Grammatical Annoyances
Grammatical Annoyances
(OP)
[Rant]
Over the past few weeks, I've found several instances on these fora of confusing one word for another. Such as, lose versus loose, and to versus too. These are just the examples that come to mind right now as I'm writing this. I know I've written on my grammatical and verbal pet peeves before, but having just read a post with the loose/lose switch rekindled the aggravation.
I realize that by our nature, most of us prefer numbers versus words. I also realize that there are several members that do not have english as their native language. I simply find it terribly distracting to read something when common words are switched.
[/Rant]
Over the past few weeks, I've found several instances on these fora of confusing one word for another. Such as, lose versus loose, and to versus too. These are just the examples that come to mind right now as I'm writing this. I know I've written on my grammatical and verbal pet peeves before, but having just read a post with the loose/lose switch rekindled the aggravation.
I realize that by our nature, most of us prefer numbers versus words. I also realize that there are several members that do not have english as their native language. I simply find it terribly distracting to read something when common words are switched.
[/Rant]





RE: Grammatical Annoyances
1. Stop reading posts in this fora
2. Deal with that fact some people have bad gramatical habits myself included.
3. Hold on-line gramma/english tutorials. I would be first person to sign up.
Heckler
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
FAQ371-376
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-1091
FAQ559-716
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Now please be very careful with this type of posting.
You must know where it will lead.
For one thing, this site is often for relaxation and that also means relaxing some of the strict controls used in the normal work in return for a degree of spontenaity.
For another we'll get to the point that it is about meaning and if engineers can't derive the meaning from context and are confused by a badly spelled word or a wrong word choice then where are we?
Finally we'll get yet another posting of the Cambridge word jumble thread and we'll be trapped in this cycle for the next decade or two.
Actually, the cycle is speeding up as, with only your third poster, you have the first irreverent posting and no sypathetic posts at all.
I think we all know where this will lead.
So i have one more suggestion to add to Hecklers list:
go have a strong cup of coffee (extra cafene), take a break go see if its night or day outside and if day, have a game of golf, cut the lawn or something and if night, get some sleep. Last option, get some therapy!
JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I'm not trying to be mean or a jerk in my response. But your post rekindled a situation I had once with someone I dated once. She was an artist and a good one at that. We met through a friend. On our first date she started correcting my english....I like most people I deal with on a day to day basis end sentences with preposition. It's just one of those bad habits. I should've start slamming her for be a mechanical idiot but I chose to take the high road. I can tell you I have corrected that habit. I have be through some gramatical rehab....no long end my sentences with prepositions. Peace out
Heckler
http://www.getitwriteonline.com/archive/022703.htm
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Does anyone have link to it? I lost mine.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Google gets the job done. I first saw this on a Linux message list. I searched Google for "soft wear for peas seas". I think there are several versions of the poem.
htt
JHG
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
That was it!!! LOL...thanx.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
But otherwise, I am convinced that you never make any mistakes.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
...
"Hold on-line gramma/english tutorials. I would be first person to sign up"
...
Is gramma/english what 85-year old ladies speak? ("Would you like a chocolate chip cookie, dear?")
:)
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I never turn down chocolate chip cookies......bake your little ars of this weekend and send me some. I wish I had a grandmother to bake me cookies.....that's one thing I miss is going over to granny's house for Sunday dinner. I especially liked her rhubarb pies. Hmmmmm
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Just curious...
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Are we off topic now?
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
The ugly truth is, some of us are less than perfect.
Life is two short.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
It seems particularly ironic that Heckler says Wake up - that's what THIS forum WAS supposed to be about, before it got subverted!
Good Luck
johnwm
________________________________________________________
To get the best from these forums read FAQ731-376 before posting
UK steam enthusiasts: www.essexsteam.co.uk
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
We are not defending poor language. We are trying to tell the perfectionists that small aberrations are not the same thing as not trying to do our best. And also to improve our languages.
The thread started with a statement that seems to be a bit tough and that demands close to perfection from anyone that writes anything at all. Yes, there were the [rant /rant] put in as an excuse. But if the OP did not mean what he said - why say it?
We all need to improve ourselves and this is what this forum is about. Discussing linguistic topics, getting views from all over the world, and learning. But I do not think that it should be a place where fingers are pointed and where elitism reigns.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
You may not be, but that looks like defending poor language to me! I do realise that many of the mis-spellings and grammatical errors in the various posts to this thread are intended as irony, but there are a whole lot more which are clearly not.
I find it really hard to take the content of written communication seriously if the writer can't be bothered to get grammar and spelling correct.
Good Luck
johnwm
________________________________________________________
To get the best from these forums read FAQ731-376 before posting
UK steam enthusiasts: www.essexsteam.co.uk
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
BTW, what makes it hard for you to take a report seriously if it isn't perfect grammarwise or in spelling? I read lots of reports from guys that have investigated different problems in paper machines and other equipment. The reports are mostly very precise and factual and are I use them for further action. They are not always shakesperian in grammar or spelling. Somtimes quite bad actually with loose/lose, their/they're/there and other ambiguities.
But I can understand them. And they often go into the final documentation, without editing. Even if they are not perfect.
Why do I allow this? You may rightfully ask. I allow it because if I demanded perfect languages in these reports and if I were to ridicule guys that do a good field job, but not quite-so-good desk work - I would not get any reports at all. And that would be really bad.
What I am saying is probably that you shouldn't let Best be an enemy of Good. Or, sometimes, even just acceptable.
A text in a book or a paper from the Mayor or Government is something else. There, I react violently if I see bad writing.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
==> What I am saying is probably that you shouldn't let Best be an enemy of Good. Or, sometimes, even just acceptable. A text in a book or a paper from the Mayor or Government is something else. There, I react violently if I see bad writing.
Why do you hold these examples to a higher standard? I agree that we should expect the best from our governments, but why not from your associates? I don't allow lack of knowledge, be it engineering or language, or laziness, to be an excuse to settle for good when you can get the best. Why do you allow good to be an enemy of best with respect to professional communications?
I expect that none of us would tolerate good from our engineers. We expect and demand the best. When a member of the team comes up short, do we not provide training and or guidance? Why shouldn't such training and guidance include professional language? Why not 'engineer' professional communications?
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I think (or hope) that I gave an explanation when I said: "Why do I allow this? --- I allow it because if I demanded perfect languages in these reports and if I were to ridicule guys that do a good field job, but not quite-so-good desk work - I would not get any reports at all. And that would be really bad."
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I am offended when a person holds themselves out as a professional and proceeds to prove they are linguistically lazy or incompetent (or poorly educated).
The motto is "do it right the first time". Your engineering competence is in question when other matters are sloppy, incorrect, or just plain strange. My standing in the profession is damaged by others, and that irritates me a lot.
Thanks to all who post here. Each comment is important, whether they agree with me or not.
jimbo
Group Owner
Buy a dictionary, keep it nearby and USE it. Webster's New World Dictionary of American English is recommended, and Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
FAQ371-376
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-1091
FAQ559-716
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
The original rant isn't demanding perfection. The original rant is complaining about some REALLY COMMON mistakes.
If you're not interested in improving your language ability, you shouldn't be on this forum.
A rant of my own: I am REALLY sick of hearing the "I'm an engineer" excuse. A lot of an engineer's job involves written communication. Letters, reports, specifications, contracts. How many of those same engineers who dismiss the need for language skills have zero patience for those who say, "Oh, hee hee, I'm just no good with numbers"?
Pfui.
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Past sentense, present sentense and future sentense I guess!
Good Luck
johnwm
________________________________________________________
To get the best from these forums read FAQ731-376 before posting
UK steam enthusiasts: www.essexsteam.co.uk
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
In an informal setting, such as this one, the standards can be a little less rigid.
" I am REALLY sick of hearing the "I'm an engineer" excuse. A lot of an engineer's job involves written communication. "
Well, it's probably be a valid excuse when trying to write a love letter...
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
In the original spirit of this post, another thing that annoys me, especially in these technical fora is the use of chat shortcuts (u for you, r for are, etc). It makes it difficult to maintain serious thought when the post is littered with those shortcuts. I understand this might also be an "it's just me" issue, but there you have it.
On an unrelated note, I didn't realize there would be this much response to my original post. Had I known, I would have checked back sooner for a response. Spouse and birthday combinations do tend to drag one away from their computer however, at least for a weekend.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Normally, I wouldn't care at all. And I do not need to know either. But, I have to ask one thing: Whose computer are you dragged away from?
I think that this illustrates very well that even a good writer now and then makes little mistakes. One can usually "reconstruct" the meaning from the context. But in this case, I can not understand to whom the computer belongs. And, shouldn't there be a comma before the "however"?
But I do not say that I am irritated. Not the least. And I do not think that you should be either - even if little mistakes annoy you.
BTW: I still do not understand why you are complaining about grammar (in the heading) when your examples are about spelling.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Why can you not understand to whom the computer belongs? Leaving aside the propriety of number-neutral "their" (which I can argue for at great length but I believe I've already done that somewhere around here), is the problem simply the ambiguity, that perhaps "their" could refer back to "birthdays"? Keep in mind that ambiguity, while not ideal communication, is NOT inherently grammatically incorrect.
I truly do not understand why people feel the need to attack the original poster. It's not like that poster attacked any of you directly. And if you do recognize yourselves (which you must or you wouldn't be so bloody defensive), then that means you are quite aware of your writing "issues"--and are deliberately choosing to keep them. Why would one do that?
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
This is my concern - if a person can't be bothered to check basic grammar or spelling then I have to wonder about their technical work too. Attention to detail in grammar is no different then attention to detail in technical aspects. I don't ask for perfection, but I can't accept that an engineer doesn't know the difference between "there, their, and they're."
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Far too many engineers do not adequately present themselves in writing.
To illustrate, I provide two embarrassing examples from personal experience:
(a) A high school paper (back in the days of manual typewriters) came back with a poor grade, with numerous typos, misspellings, and grammar errors marked. Not a single mention of the “quality of my argument”. I was ticked-off that my evidence and argument was apparently not even noticed.
(b) Upon receiving orders to my first command as an Ensign, I wrote a letter to my future department head (again on a manual typewriter). It came back with typos marked!
I finally “GOT IT” after “b” above - to many people, WHAT you say in writing does not matter if your writing contains typos, misspellings, and poor grammar! We can complain all we want that this should not be the case, but we’re just denying reality.
To this day, I’m at best an “adequate” writer, and prefer to emphasis one’s technical ability over their writing ability. Yet, when reading something written by others, I cannot help but notice common errors should they exist. Have I become too picky? Hardly, and the consequences would be dire should these errors be seen by the customer.
None of this applies, though, to those for whom English is not their primary language, and little of this applies to postings on an internet forum. I do not typically create posts in WORD (for example) which has an automatic spell checker, I may or may not give my typing a careful proofreading before posting, and I don’t expect others to do what I don’t practice myself.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I would compose any technical reports, editorials or articles in word so that I may take full advantage of the spellchecker and grammar checkers.
For published work, I go one stage further and use a publicity agency just to be sure that my work reaches them in as near perfect form as can be achieved. I do not expect them to review the engineering content. With experience I am satisfied that the changes made today are far fewer than when I first started.
I make no apology for that when normally posting to Eng-Tips I compose directly to the page. While I may use the “review post” facility, I do not worry greatly about spelling or grammar but about meaning: this is not my career and life is too short. If some choose to ignore the message because of the spelling or grammar, whose is the loss?
I have to concede that because we live in a real world, I do have to adapt my views to those of others, even if I do not fully sympathise with them. I hope I will be met part way.
Yes, I have to concede that rightly or wrongly, spelling and grammar do matter to engineers. To some more than others.
I will not concede this to the extent some insist upon.
How free is the reader to ignore the content if the spelling is poor?
You receive a report from which is full of bad grammar and poor spelling, the meaning is apparent however, but will you going to dismiss the message?
(a) it comes from a junior
(b) it comes from a peer
(c) it comes from a superior
Do you compromise your principles with regard to the author or do you adopt a more tolerant responsible attitude?
What do we know about the brain that can help us understand this? We know that men and women think differently, we know we all have different personalities (don’t take my word for this, just try any of the many online tests) so where does it say that engineers are not different to other people?
In particular, are engineers naturally (physiologically) better disposed or worse disposed toward spelling and grammar than non-engineers?
Who has the statistics, the background research?
Who can thus say that bad spelling denotes a bad engineer?
My nephew is dyslexic. It doesn’t mean he is stupid. He isn’t, far from it. It does mean that his IQ tests are somewhat distorted but suffice it to say he variously tests out at around 150 plus.
If he were an engineer and I received a report from him, should I dismiss the report because of his spelling or grammar? Or should I look at the engineering content?
What is my obligation as the reader?
Does anyone have the right to say that other engineers, who do not meet his high standards of spelling and grammar, are lesser engineers than he is?
What allowances do you make for the culture of the engineer?
Some have suggested that for those for who English is not the first language, some allowance should be made.
Why not for those for who English may be a first language but for whom their first discipline is engineering. Should we just be tolerant because of nationality, or can we include other parameters?
The first and most obvious objective of language is to communicate.
I accept that some people find communications difficult if they are not received in perfect form and I will accommodate them to the best of my ability and inclination, within the limits of the document, but not more.
Any more is verging on Compulsive Behavioural Disorder.
You may be upset if I spell a word wrong but I am upset if you criticise my spelling and ignore my engineering.
Which of us is completely right or wrong?
So let us agree to disagree but please, unless you have unequivocal evidence to support your view, do not suggest that we are lesser engineers than you if we do not spell as accurately as you in every situation.
Here are the contentions:
It is axiomatic that a good engineer is good at spelling and grammar.
No engineer who is not good at spelling and grammar is a good engineer.
Anyone who is good at spelling and grammar will be a good engineer.
Or:
Spelling and grammar are not necessarily indicators of if an engineer is good or bad.
Which ever of these is your worldview will determine how receptive you are to ideas and content.
Does this make you a better engineer or a worse engineer if you cannot see the content for the spelling?
How much effort would you make to disregard the spelling and grammar mistakes if you receive a treasure map rather than an engineering report?
JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
How many engineers have you hired that had spelling errors in their resume? How many have you chosen not to pursue, do in part to spelling and/or grammatical errors in their employment paperwork?
You may well answer those questions with zero, and if you do so honestly, then more power to you. I still say that presentation matters.
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I presume you meant "due in part" and not "do in part" in your middle paragraph. Gods be praised that I could figure that out, otherwise I might have missed your entire meaning.
Cheers,
CanuckMiner
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
If you can't take the time to reference a dictionary would you take the time to reference a standard?
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
And I wondered if I would get away with my comments without a savaging as i wasn't too sure just how small a minority i would find myself!
You will note that i do take spelling and grammar sufficiently seriously to have my work reviewed where appropriate e.g. articles for publication.
But if something calls for a sketch, i give a sketch not an isometric drawing.
In my youth i once worked for a redneck house construction company in the deep south. I was busy fitting infill pieces between the joists and the sawman called out for the measurement.
"fourteen and five sixteenths of an inch!" i replied.
"You're a nail driver, not a cabinet maker" yelled the boss and in an aside to the sawman, "fourteen and a quarter full." i.e. the same message.
In another thread we have the comments about 2 decimal place people and three decimal place people.
When it comes to resumes, show me a set of resumes where there isn't at lease one spelling error, grammatical error, poor sentance construction, hyperbole, verbosity or some other fault. Depending on which is your favourite CBD you can choose.
If i were an editor recruiting a writer then you can be sure that spelling and grammar would be of paramount importance; though perhaps i don't understand the media as in reality, it seems to me, the media seem to prize good grammar less than some engineers do, especially for TV presenters.... oh dear, we've covered that before as well.
But if you have to choose between engineering candidates based on their spelling or grammar then you have either had a crop of uniformly excellent candidates or a crop of uniformly rotten candidates. Ultimately these are none of them the criteria management use, it is more likely to be the candidate that will accept the lowest pay that gets the job.
And yes, i am back to composing on the fly.
JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I feel sorry for all this attention to detail and inability to live up to standards set by oneself. It has been illustrated over and over again in this thread. Almost all posts contain errors, but are still quite intelligeble.
The OP was ranting - yes - and he got answers from some not so balanced opponents. But that is what one should expect when being unbalanced in the first place.
Still. I think that this thread is one of the more fruitful ones in this forum. It has brought out some fundamentalists, but also some realistic individuals. Like jmw and others. I think that we all learn from this.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I prefer to purchase my spelling errors.
(Did you put that one in there on purpose?)
It seems that the debate is not so much whether content or presentation comes first. It seems the debate is whether presentation comes in a close second, or a distant second.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
But that doesn't mean that you have to be perfect all the time - mistakes are allowed!
For the truly pedantic amongst us, I recommend reading "Eats Shoots and Leaves" by Lynne Truss - a comical look at grammatical confusion.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
However, engineers seem to be noted for their bad grammer and spelling. I believe that there is probably a genetic basis for this in that a brain wired for technical thinking seems to be lacking in the language area.
One person described this as people being divided into two categories;
Homo Fabber---Humans who build
Homo Jabber--Humans who communicate
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Mathematics IS a language.
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Never thought of it that way - but it makes a lot of sense. And she (or he), who doesn't pay the uttermost attention to details will not be successful in mathematics - or engineering. So, I think that that kills the "not caring about details" argument. There must be something else. But, what is it?
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Just imagine if we were communicating with smoke signals, heliographs, or even morse code. It would be a pretty quiet forum indeed.
Wheels within wheels / In a spiral array
A pattern so grand / And complex
Time after time / We lose sight of the way
Our causes can't see / Their effects.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Some possibilities are
and perhaps most important is
which leads directly to
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
FAQ371-376
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-1091
FAQ559-716
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Absolutely so!
Good Luck
johnwm
________________________________________________________
To get the best from these forums read FAQ731-376 before posting
UK steam enthusiasts: www.essexsteam.co.uk
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
This is probably my favorite group on this site. I don't want to offend you guys but I read it for the humor. Never have I seen so many poeple get so worked up over such minor grammatical errors, most of which I didn't even know were problems.
I want to expand on what kchayfie said about "always be understood." For me, it is important that drawings, notes, instructions, specifications, etc. always be understood by all users. No matter how correct an instruction or note is, if it's not clearly understood by the reader, you have falied in your mission.
One more thing, don't be too hard on those folks when you see a mistake or two in thier communications. I don't spell well or type well so I make full use of the spell checkers and proof read once or twice. Still, mistakes slip by. This morning I noticed an e-mail that I sent yesterday said " I going", I know better, I didn't mean to say it like that but I didn't catch it on the proof read and it went out. So when you receive something like this don't immediately think, "what a dumba$$!"
NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
A sutay dog svaed the lfie of a nbeorn bbay aetfr fdining the adaobaend ifnnat in a fresot and apapertlny cayrnirg it acoross a bsuy raod and trhough smoe brbaed wire to her ltteir of pippeus, wissntees siad.
I played scrabble with some friends one time and placed the letters for some words randomly on the board. One girl, who is quite intelligent, instantly knew what word I wanted and even rearanged the letters for me. I think you'll find that some people have an easier time reading thru this than others, just like some people find math easier or english easier than others. Another interesting thing, and this may seem to drift of subject, is that many times people with high IQs tend to get lower grades then people with lower or average IQs. IQ is not so much a measure of intelligence as a measure of how fast someone can figure out patterns or puzzles and how fast they catch on to new concepts/ideas. You'll find people with lower IQs don't figure out new ideas as fast so they have to study hard to keep up and in studying hard they "overachieve" and end up getting better grades. Now I'll bring this back on subject. I will hypothesize that, in general, people who want to study math and science in order to become mathematicians, scientist, or engineers, tend to have higher IQs. In having higher IQs they speed thru things like for instance glace at the paragraph above, understand it, and move on. Thus not spending the time to carefully go over each word in the attempt to understand what it (the overall concept) is about. We can compare IQ to speed reading. A speed reader doesn't read each individual word, they read groups of words. In this example a person with high "IQ" would glance at a sentance and understand what it means, where a person with lower "IQ" would carefully read each word and construct them into the concept they are trying to understand. Theorfore people with higher IQs don't focus on the language so much as the concept and people with lower IQs, in the interest of understanding the concept, spend more time focusing on the language and therefore learn it better.
And, using scientific evidence, I have now proven that people that worry about spelling and gramatical errors are less intelligent then people who don't worry about such things.
I hope I haven't angered anyone too much, didn't someone say this forum is supposed to be lighthearted and humerous?? Just having some fun. But seriousely...
You all have a good night/day and hopefully a good laugh.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
I find it quite interesting to read these comments and find myself caring more as I muddle through some of the diatribe. For example, since this is an engineering forum, I am tempted to write thru for through because this is acceptable on engineering drawings. However, because this is also about grammer and spelling, I push a few extra keys to keep the NewSouthernPE's happy and it also gives me a feeling of just a little more pride or caring.
Poor spelling bothers me a little but give me content that I can understand and I can be tolerant. Just don't confuse me too much with ambiguity or unwarrented(sp?) sloppiness. BTW, using a spellchecker on this forum is counterproductive for sponteniety.
jmw: Why do you consistently use i for the personal pronoun. Am I being nitpicky or is it the other way around?
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Spell and grammar checkers (MSWord) are a mixed blessing.
With them, my spelling and grammar have improved.
The weakness is the auto corrct feature. This leaves me with some bad "learned behaviour".
Type "i" and a space and it is automatically corrected to "I". Why add an extra key stroke? In other words, this is a bad habit learned well.
I learn from these fora. I now break my work up into readable blocks by judicious (over-judicious?) use of paragraphs; but if you notice that my spelling has improved over the time i have been posting to this site, it is not in deference to those of you who are "fussy" but simply because i continue to learn new behaviour courtesy of MSWord i.e. word has done something for me the entire education could never do with all its "smart-ass" teacher comments in the margin etc.
Most of the other tricks of modern devices seem to leave us worse off; cell phone memories and autodial, for example, leave us with a poorer short term memory and many people don't know their own cell phone number without having to look it up. They are generally believed to be worse at most short term memory excercises; the domino effect?
Memory was once a key requisite, especially when the illiteracy rate was very low (evolution-wise and not because schools are not as good as they use to be such that many children are now illiterate in a society evolved around litteracy). It was essential for an aural traddtion of history. Here the tricks of rhyme and humour paly a great part. Today we have Mnemonics to help us remember certain things, but i bet most are those we inherited i.e. from an education system before the advent of the computer when it becomes so much easier to look things up. (I must return to the mnemonics thread and see how many come from a post computer era.)
Well Zifos,
an interesting concept about IQ and spelling; reading words we don't spell the words out (as we did when we learned), starting at the left and adding each sound together till we have a "Eureka" moment at the end when the word suddenly makes sense, but only if the word is exactly spelled.
WE use pattern recognition and, probably, soemthing like that aweful "intuitive" spelling that cell phones use for text messages to help us "get the message" just abit quicker. It doesn't always work. Sometimes sentance construction fools me and i have to puzzle for the meaning before i realise that the correct word has been used and is correctly spelled but my "recognition" ability was cued as much by the context as the actual word and actually substituted an alternative spelling that, by the end of the sentance, left me confused. More often, it is words like "rowed" that have me confused if not used in close association with the context indicators such as "boat".
The interesting point about pattern recognition is that it is a great shortcut cut but a dangerous Achilles heel. Just think about it. We use pattern recognition widely and advantageously in a wide range of activities. Studies of formula one drivers have shown that they use far less track information than a normal driver but in a much more critical way, especially for "learned" tracks. At the speeds they drive they look for a key feature, respond to that and move on to the next key feature. It is the other extreme from looking at sale signs in shop windows.
Survival instincts also rely on this type of behaviour where survivors of air-crashes, ferry sinkings etc often report a form of tunnel vision which gathers only data relevent to excape. Such people normally "learn" the escape path subconciously. In its simplest, one could suggest a brain that only collects data on exit signs and responds to these cues to the exclusion of all others.
The interesting thing is that different people and even animals, have different levels of key data requirements to help them "survive" and i guess that like much of our behaviour, it originates from the primitive part of our brains.
We are capable of interpreting visual data and obtaining the truth from very little data indeed. Even the simplest of cartoons can leave us in now doubt about the identity of the person depicted.
Animals use a combination of pattern recognition and behaviour to good effect but their methods are flawed or simpler (because their vision doesn't report great detail at critical distances for a flight escape?).
Deer recognise other deer by the behaviour e.g. the way the animal moves and grazes, for example, and a very key recognition features such as a set of antlers and four legs.
This is the weakness that allows hunters to move right in amongst them and almost touch them. Lions have lion behaviour but men are sneaky enough to mimic the behaviour of the prey.
On the other hand, wearing a Richard Nixon mask doesn't mean that "police are looking for a gand of politicans who robbed a five-and-dime last week" but i do wonder where are weaknesses are; in what way are we like deer and vulnerable to the smart hunter?
JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
So, wile u reed this sentince, u aknolige that sence you kin unnerstan wut my meenin, weer both of us geneeusis? Thats gud, cause i allus knowed i wuz a geenius, but nobuddyd ever proved it befor.
I think the entire discussion about pattern recognition and IQ misses the point, which is that it is not whether the reader is able to understand the message. The point is, what the reader may infer about the author, based upon the way the message is presented, can impact the reader's opinion of the message itself.
If the credibility of the message decreases with each error the reader takes notice of, it stands to reason that only an error free presentation guarentees that the message will be evaluated solely on its own merits.
(Upon further reflection, I recognize that in the real world "guarentee" is a rather strong word. Let's just say that an error free presentation will require your critics to find some other basis upon which to impugn your credibility.)
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
guarantee is an even stronger word
Good Luck
johnwm
________________________________________________________
To get the best from these forums read FAQ731-376 before posting
UK steam enthusiasts: www.essexsteam.co.uk
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Uh....
How clever of me to slip that in there, to illustrate my point of course.
(I guarandamtee you I won't make that mistake again...)
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
We wil be waching you to make sher u dont make the mistake agan.
(I wish this forum had spel cheker)
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP2.0 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site
FAQ371-376
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-1091
FAQ559-716
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch taem at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Such a cdonition is arppoiately cllaed Typoglycemia :)- Amzanig huh? Yaeh, and yuo awlyas thought slpeling was ipmorantt.
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
William
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
However, many people do believe split infinitives are wrong, and so if you want to annoy the fewest people possible, you should avoid them. I avoid them in my most formal writing.
Hg
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
Gunnar Englund
www.gke.org
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances
RE: Grammatical Annoyances