The language argument

[X-Codes]

if you choose your words more betterer then you do not need to rely on odd punctuation and odd arcane rules.

You do if you want people to pay attention to what you say.  Your poor word choice and improper grammar grate on me immensely.

Normally I can handle it, but it seems that he's not even trying right now in attempt to make a point.

[bhu]

http://thedesigninspiration.com/articles/70-cutie-baby-animals-bring-your-a-good-mood/

i cast distraction in hopes we can all just get along

[Sinfire Titan]

A bit on the racy side there Bhu. I know the BLYHT section isn't viewable by the random rabble, but we do need to lable the NSFW images properly and avoid going overboard on it. If it is bad enough to be censored on another site, I think the Gameologists would prefer it not to be posted.

[EjoThims]

You can't play with the rules of structure if you don't know what they are.

This.

True art doesn't come from throwing expectations out the window.

True art comes from bending expectations to lead to the unexpected.

Good art comes from doing so precisely, which requires a masterful understanding of what those expectations truly are.

[altpersona]

He would be a poet.

you know it.


 

Posted by: Nanshork
« on: Yesterday at 08:41:08 PM » Insert Quote
Quote from: altpersona on Yesterday at 05:40:33 PM
if you choose your words more betterer then you do not need to rely on odd punctuation and odd arcane rules.

You do if you want people to pay attention to what you say.  Your poor word choice and improper grammar grate on me immensely.

 

======================================

i have read the whys and hows in every grammar and similar book that was ever thrown at me. none of them ever made an argument beyond 'we prefer'.

yes, poor word choice gets in the way of communication.

yes, spelling and grammar can make things easier to understand.

Are well chosen, properly spelled words and grammatically pleasurable structure required to be English? nope. 


i have not heard a competitive argument against my position. convince me.


english has no Laws. not 'The English have no laws', they clearly do, that is an entirely different thing. 

its rules are so flawed as to render them virtually useless. (much like The English oddly enough)

at best it is guided by suggestions and preferences.

while i advocate 'the exception proves the rule', that has a limit.

im not a linguist ; but i know some about how the language works, its history and evolution.

every word in every other language is english. (people really hate it when i say that, especially english teachers)

"Ma babushka made Quesadilla." "My grandmother made Quesadillas." the only 'english word in the sentence is Made, but its still and english sentence. a person may not know the meaning of a word, but that doesn't mean its not valid.


"Meet page, our new page" homonyms, grrr. they are not even the worst of the bunch. what does the D in CD stand for? what is that pop can made of? (this is about spelling)

"This page left intentionally blank" tossed it in for fun... it irritates me when i see this in professional use.

"my family has ran this business for 60 years, i have runned it for 5. " of course 'ran' should be used twice... its the proper word. except that its not. by 'modern' standards you do not rewrite the base word to make a past tense, you double the last consonant and add 'ed'. 

bonus

I before E EXCEPT after C OR when sounding like 'A' as in weigh or neigh.

WTF about SCIENCE, oh ya; its a french root so it uses its own rules.

I before E EXCEPT after C OR when sounding like 'A' as in weigh or neigh OR whenever a word has its own baggage that makes it need its own other rules.

Im totally leaving out 'new' / 'young' words like "google" or 'dude'.

==========================================
i know i drift around somewhat on the subject, sorry about that

and all apologies to nan, im not trolling you. its just a bonus.

==========================================
* http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7911645.stm

[Kajhera]

The reason for using word choice, grammar, and so on that you do, is to make the right impression on your audience. If you're writing an academic paper, you'll want to show you know what you're doing, and convey your information in a direct manner that doesn't make your audience have to think about it to get meaning. () If you're writing a story, you want to engage the reader and might want more thought to have to go into your work, but probably not so much as if you're writing a poem. You'll use entirely different of grammar when talking, or writing conversationally. (Depending on who you are talking to, and whether you're writing an e-mail, forum post, in chat, a letter, etc.)

In many cases, you don't want someone to dismiss you or get distracted by spelling and semantics they disagree with. Language changes. It's true. People resist language changing. This is equally true. If you use language in a way perceived as wrong, it's going to get hackles up.

[EjoThims]

So, English is a language with many contradictions because of it's varied influences.

That is fact, and no one has denied or debated it.

What you fail to realize is that we are all still waiting for you to explain the logical leap from this fact to your positions that "English has no rules" and "structure doesn't matter in language."

[X-Codes]

Congratulations, you've just explained English as the original creole language of Europe.

Therefore, it's not that the rules don't make sense and are useless, it means that there are more rules to understand to communicate using the language.

[Nanshork]

The thing is altpersona, I have no interest in trying to convince you that your way of seeing things is wrong.  I studied English for fun, English was my major for years before I decided I didn't want to teach (there isn't anything else one can actually do with an English degree).  I graduated with it as my minor.  English has rules, most of which make sense and some that are odd but that's how anything works anyway.

The point isn't whether or not you're right because of the your views on the English language, it is how people are going to perceive you because of those views.  I'm the kind of person who uses proper English in all text and instant messages I send, up to and including the point of fully spelling out the word 'okay'.  I don't expect most people to be like that.  When you're not actively trying to abuse the language your posts are okay.  Not great, you have a habit of not using capitalization nor using periods, but okay.  I don't expect everyone to adhere to proper English as strictly as I do.  But when you start typing words like 'runned' or talkinga bout how 'let's eat Grandpa' isn't a grammar issue I start having problems.

[darqueseid]

Altpersona,
I think grammar is more like guidelines.  I think they are rules simply put in place that are there to help you as, "the writer", to communicate with your audience.  With this view, intentionally ignoring the rules of grammar means that you don't care enough about getting your message across, or that you don't care about whether your audience understands.   

The problem comes when you accidentally mess up and some grammar NAZI comes in to fix everything and point out your evey mistake. 

I think most people just accidentally have bad grammar; its not somthing they intentionally do, so mistakes here and there should be forgiven not judged. 

[ariasderros]

My $0.02.
The purpose of communication is to share a meaning. If the meaning is shared, then there are no problems.
The problem therefor comes from anything that disrupts the sharing of concept.

How often have we had issues here just because tone is not varied in the written medium very well? Yet there are grammatical rules for certain types of tone.

What if there were official grammatical rules for the entire tone-variance? Would we all make the effort to know these theoretical rules, and follow them? Realistically, some would, and some wouldn't. Those that didn't [follow the rules] would have issues with not being fully understood at times.

This is the nature of the issue. Can you not pay attention to the rules and still normally get your points across and share your meaning? Yes, normally you can. But there are still time that there are mis-communications because people don't follow the rules.
This bad. This very bad. Sometimes.

As a personal case in point, there have now been two occasions wherein I've ended up arguing about points with other members, and I couldn't understand why I was arguing with that person, and the issue came to light that the argument was caused by misunderstanding due to word order or word use.

[altpersona]

i am not saying 'structure does not matter in language.' i am saying that the english language has no absolute structural requirement.

i am saying that structure is nice. it is not however an absolute rule.

its not that english has NO rules.

it has few, if any, rules that mean anything.

any system has a tipping point for rules. to few and its unusable, to many and its unstable.

english is unstable.

(click to show/hide)

this 'nonsense' is english.

======================================
how many rules exist for the english language?

how many rules do not have any exceptions?

how many rules have multiple exceptions?

=====================================

if you want something 'like' english that has 'rules' and that sort of thing. try 'Anglish', English w/out loanwords.  http://anglish.wikia.com/wiki/What_is_Anglish%3F


even at that, anglish has its own problems.


=======================================

nan, am i wrong about runned?

are irregular verbs preferable to a modern conjugation merely for colloquial sake?

"lets eat grampa" is my point to a tee. its ugly, but its not wrong.

if anything is actually wrong with it, its that it has no context.

(click to show/hide)

"lets eat grampa" is like this hat



if it were not on a head, would you know its a hat?

[Amechra]

Now your just using a constructed alphabet; that isn't gibberish, not at all.

And English isn't structured? Wow. Just wow. Half the meaning in English comes with word order and punctuation.

And runned is just not aesthetically pleasing to me, at least. Ran sounds much prettier.

[Monotremeancer]

Important rule #1: Capitalization.
I had to help my friend Jack off a horse

[altpersona]

again, jack need context.

 

what you and jack do to that horse is totally your own business 

im trying, in general, to avoid preference statements, such as style. since thats what im on about.

but runned is ugly.. but imo thats just brainwashing. irregular verbs have a strong union.

the constructed alphabet is to illustrate the rule complexity that invalidates the system.

I ran with my dog.
My dog and I ran.
With my dog, I ran.
I am with my dog in Iran.

word order is not an absolute.

[EjoThims]

I ran with my dog.
My dog and I ran.
With my dog, I ran.
I am with my dog in Iran.

word order is not an absolute.

This about sums up your understanding of your own arguments.

Only two of those are actually the same but with different word order. The others actually use different words.

And the two that have different word orders have vastly different implications.

"I ran with my dog."

This is standard English word order and implies that subject and subject's action(s) are the most important idea.

"With my dog, I ran."

This is non-standard word order and implies that the most important part of this idea is the dog's companionship.

One emphasizes that I was running. The other emphasizes that I and my dog were running, despite not being phrased in that way.



And if you still cannot understand the difference between the two, that only demonstrates that you do not understand the basic rules and structures of English well enough to play with their uses and abilities.

[ariasderros]

And if you still cannot understand the difference between the two, that only demonstrates that you do not understand the basic rules and structures of English well enough to play with their uses and abilities.

The point he is trying to get across is that purpose of communication overrides the importance of grammatical correctness, given that language evolves based on usage.

In your argument, even I fail to see the importance of the prioritization. I know the rule you are citing. I understand your argument. I just don't see how it matters for the meaning. Either way, the person you are talking to understands what was done and who was involved. Any inference about the level of importance you give your dog beyond that is reading into what was said over-intently, and just ends up annoying.

[altpersona]

And if you still cannot understand the difference between the two, that only demonstrates that you do not understand the basic rules and structures of English well enough to play with their uses and abilities.

The point he is trying to get across is that purpose of communication overrides the importance of grammatical correctness, given that language evolves based on usage.

In your argument, even I fail to see the importance of the prioritization. I know the rule you are citing. I understand your argument. I just don't see how it matters for the meaning. Either way, the person you are talking to understands what was done and who was involved. Any inference about the level of importance you give your dog beyond that is reading into what was said over-intently, and just ends up annoying.

sir, you should seek professional help. you and i agree and that cant be good for you. 


ejo, i know i used different words. i know that makes a difference.

its that difference that i have been on about.


use better words instead of complicated grammar bs.

[ariasderros]

sir, you should seek professional help. you and i agree and that cant be good for you. 

A) I only agree with the spirit of what you are saying, not the extent to which you take it. I agree much more with Nanshork. I am the same as him when it comes to the way I even write my text messages properly. When my friends mock me, I just respond with "You understood me, didn't you?"

B) I admitted a few pages back my need of professional help, in order to put someone else's issue with out-of-control thoughts into context.

[Sinfire Titan]

use better words instead of complicated grammar bs.

You can only use so many words before you start to confuse your audience. Just look at George Bush: His writers clearly used too many words for him to understand.