Trust me, I've spent entire weeks in the company of folks with super high IQ's , they're just like everyone else. They fair rattle through puzzles though
cheers,
M
Bad Grammar
- Thread starter xylaria
- Start date
-
Come along to the amazing Summer Moot (21st July - 2nd August), a festival of bushcrafting and camping in a beautiful woodland PLEASE CLICK HERE for more information.
Tsk Red, "Dreich" requires no dictionary, the word is self explanatory, just saying the word explains the cold, the wet, the miserable situation you are in at that time.
Old Scots words have been around for a long time, long enough for then to become common usage all over this planet, Engish speaking or not, indeed a few are French in origin. Does one care if they are cited in some English dictionary, I would suggest they are more likely to be contained therin , rather than the more irksome text speak (shudder) that we are subjected to on a daily basis.
I suggest a saying from both our eras is suitable, "chill", be grateful we could all be speaking French/German/Russian, Viking even is some areas. And would we be allowed to even discuss it
Stephen
Why didn't we listen to Arthur Scargill and the Two Ronnies, they were years ahead of their time.
Actually thats a pretty thin translation.
"False Pride" would probably be closer or perhaps "arrogance"
Red
"False Pride" would probably be closer or perhaps "arrogance"
Red
Well you would know that better than I would.
I remember the word from hearing it when describing a pouter pigeon. That's the male one when all puffed up and preening his superiority at the female.
cheers,
Toddy
I remember the word from hearing it when describing a pouter pigeon. That's the male one when all puffed up and preening his superiority at the female.
cheers,
Toddy
Typos, of course, aren't spelling mistakes. They are impossible to avoid and we have to tolerate them.
Secondly, the "english" language isn't really english - except as the official language of a political admnistrative area.
This is going to get heavy
Especially in the 19thC, dialects and languages were "discouraged" and frowned upon because it was believed that areas having their own dialects or language could not be governed so effectively, There were exceptions, but that was the general rule through most of Europe and elsewhere. In other words, the intolerance of local variations in language etc. was a form of repression. I really think we should get away from thinking in terms of what is correct - there is no authority who can define that since language is something living and expressive - not something that should be controlled by authorities - think of Orwell, 1984, and "Newspeak".
Thirdly, to back this all up, we have no problem accepting american spelling and vocabulary.
You see - the most important thing is simply to communicate - that sometimes requires extra effort from the person doing the talking or writing and also sometimes extra effort from those listening or reading - this is called understanding - and we need more communication between people and peoples and much more understanding - something that improves with practice.
Care for the way you speak, be creative and it can become something beautiful - poetry. But don't stop speaking dialect or being creative in your writing - just don't be sloppy about it.
BTW - in the 19thC, Occitan was considered by the french "authorities" to be a sort of "pidgin" french, the resut of ignorance and laziness. It is now, of course, recognised as a language, It was the language which Richard Cur de Lion (Richard the Lionheart) spoke and it was the language of the Troubadours - the language of the poets.
Language is something beautiful and precious - we don't want to lose it like the Cornish did theirs. Be proud of your dialects
Oh, and if americans can spell differently then so can others. Important is only that we all understand each other.
Grammar is not a rule book of how people should speak, it is an analysis of the way people do speak. If a certain percentage of the people speak or write in a certain way and the dictionaries and grammar books say that is wrong - it is they who are wrong,
If lots of us wrote "wrong" as "rong", then "rong" is a correct spelling of the word.
Now we're getting some where
I cant believe the tone of most of the posts in this thread. I was taught that good spelling and grammar is next to godliness (almost). Now later in life, I thnk thts cmpl8 bolx.
Language, especially the english/anglo saxon language, changes constantly, readily absorbing and adapting words from all manner of linguistic sources outside of itself, and sucessfully incorporating them into a powerfully expressive lexicon, (aproximately four times bigger than that of the French language). Language is free, and deserves to function beyond the control of politicians and academics or any one else who thinks it their duty to impose their particular "correct" version. Language is (or should be), dynamic and energetic, creative and expressive, not passively descriptive. Also it can never be 100% precise, in the giving or receiving, even with perfect grammar and all the rest, you can still never be sure that your message was presented clearly, hence the need for feedback, clarification, come again..... Look how often academics start off their papers by defining key terms that they will be using in the thesis, so that folks reading it will (hopefully at least) know where they stand?
Speaking, writing (and posting) in your native language, with all its eclectic idiosyncracies, is indeed a personal thing. It was a revelation to me that written language has not always been subjected to fixed rules about what is proper or otherwise. When it comes to a point where you might feel begin to feel intimidated by arbitrarily applied standards of quality or taste, then something is wrong. I fail to see why proper grammar, spellcheck, use of capitals and the like is somehow going to promote "courtesy" or general good-time "bonhomie". I'd still much rather read a post from someone who carnt spel, but nevertheless has an expert grasp of there particular area of expertise, than some dry, bland, yet grammatically perfect post with no interesting content to it; same as I'd rather deal with a down-to-earth person who was honest (but swore a lot), than some pious two-faced hypocrite who didnt swear-but readily dropped you in the **** when it suited them,
Maybe if its such an important issue then there should be like some sort of forum chart with weekly gold starts for the best spellers, it would be popular with some people I guess
. I used to win spelling competitions at school hands down every time, but now I honestly, genuinely do not think its important. As someone said (Barney I think it was) I hope that people arent discouraged from posting if they think theres likely to be some sort of literary committee studying everything they typed?
How peculiar - perhaps a few language lessons are in order for the person you heard it from
The male form would be
prútscipe
How peculiar that someone would use it in a wholly inappropriate context to illustrate a point. You should really point that out to them Toddy - in case they make a fool of themselves again
Red
Seriously Mr Dazzler, I hope so too.
I do agree however that simple things can make the written word, and the meaning of the writing much more understandable.
All capitals, or none, are not good.
No starts, or stops, are also not good.
Inappropriate text speak completes the list.
The no swearing is a forum wide requirement.
That's it really.
Not a great deal to ask for.
Spelling? Every dyslexic who has posted on the thread has said that they routinely use a spellchecker before they post. I find that incredibly courteous of them. Why should it be difficult for others, who know their spelling is maybe not very clear, to do so too ?
I suspect my problems with to, too, and two and the like are age related; I learned to read and write when poor grammar would fail a pupil regardless of the subject.
That isn't the norm now and I have to accept that I must sometimes make the effort to read the intent, if not the actual literal meaning, of the writer.
cheers,
Toddy
I do agree however that simple things can make the written word, and the meaning of the writing much more understandable.
All capitals, or none, are not good.
No starts, or stops, are also not good.
Inappropriate text speak completes the list.
The no swearing is a forum wide requirement.
That's it really.
Not a great deal to ask for.
Spelling? Every dyslexic who has posted on the thread has said that they routinely use a spellchecker before they post. I find that incredibly courteous of them. Why should it be difficult for others, who know their spelling is maybe not very clear, to do so too ?
I suspect my problems with to, too, and two and the like are age related; I learned to read and write when poor grammar would fail a pupil regardless of the subject.
That isn't the norm now and I have to accept that I must sometimes make the effort to read the intent, if not the actual literal meaning, of the writer.
cheers,
Toddy
Really ? Oh I must chin him; he's a linguist who analyses the roots of words
He used the the word quite deliberatly too. Something to do with preening cocksuredness, iirc.Toddy
Are these literary requirements enshrined in the rules of the forum. I think not. To intimate that posts that do not comply to your ad hoc rules will be deleted does you, as a moderator, no credit whatsoever.
You are stirring to no good point.
I have said clearly that the only posts that we will remove are those full of swearing or continued text speak.
The no swearing is in the rules, and I know that the text speak removal has several precedences.
That's it, no other agenda.
Simple courtesy.
Toddy
I have said clearly that the only posts that we will remove are those full of swearing or continued text speak.
The no swearing is in the rules, and I know that the text speak removal has several precedences.
That's it, no other agenda.
Simple courtesy.
Toddy
Really ? Oh I must chin him; he's a linguist who analyses the roots of words
Toddy
Perhaps a basic dictionary might help his research?
BTW - did you mean deliberatly? Given the propensity for spelling and spell checking?
Red
You are entitled to your opinion, I also accept that you can report it in any literary style that you are able to communicate, or, indeed, see fit.
ATB and Goodnight
Pun, dear chap, pun
No, entirely my fault.......but do read Xylaria's earlier post on this kind of thing.
Toddy
p.s.response intended for BritishRed
No, entirely my fault.......but do read Xylaria's earlier post on this kind of thing.
Toddy
p.s.response intended for BritishRed
Actually, the Boss wrote it in the rules
1 - Community and site moderation
Admin and Moderators on bushcraft uk will use the rules and their own judgement to moderate. They have full authority to act when & how they see fit and all members should abide by what they suggest or enforce. Due to bushcraft uk being a private forum the admin and moderators act on behalf of the owner and enforce the rules and standards set out here and those given to them verbally.
Guidance for members: Abide by the decisions of the moderators, do not argue or challenge them on the forums. If you disagree with a decision contact them or admin via PM and state clearly and politely your concerns and they will be dealt with. An alternative is to use the report post function with an explanation. Anyone being argumentative, rude or a consistent nuisance will be carded or banned.
taken from the site rules and guidelines.
http://www.bushcraftuk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45
cheers,
Toddy
Now we're getting somewhere....
A lot of the content in the posts on this thread seem to have failed to differentiate between literal content and implied meaning, that is communicated in forum posts.
Even if you are 100% perfect in your application of grammar, syntax, spelling, appropriate use of words and so on, your intended meaning, or content, or message-is still never going to be 100% clear, there is always an element of chance and uncertainty. Because the reader has slightly (or even vastly) different understandings of the same words. Some writers have stopped fighting this dilemma, and accept that "meaning" is ultimately in the mind of the reader, they as authors do not have dominion over it.
Personally I like train of thought stream of consciousness type random thoughts ideas which combined in a linear, kalaidoscopic or panoramic sense serve to create facets or parts of a bigger picture-but thats because I personally value the work of creative people like John Coltrane, Georges Braque, Miles Davis or Jackson Pollock, that improvisational spur of the moment methodolgy has profoundy influenced me in a cultural sense. I type a post just as if I were talking. Only when you talk its natural and normal to stop and listen, or be interupted even. Musicians do this when they jam. Posts in threads are best when theres give and take, many posts combining to make a bigger story, one post kicking off an unexpected train of thought, or inspiring a new idea, link or whatever. Every individuals use and understanding of language is theirs, and is personal.
Similar threads
