’ll have to try harder than that if you wish to annoy me

Grammar and other language rules exists for a purpose, make the communication between being easier.

however there is no defined authority to set these rules, which have arisen instead by general agreement [BTW I could have put ‘instead arisen’ with no change in meaning], and we are all capable of coping with a steady drift in usage, spelling and pronunciation which in due time leads to the development of new languages. I didn’t say we didn’t need grammar, only that it need not be immutable.

Steady drift is fine, single-generation jumps due to laziness and lack of knowledge are not. The problem is that English is an international language, in order for it to remain an international language, understandable by all of its speakers, the basic rules must remain the same, and it must be hed more rigidly than that of a small and little used language. If we dont do this we end up with different languages again, as I understand it the Chinese have a few variations on Chinese – while they may get the gist of something the other is saying as the language is similar, they need to formally learn the other language to be fluent with people in their own country?

Steady drift is fine, single-generation jumps due to laziness and lack of knowledge are not.

here’s a thing – there’s nothing you can do about it. Because it’s fashion, everyone gets to choose how they use it, and a dynamic consensus emerges, which no one can control