English Grammar and Spelling

[Arbiter of Wyrms]

I am a linguist and a teacher of English. As a linguist, my training leads me toward descriptivism, rather than proscriptivism. That is, I am trained to observe the language people use, not to tell them what language they should use. As an English teacher, I cringe when my fellow ENworlders (who are, on the whole, highly literate) use badwrong language. It is my job to correct the language use of twelve-year-olds, but I believe that it is rude to call people on their language use in a discussion thread on any other topic.

This thread is about language use and when I see you screw up my language, I'm going to come here to complain about it.

Don't mix up "lose" and "loose." They're easier to keep straight. You can "loose the hounds." You can "lose three levels to a wight." "Lose a game of chess." "Tie a loose knot.

*"pwned" is not a word. Niether is *"1337."

We all make typographical errors sometimes. That's why there's an edit post button.

People using English as a second language deserve some slack. Don't pick on people. English-only posters make some of the most egregious errors. Leave the high-horse in the stable.

If you know you don't know how to spell a word, look it up or spellcheck it. Don't expect others to guess what you intended. We have language so we don't have to guess what others are thinking.

If you must type in computer shorthand, please do so in moderation. Most people will get that "BTW" means "By the way." if you write "OTMFCtM," please don't expect anyone here to divine that that is supposed to mean "Other than my favorite class, the monk" unless you've already spelled it out at least three times in the thread where it appears.

Jargon is appropriate in context. Folks on ENWorld know what you mean by "medium base attack," "d12," and "arcane spells." They shouldn't also be expected to keep up with "LD50," "SDAIE," or "POG."

 

[LightPhoenix]

I am a linguist and a teacher of English. As a linguist, my training leads me toward descriptivism, rather than proscriptivism.

<snip>

*"pwned" is not a word. Niether is *"1337."

While I agree with everything you posted, including this, I wanted to point out the dichotomy here. Descriptivism would certainly say that pwned and 1337 count as words, within the context of their medium, whether that is defined as the gaming sub-culture or the internet culture as a whole. It's no different that any other slang words that have come to be adapted into common parlance.

Of course, I'm saying this as someone who is not an English teacher nor a linguist.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I hate to agree with Light Phoenix on this (not because I don't want to agree with said personage but, rather, the context of the message) but, 'LEET' speak, while annoying and highly inaccurate grammatically, in context is, unfortunately, proper. In as much as any other jargon is appropriate when used correctly, so to is 'Leet" appropriate when used correctly; if you are noticing it and its bastard stepchild 'TXT' in proper English assignments from your students, then you have every right to kick academic butt.

 

[Cameron]

I hate to agree with Light Phoenix on this (not because I don't want to agree with said personage but, rather, the context of the message) but, 'LEET' speak, while annoying and highly inaccurate grammatically, in context is, unfortunately, proper. In as much as any other jargon is appropriate when used correctly, so to is 'Leet" appropriate when used correctly; if you are noticing it and its bastard stepchild 'TXT' in proper English assignments from your students, then you have every right to kick academic butt.

Let me be the first to put down that L33t speech have made its way into the classrooms and teachers have been forced to accept them due to the "changing times".

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I heard that on the news...

 

[Hypersmurf]

... L33t speech have made it into its way into the classrooms...

Have made it into its way into?

That's not L33t, but it's not English either...!

-Hyp.

 

[the_myth]

Bravo, Arbiter of Wyrms, for being able to constrain yourself and create a thread to vent!

I'm not a formally trained in linguistics, but I am a folklorist, so I am a huge advocate of the acknowledgment of vernacular speech. But I am also an old English major who is now in a doctoral program studying Communication. Every time I teach, I see the decaying of the respect for the English language. I don't entirely blame the Internet [IM/chat rooms/blogs and bulletin boards] for this loss, but it certainly is a contributing factor!

While it's perfectly understandable for typos to crop up in informal speech/writing, some people seem to think the basic rules of English grammar and punctuation are now optional. Were they not taught them in elementary school like the rest of us? According to some of my students, they weren't! [Now THAT is scary.] But that doesn't explain the people who willfully ditch some of the basics because they're typing too fast to actually make their communication understandable.

I'm subscribing to this thread, and I hope those of us confounded by bad writing can use it to "let off steam" from time to time...

I hate to agree with Light Phoenix on this (not because I don't want to agree with said personage but, rather, the context of the message) but, 'LEET' speak, while annoying and highly inaccurate grammatically, in context is, unfortunately, proper. In as much as any other jargon is appropriate when used correctly, so to is 'Leet" appropriate when used correctly; if you are noticing it and its bastard stepchild 'TXT' in proper English assignments from your students, then you have every right to kick academic butt.

Well, there's one problem with this argument:

Not every ENWorlder is as "L33T" as all the others. We are not a community of equals with regard to having an encyclopedic database of all the new lingo that, seriously, only a portion of certain tech-savvy people are all that proficient in anyway.

This goes back to Arbiter's parting comment: If you want your audience to understand you, you need to speak in such a way that THEY will understand you. Most of them aren't impressed by the fancy lingo; in fact, many will be immediately put off.

As such, you can reasonable expect most people to understand LOL or d20 or even IMHO, but there are some abbreviations that I *NEVER* get, even by reading in context. Speaking in code is really only for others who know the code [which is why not every character has access to Thieves' Cant or Druidic! hehe].

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Let me be the first to put down that L33t speech have made its way into the classrooms and teachers have been forced to accept them due to the "changing times".

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I heard that on the news...

Wait until the first time you hear someone actually say "lol" or "laugh out loud" instead of just laughing. I was perplexed the first time I heard someone do that.

Man, writing that makes me feel really old, and I'm only 26!

Olaf the Stout

 

[Harmon]

deleted cause it wasn't kind to respond and not know what you said in the first place

 

[the_myth]

deleted cause it wasn't kind to respond and not know what you said in the first place

What an interesting way to avoid being quoted, Harmon...

You said:

"When someone comes in and talks about how little skill or talent is in a forum like this, I find it offensive. It is belittling. You say that you cringe at our lackings, have you thought that maybe some of us have given all we can, that you speaking up is little more then yelling- "hay, stupid!" in the face of one of your students?"


You know, I empathized with you right up until this communicative turn.

What's the title of the thread? What is our topic? If you were offended by this sort of discussion, perhaps you should have moved along...

I cannot speak for the original poster, but I read his intent to creating this thread as a means to vent WITHOUT yelling in someone's face.

How dare you tell us we can't do that because you were offended that we get irritated by bad language skills [which, btw, you DO NOT seem to have, so I'm not exactly sure what the problem is]. This is a perfectly acceptable topic, especially in a writing-heavy forum.

You said:

"I realize you called no one out, that you mentioned no names, and I could have done this without verifying my lackings to this crowd, but I felt you should know that some of us have fought just to get here. Fought harder then you can imagine, and yet we have not gotten to where you were when you walk out of Junior High."

You have chosen to participate in a writing-based forum. And you have apparently attempted to do so with enough skill to make yourself understood. I have observed people in many forums who do not even make this attempt. To paint yourself as some sort of victim is disingenuous. You have acknowledged the shortcomings Life has handed you and attempted to address them. Simply because you still come up "short" is no reason to personalize general comments because they hit too close to home for your comfort.

You said:

"Sorry, I just feel that you do not understand, and I wanted to throw in some change, from those of us lacking in ability and talent.

This is not a personal attack, so much as it is a personal defense. I am sorry if you take offense, you are a teacher and that give you a special place in my soul.

Peace, and kind thought"

This is an interesting rhetorical move. First, you cast yourself as a victim, then you praise the "teacher" for knowing more than you. You're "offended" because someone complains about poor writing [not necessarily yours] and you feel "belittled" because someone has seen enough bad writing [again, not necessarily yours] to feel the need to scream and find support with other like-minded ENWorlders.

Um..I hate to say it, but this wasn't all about you, nor even necessarily anyone LIKE you. You're right when you claim to be "defensive," but in the end, that's your issue. While opinions, both consenting and dissenting, abound in all public forums, it seems clear to me that you're simply not the sort of person who most of us get annoyed at online. Unless of course, the care you spent crafting this post is not indicative of the normal quality of your writing. If such is the case, perhaps you really did need to be "put on notice."

All writing should be written with the reader in mind. If you're just writing for yourself, then don't expect anyone to understand you besides you.

 

[trancejeremy]

The one thing that really bugs me, but something I'm not sure is wrong, is people writing "should of" or "would of". It should be wrong, by my reckoning (since it is "should have" shortened to "should've") but I've seen it used in far too many books. So I dunno, maybe it's the right way to write it.