|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Is Standardized Spelling Elitism?
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I have read some people claiming that having and/or enforcing standard spelling, punctuation, etc. (orthography) is elitist, and serves only to separate "us" from "them." It's meaningless, the argument goes, to "make" people spell (and punctuate etc) things "properly" except to make them feel bad and let them know that they're not as good as people who have mastered the standard orthography.
It seems to me that what standardized orthography allows is untroubled and quick reading. Humans only have so much working memory. If you know a word by sight, you don't have to waste any cognition figuring out. Words you don't recognize, you have to puzzle out. When a word is spelled weirdly, you have to stop and puzzle it out. A big chunk of text with random spelling would take much longer to read than the same chunk with the normal, recognized spelling. If you've ever tried to read the original 1611 King James, or some other old book with familiar words in unfamiliar spellings, you know what I mean. Fluency in reading a text with odd (to the reader) spellings is near impossible.
Or so it seems to me. I tried to see if any research had been done on this, but all the research I could find seems to be about beginning readers, who of course don't have regular word forms memorized, so any old spelling works -- they have to sound everything out.
It also seems to me that making excuses for people using non-standard orthography is basically racist and patronizing, as it is often raised in defense of minority groups. "Those poor blacks/Latinos/whatever," the argument seems to say. "They can't possibly learn to spell as easily as whites do. It's not fair to make them try." It's insulting.
What do people think?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
The bigger issue is one of practicality - if everyone writes what they consider to be a phonetic rendering of the word then I'm going to have awful trouble trying to read anything written by a Glaswegian even if I can work out the sounds they are trying to represent. Standard spelling allows for communication that doesn't depend on being able to understand accents. I understand Chinese is the extreme example, where written Chinese is mutually intelligible but the spoken dialects are largely incomprehensible to speakers of other dialects.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Alphabets are always approximations, so standardized spelling is necessary. More so in English, which has neither a dominant dialect nor a language academy. Whatever influence "The King's English" might have had has waned.
In French the entire idea of non-standarized spelling is absurd; there is one way, the only way, and that is the French Academy way. Any deviation from that pushes you down the respectability scale.
As an English Canadian with French as my second language, I speak French with a Québecois twang; it works because I want to get a job in Montreal, not Paris.
France-Québec jealousies are another thread though. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
Surely there's a solution to that jealousy though - simply emigrate to France and get the rest of Europe thrown in as well
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
English, as my Nepali staff struggle with it, is notoriously difficult to acquire as a second language, and even for my staff who are native speakers, it's difficult to spell.
Precise communication in written English is tough enough WITH standardized orthography, punctuation, and usage. Without these, communicating in English would become a nightmare.
There are a few hundred (maybe 350) words in common use (most of them coming down to us from the language's Anglo-Saxon roots) which seem to comply with no spelling "rules." (As a one-time English major, I seem to recall that the now-silent "L" in "half," for example, was pronounced back in Chaucer's day; all that's changed is the pronunciation.)
Most people who practice reading and writing on a regular basis will encounter these 350-or-so words constantly. Suck it up and memorize 'em.
The problem with this approach, of course, is that we are rapidly becoming a post-literate society. During a brief stint at college teaching, I was appalled at the writing my students turned in. Some of their papers were incoherent, illogical, and just plain indecipherable -- and these were people who had secondary-school diplomas. Ye gods.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
The bigger issue is one of practicality - if everyone writes what they consider to be a phonetic rendering of the word then I'm going to have awful trouble trying to read anything written by a Glaswegian even if I can work out the sounds they are trying to represent. Standard spelling allows for communication that doesn't depend on being able to understand accents.
I don't know whether they still do it, but the journal of the International Phonetic Association used to be published in the International Phonetic Alphabet.
I once had occasion to read an article written by an Englishman in the 1930s. The only way I could understand it was to read it aloud and listen to my voice producing a weird parody of an RP accnt.
It took me at least five times as long to read the article as it normally would have.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Most people who practice reading and writing on a regular basis will encounter these 350-or-so words constantly. Suck it up and memorize 'em.
That'll be 'memorise' - thank you.
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Most people who practice reading and writing on a regular basis will encounter these 350-or-so words constantly. Suck it up and memorize 'em.
That'll be 'memorise' - thank you.
Actually -ize endings are a valid, if vulgar ![[Biased]](wink.gif) , alternate form even in British English.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I have read some people claiming that having and/or enforcing standard spelling, punctuation, etc. (orthography) is elitist, and serves only to separate "us" from "them." It's meaningless, the argument goes, to "make" people spell (and punctuate etc) things "properly" except to make them feel bad and let them know that they're not as good as people who have mastered the standard orthography.
This is a cop-out. In the world of education,
passages such as this one are passed around to teach poor, simpleminded, traditionalist morons of the errors of their ways... Yet, the simple fact is that the overwhelming majority of employers in professional and specialized fields will not hire people whose applications are full of errors.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
This is a cop-out. In the world of education,
passages such as this one are passed around to teach poor, simpleminded, traditionalist morons of the errors of their ways... Yet, the simple fact is that the overwhelming majority of employers in professional and specialized fields will not hire people whose applications are full of errors.
I've never seen this used in any school to seriously suggest that spelling was unimportant. If anything the last decade has seen a re-emphasis on correct use of English across the curriculum. I know it comes up regularly in Physics lessons when I'm teaching.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
Yet, the simple fact is that the overwhelming majority of employers in professional and specialized fields will not hire people whose applications are full of errors.
Very true. Even in non-specialised fields it is common for error-ridden application letters to be put straight in the bin, as a way of culling a pile with hundreds of applications down to a manageable number which can be considered properly. It might not be the best filter for that purpose, but to take hundreds of applications seriously simply isn't possible for the vast majority of businesses when time is money.
In customer-facing roles, I think there is still a general assumption that poor literacy (for example, in the notes on a computer repair job) is a good reason for customers to question the competency of the work done in the 'essential' areas of the job. Managers know and understand that there's a difference between that perception and the reality, but they also understand that they win and lose business (and therefore the funds to be able to employ workers) on the basis of perception rather than reality.
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
This seems a very small tempest in a teacup.
A single way to spell is the mark of an elite that values ease of reading over the difficulty of learning. This was not a problem when only the upper class could read.
Near universal literacy has created a large group of people who read but not often. With the advent of movies, video and cell phones many people read less, so classical orthography may diminish in the way that the skill of writing longhand has.
I have read predictions on the future of English that the majority of English speakers will be speaking it as a second language. This leads to variant vocabularies and creoles but also a wider use of a common basic dialect. In the United States radio and television has lead to the diminishing of regional accents and vocabulary. The internet may do the same on a global basis. The current problem Hollywood producers struggle with is that comic dialog is not global the way explosions are so the pressure to simplify continues at the same time that the technology of publishing now allows regional versions. I suspect that the common literate dialect may be nudged into place by auto-correct computers. I see this when in this very editor when it protests about an American or British spelling variant.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
It seems to me that what standardized orthography allows is untroubled and quick reading.
This is the essence of standardisation.
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I'm going to have awful trouble trying to read anything written by a Glaswegian even if I can work out the sounds they are trying to represent.
Take a news reader from the UK, America, Canada, Australia, etc. and we can all understand them as they speak in the "standard". And this why they do.
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
This is a cop-out. In the world of education,
passages such as this one are passed around to teach poor, simpleminded, traditionalist morons of the errors of their ways...
It is because we understand the "proper" spelling of the words that we can understand such a paragraph.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
... (As a one-time English major, I seem to recall that the now-silent "L" in "half," for example, was pronounced back in Chaucer's day; all that's changed is the pronunciation.) ...
In some dialects round here the silent 'l's are still pronounced, especially where it is in 'alm' as in 'calm' or 'Palmer'. It often appears as a sort of swallowed sound at the back of the mouth.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Most people who practice reading and writing on a regular basis will encounter these 350-or-so words constantly. Suck it up and memorize 'em.
That'll be 'memorise' - thank you.
Actually -ize endings are a valid, if vulgar , alternate form even in British English.
Doesn't the OED use -ize?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
A single way to spell is the mark of an elite that values ease of reading over the difficulty of learning.
The problem is that if something is difficult to read, many people won't bother with it.
If it is important to someone that what he writes be read, understood, and acted on, unconventional spelling will greatly lessen the chance of this happening.
It's not just the elite who won't bother with unclear writing. I suspect the non-elite are even more likely not to bother.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Very true. Even in non-specialised fields it is common for error-ridden application letters to be put straight in the bin, as a way of culling a pile with hundreds of applications down to a manageable number which can be considered properly.
Rather like Van Halen's "no brown M&M" rider. Is someone who makes careless, sloppy errors on a job application likely to be someone who will pay attention to detail as an employee?
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Mousethief had it from the beginning. Standardised spelling arose in the first place because it made it easier to realise that someone was saying the same thing.
There are small variations present in English as it is (my computer is underlining 'realise' to tell me it should be 'realize' right this very moment), but the variations are quite limited and tend to occur at locations in words where they have the least impact on comprehension. Throw in more variation and it become distracting. Throw in enough and it perceptibly slows down your reading speed.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
If Aussies use British spelling, shouldn't it be "realise?" And as for "memorise," I'm on the wrong side of the Pond for that. When the Affordable Care Act ultimately collapses under the weight of damfool congresscritters and I flee to the UK for its NHS, I'll spell accordingly. Until then, I'll memorize my neighbor's theater program instead of memorising my neighbour's theatre programme, thank you.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
Standardised spelling and punctuation. First things first, ban Yank spelling.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
Aw, hell. You lost that war, guys. We won the right to develop our own vocab ("boot" and "bonnet," indeed) , and our own damn spelling. Not to mention being the first to chuck those funny-looking double esses that look like effs.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
If Aussies use British spelling, shouldn't it be "realise?"
That's the point. The computer, or its operating system, isn't Australian.
In any case the Macquarie Dictionary recognises both.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Standardised spelling and punctuation. First things first, ban Yank spelling.
Um, what is Yank and what is Brit? Every time we have these discussions, we find it is not completely clear.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Most people who practice reading and writing on a regular basis will encounter these 350-or-so words constantly. Suck it up and memorize 'em.
That'll be 'memorise' - thank you.
Actually -ize endings are a valid, if vulgar , alternate form even in British English.
Doesn't the OED use -ize?
It does, of course calling the entire Oxford project into question.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
The problem is that if something is difficult to read, many people won't bother with it.
Exactly right.
I am dyslexic and have to work five times as hard to spell correctly as the average Joe. Some still slip through and I will still type 'here' for 'hear' with no help whatever from Mr Spellcheck. But it's essential to make the effort. There are many spellings I still do not know. I have to check every time. The dyslexic brain simply doesn't retain some stuff.
I am a Primary School teacher and give the dyslexic children no excuse - they have to put the work in, learn the spellings they can and check the ones they can't.
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Higgs Bosun
Shipmate
# 16582
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Aw, hell. You lost that war, guys. We won the right to develop our own vocab ("boot" and "bonnet," indeed) , and our own damn spelling. Not to mention being the first to chuck those funny-looking double esses that look like effs.
The long s is a matter of typography, not orthography.
Posts: 313 | From: Near the Tidal Thames | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Standardised spelling and punctuation. First things first, ban Yank spelling.
Um, what is Yank and what is Brit? Every time we have these discussions, we find it is not completely clear.
Yes, that's true. I think 'ize' is an old form in British English, well, when I say 'old', I mean late medieval.
Thus, I think that 'realize' predates 'realise' in English. And pedants seem to insist that 'ize' goes back to the Greek. Struth, give me strength.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
That's pretty much it as I understand it. -ise and -ize come from the Norman French ancestry, and both came into English before orthography set in in either language. The OED using -ize is supposed to be on account of the Victorian obsession with classical heritage, but both have been used in British English, albeit with varying frequency at different times.
Actually - another point - many odd-looking spellings were originally phonetic - it's just that pronunciation has changed. Blood originally used to rhyme with food. Salvation isn't spelled salvashun because it used to be pronounced as a four-syllable word. As anyone singing a set of Tudor responses will know.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, my wife used to be an editor in publishing, and she says that 'ize' was common in English publishing before WWII, but then came to be seen as old-fashioned, not American, and 'ise' took over. Complicated story.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
rufiki
Ship's 'shroom
# 11165
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
A single way to spell is the mark of an elite that values ease of reading over the difficulty of learning.
Doesn't standardized spelling make learning easier? If you come across a word you don't know, you can look it up. Same goes for people reading text in a foreign language.
Posts: 1562 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rufiki:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
A single way to spell is the mark of an elite that values ease of reading over the difficulty of learning.
Doesn't standardized spelling make learning easier? If you come across a word you don't know, you can look it up. Same goes for people reading text in a foreign language.
I would agree. Also - quote:
This seems a very small tempest in a teacup.
A single way to spell is the mark of an elite that values ease of reading over the difficulty of learning. This was not a problem when only the upper class could read.
(Actually many upper class people did not read also.) But at this time, writing was phonetic. It no longer is in many instances. With the rise of many new dialects, that makes it way more difficult to guess what a non-standard spelling may mean.
While I'm here - what exactly does "elite" mean in this context?
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Just chiming in to say I agree with mousethief and with what appears to be the majority view. Spelling is important, having a knowledge of it and of how to write is important, you'll still be judged adversely in many quarters without it, and it's patronising to assume anyone is too stupid to learn it.
Though of course I know, especially as I've taught English as a foreign language, how difficult it is for foreigners and for those who haven't grown up reading a lot. And I know it is much harder for people like Boogie who suffer from dyslexia--my hat's off to you!
But still. As has been said, the French don't pander to any relaxing of standards, and here I am in France trying my very best to write correctly when I write in French. And so I should.
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
It has always seemed a strange argument that spelling and grammar don't matter. Imagine if the same attitude applied to mathematics - the entire economy and science would be in a shambles as accuracy is essential for correct calculations. The same can be said of correct spelling and grammar. I firmly believe that near enough is not good enough.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I'm not sure that analogy holds. The better comparison is not accuracy of calculation but how you lay out your working. Poorly laid out mathematical work can be correct, and unconventional notation can still represent correct working, but it's a pain in the arse to figure out and increases the likelihood that mistakes won't be spotted. As a child (and now receive the same as teacher) I always argued that I didn't need to show any working so long as I got the answer right, which is probably the equivalent of the "spelling and grammar doesn't matter so long as you communicate your meaning".
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
...which is probably the equivalent of the "spelling and grammar doesn't matter so long as you communicate your meaning".
The thing is that with poor spelling and grammar you are much less likely to communicate your meaning.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
...which is probably the equivalent of the "spelling and grammar doesn't matter so long as you communicate your meaning".
The thing is that with poor spelling and grammar you are much less likely to communicate your meaning.
Moo
I quite agree, but that is the argument made against, say, marking down poor spelling and grammar in history exams.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
... The problem is that if something is difficult to read, many people won't bother with it. ...
I couldn't agree more. If someone wants to tell me something, I take the line that I'm entitled to expect them to do so in a way that I can understand, and not expect me to have to puzzle out out what they might be trying to say.
I'm particularly likely to switch them out if they write verbose gobbledygook fully of fancy abstract words of the sort that people use if they think it will impress people.
I do the same with people who talk too fast.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
You guys have nothing on Canadians. Regularly, sometimes in the same document I will see colour/color, practice/practise, travelled/traveled, memorise/memorize. And we haven't even started on vocabulary.
I want to bring back some letters lost over the centuries, particularly thorn (þ), eth (ð), yogh (ȝ).
And we need a movement to pronounce everything phonetically, like Monty Python suggests with knight as kuh-nig-it.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
..
Precise communication in written English is tough enough WITH standardized orthography, punctuation, and usage. Without these, communicating in English would become a nightmare.
..
The internet seems to survive.
My issue with standardized spelling is not elitism, its Canutism.
The English language evolves as fast as culture evolves. To attempt to deny change within it is to attempt to deny the biggest strength of English - its ability to adapt quickly.
Might as well hold back the tide.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
from the OP: Mousethief: quote:
I have read some people claiming that having and/or enforcing standard spelling, punctuation, etc. (orthography) is elitist, and serves only to separate "us" from "them." It's meaningless, the argument goes, to "make" people spell (and punctuate etc) things "properly" except to make them feel bad
The people who complain about "elitism" often come from the group that either refused to participate in the attempt to "educate" them or were forced into submission by a system that did not deal well with them.
The former group were pushed by their peer group or community to avoid becoming educated, on the grounds that they might then leave the tribe; the latter were bullied by incompetent teachers into some form of submission, where they learned that they would not be allowed to become educated - which was OK when a man could get a job at 15 or 16 and learn "on the job" but doesn't work now. This is where the large group of presently-unemployable men are stuck, knowing that they can't work in the modern society.
The two groups form the basis of the various political groups that seem to take pride in being unruly and difficult. The view of "elitism" is just an expression of their alienation.
Pink Floyd did a pretty good description: "We don't need no education" to a good heavy beat.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250
|
Posted
My personal gut reaction* to calling standardized spelling "elitist" was, "Seriously, how low do you want to set the bar for our public education system?"**
Although I do see a particular element of elitism in general academia, this call to accept poor spelling without criticism seems more an invitation to laziness rather than a "line separating 'us' from 'them'."
IMO, it's such thinking that will ultimately create a lower-class of lazy and under-educated people that have even less of a chance of advancing up the ladder. "Don't want to learn to spell? Fine, well since I don't want to hurt your little feelings I'll pass you along anyway. Oh, you don't want to learn math either? Well that's why they invented calculators, isn't it? And you, in all your infinite teenage wisdom think that a third-grade reading level is satisfactory? Okay then, here's your diploma; good luck out there!"
Most people from my generation learned their work ethic in school. Even if every student doesn't walk out of high school a Rhodes Scholar, they should have at least learned how to dedicate themselves to achieving a goal: even if that's just learning how to spell most commonly used words properly.
_____
*At least regarding native speakers: I have all the sympathy in the world for those trying to learn English as a second language ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
**Disclaimer: I probably make as many spelling and grammar errors as anyone else. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Desert Daughter
Shipmate
# 13635
|
Posted
One of the joys (?) of my profession is marking essays. These are composed by university students from varying socio-economic backgrounds. And in the following discussion I exclude those with dyslexia or a migrant background where French is not their first language:
The French language is notoriously difficult to spell correctly. I know, because I learned French as third language and the spelling was one of the banes of my teenage years. What is worrying is that in France an astonishingly large part of the native (before anyone with PC-concerns squeaks: referring here to those born and raised in the country by native French speaking parents) population does not / cannot spell correctly.
What I have, however, observed over the years is that there is no apparent relation between the density of spelling mistakes in a text and the student's background. It is just that some students take the time and effort to think before they write and run their stuff through a spellchecker before sending it to me. The majority don't bother. Ditto with e-mails sent to me in the context of general student-professor interaction. I must say I am much more favourably disposed to those students who send me a correct e-mail in decent French with few, if any, spelling mistakes, as I take it as a sign of if not respect then at least consideration. This has nothing to do with snobbishness, and everything to do with trying to uphold a certain degree of civility, style and courtesy in communication. It's about civilised behaviour and showing respect. You don't need rich parents to learn the rules of grammar and good spelling (at least not in a country with free secondary schools), or at the very least use the spellchecker of your word processor.
Very often, it's a question of attitude, not of education.
[ 30. November 2013, 15:52: Message edited by: Desert Daughter ]
--------------------
"Prayer is the rejection of concepts." (Evagrius Ponticus)
Posts: 733 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carex
Shipmate
# 9643
|
Posted
Clarity of communications: it comes down to the difference between
You know your shit.
and
You know you're shit.
Working in a technical field, especially with staff in distant countries where English is not their first (or even second) language, I find that spelling is very important. I don't always know who at the other end might have to be looking up my words in a dictionary to make sure they have the proper meaning, and that is much more difficult if I don't spell the word properly.
Not to say that my spelling is perfect, or that I can't understand sentences with poor spelling or grammar - I deal with that all the time (especially when auto-correct inserts the wrong word, or when text is auto-translated, which can cause some interesting terms in a technical paper - one paper in electrical engineering was full of sea urchins, but I was able to figure out what it meant.)
Posts: 1425 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
..
Precise communication in written English is tough enough WITH standardized orthography, punctuation, and usage. Without these, communicating in English would become a nightmare.
..
The internet seems to survive.
Certainly it survives. It also purveys, along with a certain amount of accurate and/or interesting information, a great deal of badly-thought-out, inaccurately-spelled, incoherently-phrased, disorganized and illogical and utterly incomprehensible rubbish.
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
My issue with standardized spelling is not elitism, its Canutism.
The English language evolves as fast as culture evolves. To attempt to deny change within it is to attempt to deny the biggest strength of English - its ability to adapt quickly.
Might as well hold back the tide.
Of course English changes, and must change, and you're right that its flexibility is one of its strengths as a language.
However, I'm not sure it's "change" that's the issue here. Certainly if the majority of English speakers agree to spell "see you later" as "c u l8r," no problem arises. But that's simply establishing a new, different standard: "c u l8r" becomes common usage, and people who deviate from that common expectation deviate from what has become the new standard.
Having everybody spell that phrase however they like -- "si yoo latre," "sea yu lattr," "c u l8tr," "see you later," etc. is what causes the problems and potentially interferes with the accurate communication of the writer's intentions (though probably not with this particular phrase).
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
Clear communication needs correct spelling and grammar, e.g. should have plus past participle, not should of.*wince* I cannot think of 'easier' spelling which would improve communication. I'm slightly saddened by today's - I suppose one would call it 'return' - to words like re-occur instead of recur, and another similar lengthening of a word beginning with re, but which escapes my mind just at this moment.
I think I'm lucky, spelling came easily to me and errors jumped off the page at me. My ears have to spot them now, which I hope they do most of the time with Synthetic Dave's pronunciation of whatever is there.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Desert Daughter:
That is because French never uses one vowel where three will do. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
The internet seems to survive.
My issue with standardized spelling is not elitism, its Canutism.
The English language evolves as fast as culture evolves. To attempt to deny change within it is to attempt to deny the biggest strength of English - its ability to adapt quickly.
Might as well hold back the tide.
Agreed. Selfie is OED word of the year
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
But "selfie" does not contrevene the rules. It is a new word added, such as all laguanges do. Selfie demonstrates collective acceptance, not random illiteracy. In short, it is a demonstration of why rules matter, not the opposite.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Exactly. When I see people giving examples of new words or new grammatical forms, I wonder if they've understood what the thread was about.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
Even if we Anglophones can read between the lines well enough to grasp the meaning behind a message couched in mis-spellings, let's have some mercy on foreigners and the computers they often use to help them. It's a big world now.
Pre-Web, I'd hang my head in shame when told that we Americans are a particularly sloppy and stupid lot, not knowing our own language. This may be true enough, but we are not alone! Take anything written by a French or German member of the hoi-polloi to Google Translate and see if it (or you) can make anything of it. One of my Facebook friends is a young Finn, and machine translators and I can't make sense of even the briefest of posts or comments from his page.
As for punctuation, a popular book on the subject is entitled Eats Shoots and Leaves. Misunderstandings can lead to fights.
[swapped html tags for ubb tags]
[ 01. December 2013, 06:07: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
