|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on May 8, 2010 12:03:49 GMT -8
Shine on you crazy diamond. Technically, there should be a comma between "on" and "you." Without it, it communicates that something is shining on me. Don't try to out-pedant me, son. I know how to 'deconstruct.' Really dude? You're saying these rules are just "too hard" for some people? No, I'm not. I don't know why you are using quotation marks around that phrase because I didn't use it. What I am saying is that it is naive to expect everyone to have the same, total grasp of the English language. By all means, correct people when they are wrong but cursing them out and ridiculing their intelligence is really when you should step back and think. The single letter abbreviations of three letter words is nigh inexcusable, unless there is a pressing need for time. I'm sorry, I'm largely ignorant of how common this use is outside of text messaging. In any case, I habitually type out the full word while texting, regardless of the pressing need for time. "Your" and "you're", "there, their, they're", or whatever else is not rocket science. Yes, and that's what trips a lot of people up. In all truth, there are many more crucial rules to writing the English language. Errors such as those are always an afterthought to conveying the substance of a sentence. I'd personally much rather have someone follow more basic grammatical words which make possible the meaning of the sentence than to correctly use words that are commonly used incorrectly. Calling it "condescending pedantry" is condescending in itself, as if the subject of English is just too hard for some people, and we must accept that their inferior minds cannot grasp these fine nuances like scholars such as ourselves. My position isn't condescending precisely because I do not assume that these errors are negatively indicative of one's intelligence. Your position, on the other hand, does. I haven't spoken about the capacity of people to better know the English language but you're equivocating if you believe that is subsumed in my recognition that people have varying familiarity with the language stemming from various, legitimate reasons. Derision is perhaps best for ironing out minor errors such as these at a high school level but before that is harmful and after that is impossibly austere. Saying otherwise is coddling sloth and illiteracy. If you're going to assume something like this prior to considering what is otherwise, I don't see the point in having this discussion. I don't know how to respond to such intellectual infidelity aside from responding in likewise. The English language is not a necessary quality of intelligence and even the intelligent commit errors. Saying otherwise is harboring terrorists and enabling pedophiles. |
|
|
|
Post by Kuat on May 8, 2010 12:54:42 GMT -8
Technically, there should be a comma between "on" and "you." Without it, it communicates that something is shining on me. Don't try to out-pedant me, son. I know how to 'deconstruct.' Touche. Teaching is facilitated with emotional connections. If someone who reads this gets incensed/depressed at having coarse language used, they are also more likely to remember the context. True, it is an afterthought; but as the old saying goes "it's the thought that counts". Would it kill someone to proof read their own writing? You misunderstand, neither do I. I think that it's a matter of effort (which I why I later used "sloth" and not "idiocy"). Debatable. As I had stated earlier, it's a method for getting the listener to remember the point, no matter what the age. From what I can gather, your position is that trying to educate people on their errors through the use of foul language, bright colors, and questionable font choice is ineffective at best and harmful or alienating at worse. However, before you colored the effort as "pedantry", which suggested that pointing such errors out was somehow unreasonable. This is what I took issue with - the thought that the correct use of "you're" was some slavish adherence to an archaic grammar rule. If the former is your point, I'll refer to "spare the rod, spoil the child". Or in this case "spare the use of cockwit fuckshits, spoil the dumbasses". If the latter is, that is why I thought you were taking a stance on intelligence: that these rules are anything but incredibly simple, and that to expect more out of the writer is misguided. How dare you espouse me to terrorists and pedophiles! If this were days of yore, I would challenge you to fisticuffs. Thank your lucky stars we live in a gentler time. |
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on May 8, 2010 13:38:01 GMT -8
From what I can gather, your position is that trying to educate people on their errors through the use of foul language, bright colors, and questionable font choice is ineffective at best and harmful or alienating at worse. However, before you colored the effort as "pedantry", which suggested that pointing such errors out was somehow unreasonable. This is what I took issue with - the thought that the correct use of "you're" was some slavish adherence to an archaic grammar rule. If the former is your point, I'll refer to "spare the rod, spoil the child". Or in this case "spare the use of cockwit fuckshits, spoil the dumbasses". If the latter is, that is why I thought you were taking a stance on intelligence: that these rules are anything but incredibly simple, and that to expect more out of the writer is misguided. Whoa there, I think this is the point of departure. I was neither criticizing the image you posted, which I took as humorous, nor the effort in principle. What I am critical of is obsessing over these errors to an unreasonable degree. It's to that degree that it becomes pedantic, it isn't pedantic in principle. These are the type of people who would dismiss a reasoned argument simply because of a common error. At that degree, the person may very well assume that the person who committed the error is incapable of improving. It isn't instructive, it is dismissive. |
|
|
|
Post by Kuat on May 8, 2010 14:04:36 GMT -8
Why do you have to post something I can't argue with? You ruin all my fun. I like debating  |
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on May 8, 2010 15:43:04 GMT -8
Now on with the brandy and cigars.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on May 10, 2010 23:59:39 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on May 11, 2010 19:24:06 GMT -8
I think I would pretty good at half of that sport.
If only my Fight Night doppelganger could handle the other half.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on May 15, 2010 1:32:26 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Muramasa on May 15, 2010 11:27:04 GMT -8
I don't know, what's yours Hipbadapawooblyhipspee?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kuat on May 15, 2010 13:25:02 GMT -8
Dippawooblyhipspee at your service.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dankness on May 15, 2010 15:06:10 GMT -8
Cosby hereby dubs me Hipspeebadapameepnup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on May 15, 2010 16:25:18 GMT -8
I don't even know how to start pronouncing these.
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on May 15, 2010 18:32:54 GMT -8
Gibberish is the free jazz of language. Pronounce it anyway you'd like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on May 20, 2010 11:20:15 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on May 29, 2010 0:07:58 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Inaaca on May 29, 2010 6:18:03 GMT -8
Oh... my GOSH. EVERYONE KNOWS that LEER doesn't CONFUSE, it LOWERS DEFENSE.
NOOB.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kuat on May 29, 2010 10:09:44 GMT -8
Oh... my GOSH. EVERYONE KNOWS that LEER doesn't CONFUSE, it LOWERS DEFENSE. NOOB. That is far from the most glaring error! First and foremost, pokemon can only use four moves. There Machoke used five! Machoke also can't learn pound, sleep powder, harden, or charm. Status effects that do not cause damage so they cannot be "super effective", they either work or they don't. And... and...  |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on Jun 4, 2010 7:22:49 GMT -8
 This reminded me of Sara for some reason. |
|
|
|
Post by The Dankness on Jun 8, 2010 0:33:53 GMT -8
I hate to post this right after that cute duck one, but here goes... The most effed up movie poster ever, anyone?  |
|
|
|
Post by Kuat on Jun 8, 2010 9:49:21 GMT -8
In his defense, the baby was being sort of a BONE.
|
|
