"jo4hn" wrote in message
...
J Brown wrote:

I've been complaining about this list all day to anybody who would
listen, so hear goes: I've seen this in previous years, and it always
drives me nuts ... I think the idea is, "What can you reasonably expect
from people who have experienced so little?" But I think you *can*
reasonably expect them to know something about history. I know WW II
happened, though I wasn't around for it. Not having lived through it (or
anything--pick your historical event or cultural phenomenon) is no
excuse.
Ah. Zen and the use of the English Language. Your grump does strike a
chord. I have always been one of those cranks who tries to nudge others
into a correct (my judgement) usage of the language. My father, for
example, taught me that "you can be hung or you can be hanged; one is
good, the other is bad".
humph,

It's about common culture. You can't use the English you use with people of
your generation with the current, because they have a different background.

Metaphors and similes are based on some form of shared understanding. Can't
use them with people who do not have the basis for understanding, which
makes teaching difficult. Normally, when there are blank looks out there in
class, you switch to a different analogy to try and make the connection.for
them. Easier in the sciences, where demonstrations or re-creation of
classical experiments can be used to demonstrate a truth than in English
Literature classes with kids who never learned their Bible. Can't explain
the thought without understanding the metaphor, can't teach the metaphor
without offending some nitwit. Can't teach US History without mentioning
all those dead white guys, because there just weren't a lot of decisions
made, battles fought, or treaties made by black (excuse me African American)
women.

That's what the list is meant to convey, a warning that so much that is
second nature through real or vicarious experience (learning) to the
professors is meaningless to the student.