Michael Emrys Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Really, DT, you must strive harder to overcome this compulsion of yours to let the facts get in the way of a good story. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Sorry ME, just have this crazy feeling about honesty! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 [in homburg, trench coat, and tinted glasses] Ja? Zat could be verrry dangerous for you and your family, Herr Diesel. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 [in homburg, trench coat, and fake glasses, nose, and mustache.] Fixed that for you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted May 18, 2009 Share Posted May 18, 2009 Spelling in France: baisse-toi --- Duck your head down Apparently often used in the sense of "bend over so we can both watch X-files", and so not so far removed from..... Baise-toi ---- Screw yourself Just as well I didn't mention French then 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I suspect there is a spelling mistake in this post: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1136627 But then again, it kind of makes sense the way it is. What do you think the writer was trying to say? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 "Oh goody, more wars. LOTS more wars." International sediment is a good one though - sort of brings up images of the crud at the bottom of a cesspool. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 seems fair enough - the chinese are supporting the guy so he can happily ignore "the west" & continue massacring anyone he feels like. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Are you sure you understand what he meant to say? Maybe, maybe not. That's a fairly easy one, though, since that word stands out. It's not hard to come across similar situations where the word is 'wrong', but ends up being a word and spelt correctly or nearly correctly, and completely changes the meaning of what's written or intended. And that's only for the ones that stand out and are noticed. lord knows how many unintentional and undetected misunderstandings are caused by bad spelling and grammar. Yet I'm supposed to conclude that it doesn't matter? *pfft* Go argue with your strawman. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Sure Jon - but is perfection in the use of language a desirable, or even possible thing? Can you, for example, claim such a degree of correctness? So, to some extent, it doesn't matter? As for understanding the post - I'm not sure it can be understood. So, no, I don't understand what he said, let alone what he meant to say. Rule of best approximation plus an enormous load of baggage (including consciously held bigotries and bias) leads me to believe... I find misspelt missives to be a pain to read - literally. Bad prose does the same - stop, stumble, what? Clever can take you through, but it's engagement and my brain's processes (as far as "I" can experience them) that keep me reading. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Sure Jon - but is perfection in the use of language a desirable, or even possible thing? Can you, for example, claim such a degree of correctness? Absolutely not, as the number of my posts which have been edited can surely attest to. But nor do I claim that spelling is unimportant. I make mistakes, but regret and correct them. Organ makes mistakes, yet tries to make it your fault and problem. That's the difference. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 lol Seems he does a pretty good job. ramble A discipline of mind that lends itself to exercise, in the maintenance and husbanding of its command of a language, can be better relied upon to deliver the right facts, perhaps even in a timely manner. This practice lends itself to efficient communication, and the ability to deliver a significant amount of information to another individual. Whether this information is communicated depends to a large degree on the individuals' shared understanding of the language. It could be postulated that the simplicity of such mind training - the development of memory and recall - is a foundation for specialised modes of thought: synthesis, problem solution, ideas even. end ramble 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xor+ Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 How about (modern) pictographic languages? I'm guessing a misplaced penstroke lends an entirely different meaning to a word. Icons can be evil ambiguity-generators. I routinely try to ignore/turn off icon-infested taskbars in applications. I guess I'm expected to somehow "intuitively" grasp their meanings. But most of the time I'm not even sure what they're supposed to depict. And I don't have the faintest idea what program functions any of those 25 blobs of pixels will lead me to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Organ makes mistakes, yet tries to make it your fault and problem. That's the difference. No. Thats teh diffrenec. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Are you sure you understand what he meant to say? Dunno who you were talking to, but I did despite the incorrect word being used....I chose to reply to the actual on the basis that stirring up the bottom dwelling muck was a reasonable metaphor. Sorry if I overtaxed your comprehension. I make mistakes, but regret and correct them. Organ makes mistakes, yet tries to make it your fault and problem. That's the difference. I thought the difference was I don't make up stories about what your attitudes are. I claim that current English spelling is often arbitrary, complicated, confusing and a factor in literacy problems, and that we would all be better off if it were simplified. But I guess that's a leap of logic too far for many. It's amazing how it's such an untouchable institution. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I claim that current English spelling is often arbitrary, complicated, confusing and a factor in literacy problems, and that we would all be better off if it were simplified. But I guess that's a leap of logic too far for many. It's amazing how it's such an untouchable institution. Spelling is a factor in literacy problems, yes. I'm not sure that literacy problems can be helped by relaxing the vigour with which a word holds onto it's physical structure. I'd intuit that a person trying to address their literacy problem is less likely to be helped by the inconstant spelling of a word than by the lowering of the standard by which literacy is judged. As for arbitrary spelling - a language doesn't appear fully developed, it is unreasonable to expect it not to change in the course of time. Arbitrary rules are the greater part of the foundation of our society. Complicated - the task is to make a vocabulary out of combinations of 26 letters, then have the various taxonomic sets within relate to each other in the same way that objects relate to each other in the physical universe - i.e develop with the changes in perception and understanding of the users of the vocabulary. Confusing - well, to an illiterate, yes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 Arguably English is already simplified to the 2000 words reputed to be used by the popular tabloid press. Out of a million words I would call that simplified : ) However if one wishes to write more usefully with shades of meaning to a more intelligent audience then you have to use a bigger vocabulary. Spelling could be simplified - and in fact Webster in the US and Johnson in England who really standardised the current spellings. There have been changes and I was intrigued that the Times used to spell car tyre as tire until quite late. There is of course a logic to not using the same words for too many different things. It is a great problem for the French who try for a vocabulary limited to 100000 words. BTW aluminum for the correct word is derived from a spelling mistake - irritating isn't it that it was not sorted at the time but allowed to divide languages. A splendid example of what can happen if we all can create our own spellings : ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I claim that current English spelling is often arbitrary' date=' complicated, confusing and a factor in literacy problems, and that we would all be better off if it were simplified.[/quote'] I don't greatly disagree with that. But I don't believe for a moment that a cure is to be found in linguistic anarchy. And if that isn't actually your position, I wish you would say so, because so far that's the impression you have left me with. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 Yeah, well I did suggest that how we spell doesn't matter....so perhaps I'm guilty of a bit of hyperbole.....my gripe is actually that spelling is too complicated - 9 or 10 ways of pronouncing "-ough" is just not helpful so why not spell each phonetically and remove the problem? I advocate set spelling - but simplified. Enuf is enuf, but enough is too much. Coincidentially this got published in today's paper.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 BTW aluminum for the correct word is derived from a spelling mistake - irritating isn't it that it was not sorted at the time but allowed to divide languages. A splendid example of what can happen if we all can create our own spellings : ) I assume you meant aluminium and not that stuff the Yanks refer to! Regards KR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Phonetically - and which pronunciation will be standardised NZ, US , English. Or will each country spell it phonetically the way they pronounce it. : ) I bough/bow to yore/yor/yaw marsterly kure Wiki is fun - here/hear is an extract: Examples Examples of phonemes in the English language would include sounds from the set of English consonants, like /p/ and /b/. These two are most often written consistently with one letter for each sound. However, phonemes might not be so apparent in written English, such as when they are typically represented with combined letters, called digraphs, like <sh> (pronounced /ʃ/) or <ch> (pronounced /tʃ/). To see a list of the phonemes in the English language, see IPA for English. Two sounds that may be allophones (sound variants belonging to the same phoneme) in one language may belong to separate phonemes in another language or dialect. In English, for example, /p/ has aspirated and non-aspirated allophones:aspirated as in /pɪn/, and non-aspirated as in /spɪn/. However, in many languages (e. g. Chinese), aspirated /pʰ/ is a phoneme distinct from unaspirated /p/. As another example, there is no distinction between [r] and [l] in Japanese; there is only one /r/ phoneme, though it has various allophones that can sound more like [l], [ɾ], or [r] to English speakers. The sounds [z] and are distinct phonemes in English, but allophones in Spanish. The sounds [n] (as in run) and [ŋ] (as in rung) are phonemes in English, but allophones in Italian and Spanish. An important phoneme is the chroneme, a phonemically-relevant extension of the duration a consonant or vowel. Some languages or dialects such as Finnish or Japanese allow chronemes after both consonants and vowels. Others, like Australian English use it after only one (in the case of Australian, vowels). but if we stick with English This concise chart shows the most common applications of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) to represent English language pronunciations. See Pronunciation respelling for English for phonetic transcriptions used in different dictionaries. AuE = Australian English[1]CaE = Canadian English[citation needed]GA = General American[2][3]IrE = Irish English[citation needed]NZE = New Zealand English[citation needed]RP = Received Pronunciation (England)[4]ScE = Scottish English[citation needed]SAE = South African English[citation needed]WaE = Welsh English[citation needed]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabet_for_English 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I assume you meant aluminium and not that stuff the Yanks refer to! Regards KR That is correct! : ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium though you will see that the wrong spelling did have a pedigree. I do think it was an advertising cock-up probably but just possibly a marketing masterstroke. In the UK we have hoovers as generic for vacuum cleaners though Dysons are doing their best to replace it : ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 By all means spell phonetically differently in each country - that'll just add colour/color, and we already pronounce words differently with the same spelling too........ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 By all means spell phonetically differently in each country - that'll just add colour/color' date=' and we already pronounce words differently with the same spelling too........[/quote'] Us non-native speakers get to laugh hard when you subtitle native speakers so other native speakers understand what is being said. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 From a bunch of first year politics essays I was marking today: "...a dessert dwelling people..." "....old-fashioned social morays..." "Lebanon has a lot of Sheer Muslims." "....Islam is a peaceful and gentile faith..." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.