posted
So El, there reason you didn't use a full stop was because the second part was elaborating on the first part; but other than that they ran just like two different sentences would?
Edited for semicolon goodness. Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cheiros do ender: So El, there reason you didn't use a full stop was because the second part was elaborating on the first part, but other than that they ran just like two different sentences would?
Right between (part, but) would be great for a semicolon.
Posts: 2121 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In general, people only get on other's case (besides to needle them in a friendly manner) when somebody isn't even trying to use correct capitalization, punctuation, or spelling. Nobody expects posts to be perfect.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do it when the to independent thoughts are related; otherwise I just make them separate sentences. The semicolon is the halfway point between a comma and a period (or a full stop, to you). But I never bothered to memorize all the rules, exceptions, names of all the parts of speech, or any of that other stuff. I just write sentences the way I think they should look.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing I love about Hatrack is that I don't feel compelled to be a grammar nazi very often. Most people here take their words very seriously, so they go to the effort of writing clearly.
Writing sloppily in order to save a little time is like foregoing grooming in order to get to work a little earlier in the morning. Sure, you might get there before everyone else, but everyone is going to stay away from you because you stink and have bad breath. Better to take a little more time to make yourself presentable, methinks.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cheiros do ender: So El, there reason you didn't use a full stop was because the second part was elaborating on the first part, but other than that they ran just like two different sentences would?
Right between (part, but) would be great for a semicolon.
posted
I leave all further grammar questions to Jon Boy, as he's far more qualified than I to answer them. And I'm watching the West Wing.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
psst, Reticulum, you're arguing with a guy who has been known to correct the people who write the style guides.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scythrop: No problems. And for what it's worth, I write for a living and my editor is constantly removing unnecessary comas from my work. Contantly.
I'd try to convince you all that 'coma' is in fact the correct Australian spelling of 'comma', except for the fact that we've just established that there are too many of us here for me to get away with it.
I hear ya pal. I hate conjunctions and their "on again/off again" relationship with the commas. Indeed, I lose patience with the whole lot of them - those "rules".
Posts: 351 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rejecting an otherwise excellent post because of grammar errors is a ridiculously shallow way to judge someone's writing. It falls right along with judging people by their choice of shoes or hairstyle, not hiring someone because you don't like their handshake, or refusing to read a book just because it has a spaceship on the cover. Would you spit on a Picasso because you don't like the frame around it? I hope not, but why is making fun of a post that includes grammatical errors any better?
It is good to use good grammar because you can't escape having to deal with people who judge by trivial things like grammar, hairstyle, and handshaking ability, but that's absolutely no excuse to fall to their level, and use the same poor judgement yourself. You hurt yourself if you do so, because it makes it quite difficult to see why unpolished diamonds are better than error-free junk.
Contrary to what Tom claimed earlier, lazy and ignorant people do NOT usually use poor grammar. There are a great many lazy and ignorant people who write well, and a great many intelligent, hard-working people who don't know how to write well, or don't consider grammar a priority (and yes, not considering grammar a priority is quite different from being lazy). The notion that you can figure out how correct someone is based on their grammatical skills is flat out incorrect. And why would we think otherwise? You don't have to be smart to learn good grammar. And you certainly don't have to be wise to know how to write well. Why would we think there'd be a strong correlation between the two?
To those who suggest the forum should have a standard of high grammar, I'd ask why? The purpose of this place is discussion. It is not a linguistic fashion show. Grammar should not matter unless it interferes with discussion. And if bad writing makes discussion more difficult, I agree that that is a problem. But only rarely is this the case. Missing commas, misspelled words, run-on sentences - these things should not prevent you from understanding what the author is saying. If someone truly does find reading such things painful, they are the one with issues, not the author. A good reader looks past these elements to what is actually being said beneath the style. A good author does hope to avoid stylisic and grammar errors, but that doesn't make it any less rude of the reader to point them out, mock them, or reject the whole post on account of bad grammar.
Errors, though bad, are not unacceptable - especially in an online forum. People should not be spending a large amount of time editing posts. And if they are not good writers, they don't have to wait until they become good writers to post something here. They simply need to be capable of quality discussion, and making good points in a readable fashion. If someone is intentionally using bad grammar to frustrate us, that's one thing. But to attack someone just because they don't know all the grammar rules - that's shameful. We have a responsibility to treat other members of this forum better than that.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
read the first line of my post in which I pointed out the fallacy about "saving time." You'll note that I start by noting that Reticulum is capable of generating text that is clear, grammatically within reasonable tolerances, and generallyl free from spelling errors.
Given that this IS the case, your entire argument is specious.
Rant on, brother, but you are barking up the wrong tree entirely. At least as far as I'm concerned.
Words, sentences and paragraphs are to written communication the structure and undergirding of meaning. They are not a mere shell (as implied by your clothing analogy). They are more like the skeleton, without which a human being would be unrecognizable.
posted
I don't actually disagree with you Xap, however I think the point I was trying to make earlier is a valid one;
quote:Originally posted by Xaposert:
To those who suggest the forum should have a standard of high grammar, I'd ask why? The purpose of this place is discussion.
I'd say precisely because the purpose of this place is discussion is why we need clarity of expression. To have anything else can lead to ambiguity, mis-interpretation and hurtfulness. Good use of grammar is, in my opinion, one (but by no means the only) key way of achieving this clarity..
quote:But to attack someone just because they don't know all the grammar rules - that's shameful. We have a responsibility to treat other members of this forum better than that.
I agree completely with this, but don't think this is incompatible with asking someone to make their posts more readable, and politely assisting them to do this, if they don't yet have the skills to do so themselves.
Edit: *Garn* Bob, will you stop doing that?
Posts: 466 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stop twisting our words, Xaposert. We're not saying they're lazy by nature, we're saying they're lazy as posters, and they've, almost all of them, admitted this. Ignorance is another thing. No-one is accusing the ignorant (like my lack of knowledge in punctuation and vocabulary) of being not worth our time. And no-one, no-one, is attacking anyone, except those that bite back with "I feel lazy... I don't have time to write properly.... I don't have to write properly; it's just a forum, etc."
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scythrop, really? I had no idea that is the correct spelling in Australia! I apologize for my ignorance. I was only teasing anyway since I was really just thinking of an idiot boss I have who really should take a look at this thread. Some teachers I work with keep threatening to use his memos and emails as warm-up exercises with the kids. His writing is pretty scary for a man in his position. I was certainly not trying to offend. Anyone certainly pick apart my posts and find errors, even with commas. Posts: 1319 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
I'd try to convince you all that 'coma' is in fact the correct Australian spelling of 'comma', except for the fact that we've just established that there are too many of us here for me to get away with it.
Because if you were the only Strine you'd be able to get away with it?
Have you been here long?
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xaposert, I disagree too and for some of the same reasons.
When a post is filled with too many errors and the poster thinks that those errors are too much hassle to fix, it is a slap to the reader. It is like saying the reader has to do all the work to decipher what is written rather than the writer taking that responsibility. The reader can better focus on what is said if the writer puts effort into HOW it is said.
So I do judge people, not by their ability to write (I do teach children after all) but by the care they take in their writing. If care is not taken in the writing, why should I take care in the reading?
quote:not considering grammar a priority is quite different from being lazy
How? People who don't consider grammar a priority are lazy or disrespectful, either of themselves or their readers. It is a form of being rude. Asking why we have a high standards of good grammar is like asking why do we have good manners? Why don't we just fart and pick our noses in public? We all know that everyone has snot and gas, so why does it matter where we release it? Farting in public is rude, just as using poor grammar on a writer's forum is rude, especially when it matter to many people here.
Posts: 1319 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xaposert, as I stated out earlier, writing clearly is a way of showing that something is important to you. If someone can't take the time to make themselves understood, why should I take the time to understand?
Grammar is not as superficial as you claim; poor grammar and punctuation can seriously impair readability. Furthermore, if grammar is so superficial and unimportant to you, then why did you bother to write clearly? It seems like you want to have it both ways; you want to righteously denounce an evil and oppressive grammarocracy, but then you take the effort to make sure that you don't incur that regime's wrath.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Advent 115: I would like to welcome everyone to the Giants Shadow Bar (a game). Where you can drink til' you can't type strait or talk til' you can't talk no more. But just remember to enjoy yourself.
Speaking of being disrespectful to readers . . .
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sort of. But this is the only night I will ever do it. Sorry, but I just wanted to get the word out quickly. Posts: 1941 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Words, sentences and paragraphs are to written communication the structure and undergirding of meaning. They are not a mere shell (as implied by your clothing analogy). They are more like the skeleton, without which a human being would be unrecognizable.
Ideas, concepts, and reasoning are the undergirding of meaning. Grammar IS a shell, and it mainly just makes those ideas and concepts flow more smoothly from one person to the next.
IF someone is writing with such bad grammar that the meaning is truly unrecognizable, I agree that grammar is important. But very rarely does anyone post something on Hatrack that is actually unreadable. Typically when complaints about grammar arise, I can read whatever is intended with ease, just as quickly as I would had there been no mistakes. It is not signficantly harder for me to understand "i think cheney shouldnt go hunting" than it is to understand "I think Cheney should not go hunting". (And that would be a particularly severe example of a grammatically lazy post - most on Hatrack are much less obvious errors.)
I don't think this is about poor communication. It's about details that don't need to be all that important.
quote:And no-one, no-one, is attacking anyone, except those that bite back with "I feel lazy... I don't have time to write properly.... I don't have to write properly; it's just a forum, etc."
I've seen numerous complaints about grammar on this forum, and most of them are one-liner attacks on the original author. Very rarely are they written in a polite, constructive fashion.
Posts: 2432 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xaposert: It is not signficantly harder for me to understand "i think cheney shouldnt go hunting" than it is to understand "I think Cheney should not go hunting". (And that would be a particularly severe example of a grammatically lazy post - most on Hatrack are much less obvious errors.)
A couple of points: (1) there were no grammatical errors in that sentence, but rather capitalization and punctuation errors; and (2) that is absolutely NOT a particularly severe example of a grammatically lazy post.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: If someone can't take the time to make themselves understood, why should I take the time to understand?
You know -- the reality is that some folks are good at expressing themselves -- be it verbally or by using the written word.
And some folks really struggle with communication.
It behooves us to be a wee bit patient. Especially if our communication skills are patently better.
One would hope that "better" communication skills also includes "better" listening skills. Which can be, and usually is, a whole lot of work.
One of the interesting quirks to me about the whole tech revolution in communication, is how people try to write the way they speak.
And clearly, some of the examples I've seen on forums, internet, and in e-mails demonstrate one of the reasons why we have so much discord and disharmony in the world.
People don't really know how to communicate very well. (I'm no exception.) Whether verbal or written. And they certainly may not take the time to listen very closely or reflectively -- which is a far larger portion of adequate communication than the response we give to what we have heard (or read). Or not heard, or read. Or refuse to hear or read.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Glad you're now okay. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I was only teasing anyway since I was really just thinking of an idiot boss I have who really should take a look at this thread. Some teachers I work with keep threatening to use his memos and emails as warm-up exercises with the kids. His writing is pretty scary for a man in his position. I was certainly not trying to offend. Anyone certainly pick apart my posts and find errors, even with commas. ![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
