Language & Grammar discussion

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/07/i_won...

Some people can write; some can play the guitar; others run the 100 metres.
I try to write properly. So I should: I'm a writer. With other people it doesn't matter so much. For some people, playing the guitar well is as important or more so.
This man, I fear, is up himself.

They say that students who read a lot will become better spellers, but experience tells me that this theory depends on the kid. I've had lots of students who read a TON, yet they cannot spell their way out of a plastic bag.

As for penmanship -- beautiful, sure, if you're good at it. I was taught denelian (?) handwriting as a kid, but it wasn't beautiful and I gave it up for printing letters. Well, not all true. Some of my handwriting is the bastard child of print and denelian.

But let's go back another generation. Both my parents got the traditional handwriting training in school as children. My mother, like many women, has beautiful handwriting and continues to use it when she writes. My father... prints.

Cursive

Ah! It does have an artistic look about it.

Try writing that junk with all its curls and wisps. Ugh.

I have always had terrible handwriting. I think I was taught the Palmer method. Dunno, but it involved lots of copying between the lines. Pure hell.

As soon as I learned touch-typing, at about age 12 or 13, I stopped handwriting unless absolutely necessary.

Even after being married to me for 39 years, my husband still can't read my market list, or appointment calendar.

I love handwriting and I have done calligraphy....I just bought a beautiful fountain pen...haven't used one in years but felt the urge....

I'm amazed at how consistent some people's cursive looks. Many old letters and diaries show such beautiful handwriting. In a word: Wow (sez the guy with chicken scratch).

I wish I had good handwriting. Unfortunately, I attended too many schools as a child. The first school taught me to join letters with over-loops, the second insisted on under-loops; the third used no join at all. The death-blow was being taught italics. My handwriting became a mess of incompatible styles. Thank heaven the computer came along.

Of course, kids should be taught to write properly: spelling, grammar, handwriting, the lot. They should also learn to paint, play instruments and speak Chinese. We should maybe admire people for the skills they have, not condemn them for the ones they haven't.

Anthony says: We should maybe admire people for the skills they have, not condemn them for the ones they haven't.

Word.

It's rather lacking anything to do with grammar. I would expect someone making those points to pick a more suitable word.

Spelling and punctuation matter - but not for everything, as Gabi points out.

If I'm employing an electrician, we need to be able to discuss requirements clearly and accurately, and I want to be confident in their electrical skills, but I couldn't give two hoots about whether they know the difference between "its" and "it's". On the other hand, if recruiting someone to write customer-facing documents, writing ability is crucial. Horses for courses.

My grandparents are somehow set on me learning Mandarin, let us hope it doesn't lead to learning the Pipa without a teacher as well.

The best way to learn to spell--as Newengland said--is to want for it to be right.

Myself, I used to be obsessed with my creative (eleven or twelve years old as I recall) but with hours of single minded typing I had to come to my own conclusion. If I didn't learn how to spell decently, I simply wouldn't exceed in an english-run society.

Now, my spelling isn't perfect (the teacher only taught us this year how to properly aligne 'is' to other words) but it tells the difference between myself being a student on goodreads and an e-mail scammer that hasn't mastered the full art of the english language.

My spelling used to look like that and it really makes all the difference to those who want to take you seriously.

Horses for courses, eh? Haven't heard that one, though I've always liked the Mark Twain quote about horse races.

BB&M -- English is your second language, I infer?

Gabi, it's is short for it is (or it was), like can't being short for can not.

Possessive pronouns used to have an apostrophe (her's is all over Jane Austen if you read a version with the original orthography), but now none of them do, including its.

Hence we have:
The house's door.
Its door.

I lost the place I was at. I wonder where it's at?

Language. Grammar. Ampersand.

While I applaud his desire to have more people pay attention to grammar, etc., the whole "article" sounded like an info-mercial to me. There were plugs for books and on-line services. Rather "terroristical" actually: Want to work for me? Buy my book and my on-line service... otherwise, forget it!

Nonexistent. It's a big "tent." And notice how my period is parked inside the closing quotation mark. Judging by the participants in this discussion and their geographical locations, that has to look funny.

Gabi wrote: "Hayes! Where you bin, honey?
"

Hiya Gabi,

I bin working (not enough), and trying to invent work (with poor success), and obsessing about not working (a lot). But I'm okay, just was not in the mood for socializing. Things are looking up (a little).

NE: I think that looks funny, even if I am 'Merican. Must be because I do most of my editing work for Europeans.

I think of it like this:

if the quote is the whole sentence, the period/full stop goes in:
"It's a big tent."

if the quote is just one word, the period/fs goes out:
It's a big "tent".

Yep, that's the way Brits do it: far more logical. ;-)

For whatever (read: illogical) reason, that rule works for question marks and exclamation points, but not periods. The uppity period has to make its point by being different, an American individualist lighting in for the territory (with apologies to Huck).

Newengland wrote: "Horses for courses, eh? Haven't heard that one, though I've always liked the Mark Twain quote about horse races.

BB&M -- English is your second language, I infer?"

Yes, sadly. Is it so obvious?

That's the hope! It's a real treat, you're improving my vocabulairy without even trying! Like a champ.


I've come to this group to learn. All of you have very interesting opinions on the matters of language and you are all very well read (it will take several lifetimes to achieve this level). I enjoy the act of listening when everything is vital.

This group has taught me more from one folder then I can ever imagine to learn from my basic grades school 'advanced' english class.

Unfourtunately, this may emmit a sort of sidekick behavior on the rest of you. I apologize in advance. (This act of sucking up for example. I do not mean to but the topics are so interesting it can't always be helped. It feels like Kansas again).

What? We're in Kansas -- again? But I've never been!

Anyway, BBM, your English is better than my (insert your first language here) by far.

Little one? Now you're inferring things!

Possessive pronouns used to have an apostrophe (her's is all over Jane Austen if you read a version with the origina..."

So when did this rule change? I was taught that apostrophe s was correct for possession and contractions...is this like Pluto being deplaneted?

Her's? I think that was on Pluto from the get-go. A perfect place for Jane Austen, by the way...

Susan, I think you've misunderstood: what you say is correct, but it doesn't contradict what I meant:

Apostrophes are used for contractions (I'm, can't) and are used for possessives (Peter's house, today's date), but they are not now used for possessive pronouns (his, hers). The trouble with it's/its is that it falls into the first and third categories.

I have no idea when the convention for the final category changed

Whew! Yes, I misunderstood!

Are we still talking about parking Jane Austen's books on Pluto?

I have to type that I am quite glad that he forgets to stress certain words towards the end of that piece.

Antecedent for "he," please? Which piece are we talking?

Never mind. On afterthought, maybe Mark is talking about Ruth's original link, 48 posts north of here.

I was referring to the original link.

Got it. I just got lost following the wandering conversation and forgetting the original link.

What were you all talking about when I randomly popped in with that post?

Ask Gabs. She's the only one that can untie the knot at this point.

Fair enough. I really should have read the other posts and then did mine as a reply.

Pshaw. Who really reads threads? I read the most recent posts, is all, then get more lost than Will Robinson looking for some space....

Danger!!!Newengland!!DANGER!!!

(Did I type that right?)

Yeah, and you proved we are contemporaries of a sort (making you OLD)...

According to a lot of irrelevant sources I have always been old.

There's something to be said for that -- if you're around folks who confuse "old" with "wisdom."

I have to say that I am. They are probably interpreting my constant mild contempt as 'long-suffering'. I'm joking, of course.

Joking. Also a sign of age...

Perhaps... (So is trailing off...)

No job here. It's bad grammar we need.

Gabi wrote: "Would you two like a spot in the sun on the bench outside the Post Office? You could smoke your pipes - or gum them, anyway - and comment on the world as it passes you by.."

I would do that anyway. Although I'd prefer to be inside a coffee place with an outward facing window.

What writers smoke a pipe anymore? Are they all gone?