"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:45:44 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:
If a person - anyone - wants to communicate effectively I think it does
matter. If the flow of the message is interrupted by a solecism of any
kind
then it does matter. It could be argued that a writer who hasn't the
courtesy to bother to check spelling is insulting the reader.
Oh to live in utopia Mary .. ? It will be "no one over 6' or bald"
soon (that's me out on both counts!) ;-)
I liken this to how people behave in other parts of their lives. For
instance, do you bother washing?
Yes.
Does it matter if you smell?
'Matter' is a function of where you are and what you are doing .. in
the real world what do you expect a workman digging a hole in the
ground in the 80 deg sun to do? Stop every 5 mins for a wash? So, it
might 'matter' if the observer is inflexible? As mentioned elsewhere,
it's often not just a matter of trying harder .. is just how different
folk 'see' stuff. What if they have a body odour 'problem' no matter
how many times a day they wash / spray / roll .. would you tell them
they stink?
Are you suggesting that someone who can't be bothered to spell is digging a
hole at 80 degrees?
Many women
wouldn't go out without applying make-up, yet when they open their
beautifully painted mouths the inarticulate noises which emanate therefrom
belie the care they've given to the rest of what they present to the
world.
And you would judge them so Mary? Could it be possible that these folk
could actually be 'better' citizens than some you would find more
'acceptable' because of how they sound?
What I'm saying is that they care about how they look but not about how they
communicate. Fine feathers and all that ...
I would love to be able to spell everything correctly (even if only to
get the pedants off my back) but I just can't (English being so messed
up .. "I before E except after C" .. yeah right ..),
English is perhaps the richest language in the world, it is expressive and
there is usually a variety of words which can be used for the same idea,
nobody has to be stuck.
Try telling someone learing English that though?
Are you learning English?
My 15 year old
daughter was recently helping her 15 year old boyfriend (gently and
because he asked) about "their" and "there" etc. After she explained
*why* there were differences and what they meant he was much happier
(he 'understood'). Why hadn't anyone else (school) managed to deal
with this 'hole' in his understanding before now?
I've no idea. I wasn't responsible for his education.
Other languages tend to be more rigid, you could
say that they are 'easier', our nuances do make English more versatile.
Possibly, but that wasn't the 'issue'.
You made it an issue by talking about English being 'messed up'.
If you have a piece of timber which you want to convert into a shelf but
you
can't be bothered to use the right tools or measure properly are you
satisfied with second best? Is the piece of wood messed up or are you not
working it appropriately?
Or put another way, what if you are actually doing the best you can
(reasonably) do with the tools you are given? We have one life to get
though and most of us choose to do a variety of things to the best of
our ability. I'm not saying we should close our eyes to things but
sometimes you walk into stuff even with your eyes fully open?
I don't understand the correlation.
even when I use
the spell checkers that come in some apps, I can't even get the spell
checker to understand what I'm trying to write (and have to use
another word instead)!
That's a great benefit of English. OE's spellchecker is very good and you
can also make it do what you want.
Possibly (don't use OE)
Try it.
You could work at it - if you think it matters enough. If you can't be
bothered it doesn't matter. You just won't have the same impact as if you
do
bother.
With *some* possibly. But if I think someone has something valid /
informed / interesting to offer I try to see though any minor issues
(like difficult spelling or 'blind spots' (like a mate that always
types teh for 'the' ..) and appreciate the good stuff?
I do - but it interferes with the communication of the message and it's not
necessary.
Rules of language can be likened to other rules, social or legal.
There are rules about crossing the road. Does it matter if you can't be
bothered looking to see if something's going to hit you?
I can't see a valid comparison (re spelling) Mary? ;-(
If you can't see that I haven't communicated well enough. I rest my case.
*I'm* not having a pop at anyone (especially Mary even though she's
pulled me up re spellings several times) just a plea to those who find
spelling 'easy' do the bigger thing and just read our posts for what
they mean, not how they are spelled (spelt?) ..... ;-(
If you had a pop at me it wouldn't make any difference to me, my integrity
is intact, don't worry about it. But it seems that you want others to do
the
work which you can't be bothered to do in the first place.
That's making a huge assumption though isn't it Mary? You have no idea
how much time I may put into typing, editing and proof reading
something I send? You have to understand that some of us can read and
re-read some incorrect spelling and not see anything wrong?
er - that last sentence isn't a question ...
The many have to
compensate for the few. Is that fair?
No it isn't fair. The many in Usenet are those who don't bother about
communicating well, in my experience.
If this was uk.english.perfect then possibly no, but it isn't .. it's
a newsgroup for folk to exchange information regarding DIY (or bees or
whatever) ;-)
And I'm still here, still wanting to learn and, occasionally, offer the
benefit of my experience. I didn't start this sub-thread.
I'm not sure about spelling being 'easy' for anyone. It has to be worked
at
just as other things, which are worthwhile, have to be worked at.
But as you know all too well everthing has prioraties (I tried but
have no idea if I'm even close). I suggest someone on this list with
water pouring down the stairs would rather have an informative reply
written all in lower case, with no punctuation and poor spelling than
no answer at all?
That's an extreme example, I've never seen that - that doesn't mean that it
hasn't happened. I really would have expected someone in that position to
find some other way of obtaining advice than going to his computer. Or even
her computer.
By the way, I didn't correct the poster's spelling of Einstein.
Did I suggest you did? Maybe I missunderstood the spirit of your
comment ..
Perhaps you did.
"Mike: No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must
admit it was a gift...
Mary: True. Like Spellcheckers."
er... ?
For my crude inderstanding of this flexible language of ours I took
that to suggest that 'posters' could use a spellchecker because they
were 'there' or freely available (was I close)? ;-)
I've no idea what you mean. I really did believe that spellcheckers were
part of most verbal applications
Bottom line, I don't like hearing folk saying 'we was' or 'anythink'
but wouldn't assume to correct them .. (unless we were in an English
class and I was the teacher of course) ;-) [1]
Who did I correct? And if I were an English teacher would you accept what I
said?
Mary
|