November 21, 2007 at 8:40 am
English is a mess, and probably the fault of my fellow Americans, so I'll apologize for the alterations, inconsistency, and just general silliness of our alterations to the "Queen's English". I'm amazed my kids can ever learn to spell.
Now, if we can just accept the language used in Denver by 30-50 year olds as the global standard, we'll be fine 🙂
November 21, 2007 at 9:04 am
Steve Jones - Editor (11/21/2007)
English is a mess, and probably the fault of my fellow Americans, so I'll apologize for the alterations, inconsistency, and just general silliness of our alterations to the "Queen's English". I'm amazed my kids can ever learn to spell.Now, if we can just accept the language used in Denver by 30-50 year olds as the global standard, we'll be fine 🙂
English is a mess - or you can even say "the English are a mess" 😛 - but the messiness has been an intrinsic part of the language long before the "fellow Americans" took a crack at linguistic vandalism - the world is rife with examples - but & put; root & foot; plough & though; to & so....where's the logic, where's the pattern?! :w00t:
For all my passion for this language I do see how difficult it would be to master leave alone just get the basics right - for my money I'd go with Spanish - I love the WYSIWYG (thrown in to align with this editorial -ha) factor of Spanish that you cannot get with most other languages!
**ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI !!!**
November 21, 2007 at 4:05 pm
I Need to post a retraction
On further research and reading of Fowlers' Common English usage circa 1926 - reprinted 1954 makes the clear distinction on the correct and acceptable usage of '-ize' and '-ise'. Most english printers follow the French in changing ize to ise. Those words with a latin or greek root where izien (Greek) and izare (Latin) are common and as the pronunciation is also with a 'z'ed' there is no reason why , in English, the special French spelling should be followed. There are however, those verbs that do not get their ise even remotely from the greek izo and must be spelt with an ise.
Like
Advertise, Devise,Surprise,appraise, chastise, circumcise,comprise,compromise,dispise,disguise,devise,enterprise,exercise,improvise,supervise,surmise.
In the case of colour Keep the -u-
Colour makes colourable, colourist BUT use Coloration decolorize 😀
Here endth the lesson 😉
CodeOn 😛
October 29, 2012 at 6:41 am
I'd like to echo Sushila's sentiments from earlier- the sad fact is that a generation of people have grown up in front of a display and keyboard rather than a book and a reading light. And because parents are working too hard to sustain a shrinking standard of living, or are too distracted to parent in the discipline of proper education, the time taken to compose and articulate cogent thought has decomposed into a gathering of clucking hens tapping on keys.
I'm proud to say that my girls, while fully immersed in this Smartphone Generation, take the time to compose a text message in the same manner as their parents composed love letters many years ago- with careful attention to the words they use and spell out.
October 29, 2012 at 6:52 am
Paul G-468777 (11/20/2007)
There is a whole group of people coming behind who believe things like "words should only mean what the speaker intended them to mean" (yes, I have had that debate with an early20s developer) ... Me deciding what words should mean to everyone is arrogant. Words that can not be understood commonly are deceptive and a waste.
In electronics signals communication, the first "law" they have to beat into the heads of young engineers is this: "The meaning of any message is determined by the receiver."
That's why I email a lot, and in plain, grammatical English (still fairly common here in the US). Not because I'm older, but because it's MY responsibility to make sure I'm understood.
Lots of great comments. It looks like acronyms have some defenders, but only 10-15% of us.
Sigerson
"No pressure, no diamonds." - Thomas Carlyle
October 29, 2012 at 7:39 am
Sigerson (10/29/2012)
.....Lots of great comments. It looks like acronyms have some defenders, but only 10-15% of us.
Not sure. I wouldn't defend an acronym like AFAIK in common parlance because it's not widely understood enough. However, I would defend the use of P.S., N.B. and e.g. (even though many won't know what they actually stand for) because their meaning is readily understood. If it aids communication, I'm for it, but if it gets in the way then I'm against it.
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
October 29, 2012 at 8:00 am
Once I saw an infographic that suggested there are more english speakers in China than the rest combined.
make of that, what you will 🙂
October 29, 2012 at 8:06 am
Some these commonly used acronyms (like FUBAR) are vulgar. There is a potential for a text-to-speech or language translation software to sound out the root words literally, which is something you definately would not want when sending emails to clients or coworkers.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
October 29, 2012 at 8:07 am
Sorry, I wasn't clear. (My fault!) I didn't mean to exclude the common PS, NB, EG, et cetera, those are useful and widely understood. But now that I think about it, aren't those usually called 'abbreviations?'
Maybe that's the dividing line we're looking for, where an acronym expression from an evolving language finally makes it into the mainstream: when a dictionary lists it as an 'abbreviation' and not an acronym, then it's arrived.
Sigerson
"No pressure, no diamonds." - Thomas Carlyle
October 29, 2012 at 8:21 am
Sigerson (10/29/2012)
@majorbloodnock:Sorry, I wasn't clear. (My fault!) I didn't mean to exclude the common PS, NB, EG, et cetera, those are useful and widely understood. But now that I think about it, aren't those usually called 'abbreviations?'
Maybe that's the dividing line we're looking for, where an acronym expression from an evolving language finally makes it into the mainstream: when a dictionary lists it as an 'abbreviation' and not an acronym, then it's arrived.
There's no need to apologise at all. You weren't being unclear; I was being deliberately obtuse and pedantic.
The point I was trying to make, though, is that an acronym is no more or less a hurdle to communication than a word or phrase. It's purely a matter of whether or not that acronym, abbreviation, word or phrase is commonly recognised. To me, that's the dividing line, and it's the initiator's responsibility, not the receiver's, to choose their language appropriately.
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
October 29, 2012 at 10:14 am
For some of the years I worked in this business some believed that i should not attend meetings with the suers. I did not speak English nor American but fluent TechnoBabble. Words that had three or four meanings as well as a technology meaning as well as abbreviations and new IT related terms made it almost impossible for many to understand. It was always clear to me, but much of the time it would be well over the heads of others in the room.
I had to relearn the language, and at the same time some of the tech terms became mainstream so it was not as hard to convert to English as it could have been.
For those communicating in abbreviations and alliterations they will find the same true. They will move a little more towards the traditional language and the traditional language also adapts to the new words and meanings. It is the cycle of American English and really English as well.
Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
October 29, 2012 at 2:44 pm
Great topic. I think 'it depends'. Subtlety and precision are sacrificed for expediency. Sometimes that makes sense, but compressing the language all the time seems like a bad idea to me. Maybe more people will learn brevity, but more likely it will generate an inordinate amount of of noise.
October 29, 2012 at 3:06 pm
I had a boss once who said that English had no real spelling rules and therefore couldn't really be called a language. He pointed out that 'GHOTI' could be the equivalent of 'FISH'.
GH as in rough
o as in women
ti as in option
and it would sound like 'fish'.
He also liked to point out that capitalization could make a difference as in 'polish' versus 'Polish'.
He had too much time on his hands...
October 30, 2012 at 3:27 am
David Webb-200187 (10/29/2012)
I had a boss once who said that English had no real spelling rules and therefore couldn't really be called a language.
That depends on the definition you use of "language". By his definition, he's right. By all accepted definitions (variations on the theme of "a system of communication" that don't even specify the written word as a requirement), he's wrong.
He also liked to point out that capitalization could make a difference as in 'polish' versus 'Polish'.
And in German, a simple mistake of gender can change "ein Alt" into "eine Alte" (the abbreviated form often used for an Altbeer into a colloquial term for a hooker). When I made that mistake whilst ordering another beer in a Duesseldorf pub, my German colleagues were able to string out the amusement for months afterwards.
The point is that each language has its exceptions, nuances and lingusitic oddities, but they don't stop it being a language.
He had too much time on his hands...
Too much time and too little knowledge. A dangerous combination. I assume you kept him away from important systems...
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
October 30, 2012 at 7:05 am
The danger in using acronymns like "OMG" and "TTYL" in your business correspondence is that your clients and coworkers will stop taking you seriously and laugh at you behind your back.
I know I would.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 44 (of 44 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply