Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis

Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/index.php)
-   General Discussion (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Proper spelling - is it that important? (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=33969)

nuttyturnip Aug 18, 2008 03:10 PM
Proper spelling - is it that important?
 
Link
Quote:
Originally Posted by Time
Most teachers expect to correct their students' spelling mistakes once in a while. But Ken Smith has had enough. The senior lecturer in criminology at Bucks New University in Buckinghamshire, England, sees so many misspellings in papers submitted by first-year students that he says we'd be better off letting the perpetrators off the hook and doing away with certain spelling rules altogether.

Good spellers, Smith says, should be able to go on writing as usual; those who find the current rules of English too hard to learn should have their spelling labeled variant, not wrong. Smith zeroes in on 10 candidates for variant spellings, culled from his students' most commonly misspelled (or mispelled, as Smith suggests) words. Among them are Febuary instead of February, twelth instead of twelfth and truely instead of truly — all words, he says, that involve confusion over silent letters. When students would ask why there's no e in truly, Smith didn't really have an answer. "I'd say, 'Well, I don't know. ... You've just got to drop it because people do,' " he says. Smith adds that when teachers correct spelling, they waste valuable time they could be spending on bigger ideas.

Word nerds aren't the only ones with a stake in the proposal. People who have trouble with spelling are punished when it comes to applying for jobs or even filling out forms, even though their mistakes are far from unusual, says Jack Bovill, chairman of the British-based Spelling Society, an international organization that has advocated simplified spellings since 1908. A 2007 Spelling Society survey of 1,000 British adults found that more than half could not spell embarrassed or millennium correctly and more than a quarter struggled with definitely, accidentally and separate.

Smith and Bovill are part of a long and illustrious line of spelling malcontents. Benjamin Franklin, Andrew Carnegie, Teddy Roosevelt and even Noah Webster, father of American lexicography, all lobbied for spelling reform, their reasons ranging from traumatic childhood spelling experiences to the hope that easier communication would promote peace. In 1906, Mark Twain lobbied the Associated Press to use phonetic spelling. "The heart of our trouble is with our foolish alphabet," he once wrote. "It doesn't know how to spell, and can't be taught."

Non-English-speaking countries have been simplifying their spelling for centuries: Spain, France, Germany, Russia, Norway, Ireland, Indonesia and Japan, among others, have all instituted such reforms; Portugal in May amended its spelling to follow the simpler Brazilian rules. Since 1755, when the English language was standardized in Samuel Johnson's aptly named Dictionary of the English Language, many variant spellings have become widely accepted on both sides of the pond. In 1864, for instance, the U.S. government officially changed the spelling of words like centre and timbre to end in the variant -er; more recently, at the beginning of the 20th century, fantasy became an accepted variant of phantasy.

But some language purists insist that there is value to the top-down rules of English. "People who spell a lot of words incorrectly either aren't paying attention or don't care," says Barbara Wallraff, who writes the Wordcourt column on language and writing problems for the Atlantic and King Features Syndicate. "Why are we changing our language to accommodate — with two m's — them?"

Joe Pickett, executive editor of the American Heritage Dictionary, says that changes to dictionary entries are always on the table, but he and his seven fellow editors are a tough crowd. They keep an eye on print publications to see whether a variant usage has started to become mainstream. Any word that seems to be a good candidate for an update undergoes rigorous scrutiny as the editors seek input from a panel of some 200 orthographic and lexicographic whizzes. Even among this writerly crowd, 13% admitted in 1996 to combining a lot into a single word. But 93% still considered it an error and corrected it in their own writing — leading the editors not to change the entry. Variants are added to the dictionary, Pickett says, "only when we're really convinced that even people like us don't notice [the misspelling] much."

Smith, for his part, insists that he is advocating only for minor changes. "I'm not saying to people who have actually gone to all the trouble to learn all the exceptions to the rule that they should unlearn it. I'm just saying, let's have a few more variant spellings," he says. And if that doesn't catch on, he has another idea. "In the 21st century, why learn by heart rote spelling when you can just type it into a computer and spell-check?" he asks.
Grammar police of GFF, does this sound as wrong to you as it does to me? As long as a person gets close, we ought to give them credit? This seems like the beginning of a slalom down the slippery slope of laziness.

Radez Aug 18, 2008 03:31 PM
Here's the thing. There's a history behind words and how they're spelled. Mr. Smith can't tell us why truly isn't spelled with an e, but for damn sure there's a reason. It's likely rooted in grammatical rules governing the application of suffixes. I'm sure the whole world wasn't conscious of this reason, but just the same a lot of people probably picked up on the pattern and sub-consciously carried it forward.

Language evolves, sure. I don't think it's a process that can be effectively controlled by people. It's kind of like the EPA thinking they can manage the environment. Best just leave it to its own devices.

Of course that means that drawing a hard line and making a stand for the true and righteous way of spelling is a little stupid too. However I'd argue that history has its own inertia, and tradition deserves a little respect.

Philia Aug 18, 2008 03:34 PM
This I just cannot condone. Because of my being deaf, I learned how to spell every word correctly before I type them online because I do not want to appear as a fool. Extra harder for most words that has silent letters, I still consult this handy dictionary on my right every now and then.

I did not get taught and be reprimanded after so many times to just let it slide to laziness. Can anyone say ASL? (And that's not what you think it is.) American Sign Language is atrocious in this regard. Because of the time spent on spelling it out on words that doesn't have a "hand" sign yet, (you can't sign as fast as you speak), they shortchange a LOT of words. Its really sad to the fact that it really influences a lot of deaf people's grammar to this day.

ramoth Aug 18, 2008 03:59 PM
It's good to be correct, to a point. I used to subscribe to Language Log a blog by linguists (I stopped because they were pretty spammy), and I was fascinated to find out that linguists are not interested in beating people over the head with a bunch of rules in a musty book printed a hundred years ago, but how people actually use language.

Take the phenomenon of Eggcorns for instance. For people who are too lazy to click:

Quote:
Originally Posted by WIKIALITY
...an idiosyncratic substitution of a word or phrase for a word or words that sound similar or identical in the speaker's dialect. Characteristic of the eggcorn is that the new phrase makes sense on some level ("old-timer's disease" for "Alzheimer's disease"). Eggcorns often involve replacing an unfamiliar, archaic, or obscure word with a more common or modern word ("baited breath" for "bated breath").
Linguists have actually set up a website to find and track eggcorns on the interwebs. Being able to Google Search for a phrase is a linguist's dream, apparently. I guess it makes sense -- they can see how real people are using language without any observational bias: people don't know they're being listened to. You can also see how many "ghits" a phrase has. It's pretty cool to watch linguists at work -- it totally shattered my mental model.

Anyway, my point is: nobody except a grammar nazi gives a shit if you occasionally make a typo or comma splice. The point isn't to have perfect grammar: the point is to clearly and concisely communicate what you are trying to say. Language is a tool to communicate. The more smoothly, more clearly and more emotively you can do this the better, and that's the point. Who gives a fuck about an Oxford comma? As long as it's not ambiguous and reads cleanly, you're good. Fret not.

Crash "Long-Winded Wrong Answer" Landon Aug 18, 2008 04:17 PM
There's a reason spelling counts: standardization.

If everyone just goes about spelling words however he or she pleases, then we lose a consistent foundation for our language. Vernacular changes, and alternate spellings are often grandfathered into academic acceptability, but this is something that should happen through time, not the abandonment of structure altogether.

Words are tools to convey ideas. When we accept a proper spelling, we're effectively choosing which particular tool represents the concept of, say, "cat." We insert that tool into context and everyone involved recognizes it - "I know that idea!", everyone says to himself. Though different spellings can still function as these tools, they lose some efficacy, we're forced to pause and examine the tool we've been given, as though it was produced in some foreign country that operates under different laws. Maybe the tool will fit, maybe it won't. God help us if the word it means to be is a homonym; context doesn't always fill in the gaps.

Standardization holds each of us accountable to the same rules. Without them, we could be as cavalier as we wished and chalk all misinterpretations up to reader error, not authorial stupidity. It also allows us to observe relative levels of intelligence; an employer does not wish to hire morons. It is not the employer's duty to lower the hiring requirements; it's the applicant's responsibility to achieve competency!

Basically, if you can't spell, go work at McDonald's. Poor English skills don't seem to bother them.

http://www.shermanoakschamber.org/im...in_it_logo.jpg

ramoth Aug 18, 2008 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash Landon (Post 638504)
There's a reason spelling counts: standardization.
Also if you spelled standardization "standurdizashun", most folks would be unable to determine what you were trying to say without taking time to sound the word out.

More than just a bunch of arbitrary rules that serve no purpose, proper spelling allows others to quickly parse what you're trying to say. More than anything it's an optimization for reading speed.

Hi, My Name Is Hito Aug 18, 2008 04:37 PM
Crash, you'd be surprised how many times in a restaurant illiteracy or bad spelling habits has gotten a plate fucked up. It's understandable if it's something French like WHORE DUHRVS that almost never gets written outside of the industry, but more often I see mistakes in very simple things like hamburger (hambirgur), lettuce (letis), bacon (bakin). Combined with bad handwriting or recipes that don't make a lot of sense to begin with and you'll end up with a plate of hamburger and baked lentils when it was supposed to be a bacon burger with lettuce.

Identity Crisis Aug 18, 2008 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iago (Post 638511)
It's understandable if it's something French like WHORE DUHRVS that almost never gets written outside of the industry, but more often I see mistakes in very simple things like hamburger (hambirgur), lettuce (letis), bacon (bakin).
Wow. I can understand some spelling mistakes like the word "separate" becoming "seperate," but spelling like that looks too tacky to take seriously let alone read. It reminds me of a talk one of my high school teachers had about the English language.

How would you pronounce this word: ghoti?

With the right conventions, it would actually be pronounced "fish". The "gh" would form the noise similar to the "gh" in "rough", the "o" would come from the "o" in "women", and the "ti" would come from the "ti" in "station". Here's an exciting Wikipedia link!

Of course, that's a very extreme example, but as long as the reader can easily get the gist of what's being said, a few simple misspellings (or mispellings even though my spell check says otherwise) shouldn't hurt.

I poked it and it made a sad sound Aug 18, 2008 05:11 PM
I also understand that language evolves, but not because some asshole students can't learn how to spell properly.

It's not hard: if you don't know how to spell it, look it up.

Sometimes, people think they know how to spell something and they've been doing it wrong all the while. If you get something tagged on your paper for misspelling (fuck you, misspelling is correct), perhaps you should investigate it!

It makes my SKIN CRAWL when I see some papers (yes, I do get to see academic papers, compliments of my sister) with words that have been mangled into oblivion, I want to know why professors aren't taking points off -or even mentioning it- to their students.

"It's about the content, not the grammar or spelling" is the response I usually get.

How can students know if they're fucking a word up if they're not told.

I'm no college graduate, but I do my damnedest to present myself in an acceptable fashion.

I get sick to my stomach when I see college graduates not spelling words properly. It seems that it is the BASIC FOUNDATION of a good education to at least give a shit about how things are spelled.

So yea, after that long rant, I am saying that you don't twist the English language to accommodate some punk-ass lazy fuckwits. There are ways to remember how to spell things (I use them ALL THE TIME without thinking - "accommodate" is one of them!); people should start using what they learned in school.

ramoth Aug 18, 2008 05:21 PM
I think I've said my peace in this thread but I noticed this:

http://i35.tinypic.com/eu1the.jpg

The Plane Is A Tiger Aug 18, 2008 05:44 PM
I don't mind a few spelling errors here and there, but it's ridiculous how little people seem to care about it. So many of them are caused by nothing more than laziness, but they always respond with some line about it being close enough or that they've just never been good with spelling so they don't bother trying. It's not difficult to grab a dictionary or simply choose a word you do know how to spell, and with resources like spellcheckers and dictionary.com there's very little excuse these days.

Online classes are the worst, since apparently people still see it as just the internet rather than school. In the three classes that I took there were so many chat abbreviations and shorthand being used in formal papers that some were barely legible. While I can't blame teachers for feeling like giving up out of frustration, they need to do their jobs and drive home the importance of not spelling like an idiot.

nuttyturnip Aug 18, 2008 06:22 PM
While I agree with not allowing students to become lazy with their spelling, Smith does bring up an interesting point in the last sentence:
Quote:
"In the 21st century, why learn by heart rote spelling when you can just type it into a computer and spell-check?"
One could argue that the spelling situation is analogous to teaching mathematics in the age of the pocket calculator. Fifty years ago, kids had to learn about square roots, logarithms and cosines; by the time I was in school, the curriculum consisted of teaching us how to punch those into the calculator. A fundamental knowledge of spelling is still needed regardless, but in this day and age, many people rely on a spellchecker instead of actually knowing how to spell something.

Of course, this doesn't explain why the students in Mr. Smith's class don't use that spellchecker, but the fact remains that our spelling skills may atrophy with such a tool at our disposal.

Dhsu Aug 18, 2008 06:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramoth (Post 638527)
I think I've said my peace in this thread but I noticed this:
At the risk of missing obvious irony, do you mean "piece"?

Radez Aug 18, 2008 06:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuttyturnip (Post 638545)
One could argue that the spelling situation is analogous to teaching mathematics in the age of the pocket calculator. Fifty years ago, kids had to learn about square roots, logarithms and cosines; by the time I was in school, the curriculum consisted of teaching us how to punch those into the calculator. A fundamental knowledge of spelling is still needed regardless, but in this day and age, many people rely on a spellchecker instead of actually knowing how to spell something.

Of course, this doesn't explain why the students in Mr. Smith's class don't use that spellchecker, but the fact remains that our spelling skills may atrophy with such a tool at our disposal.
I don't agree, nutty. I don't think the comparison is apt. We still learn the definition of a squareroot, sine and cosine, etc. In order to calculate those by hand, you have to calculate approximating series out to the nth degree. This is not something that can be easily done without tools.

Spelling is simply learning how the letters fit together to make sounds. This is a process intrinsic (inherent?) to language and the use thereof.

The reference to a spell-checker doesn't really change the argument. A spell-checker still needs a standard against which to check shit, and that standard's gotta be defined by someone. Smith wants to redefine the standard.

Megalith Aug 18, 2008 06:43 PM
As an editor for a magazine, I'll go ahead and call this guy a faggot. Naturally, it comes from a college professor---for all that money you're shoveling up their ass every semester, you're still ending up with somebody as lazy and bored as this. And this is the root of the scam many refer to as "education."

There's actually a lot of things that can be tolerated in grammar, but spelling simply isn't one of them.

nuttyturnip Aug 18, 2008 07:05 PM
What magazine is that, Megalith?

Ridan Krad Aug 18, 2008 07:28 PM
Quote:
Non-English-speaking countries have been simplifying their spelling for centuries: Spain, France, Germany, Russia, Norway, Ireland, Indonesia and Japan
It's interesting that they mention Japan, because Japan doesn't really have "spelling" per se, but uses borrowed Chinese characters, kanji 漢字, and combines them together like we tie together certain root words in English. So in English, for instance, the prefix "-ing" is used to nominalize verbs (e.g. the verb "read" becomes the noun "reading"). Now in Japanese, a single character can sometimes function in much the same way. So for example, the word kanji is formed with kan- 漢 (which means China) and -ji 字 (character, letter, etc.)--thus giving kanji the literal translation Chinese character. Individual kanji, in turn, can be further broken down into components, sometimes with amusing results (e.g. kusuri 薬 meaning drug, is formed from 楽 which means "comfort" and an abbreviated 艸 meaning "grass"--thus, "comfort grass").

This is all well and good, but unfortunately, like with English, the reasoning for why certain roots were together to form a particular word isn't always clear. Thus, remembering which kanji to use is a constant issue, particularly in the modern world where modern Japanese language software has made it simply a matter of typing in the phonetic form of the word and then selecting the correct word from a pop-up list, compared to the old days where it was all handwritten. As Nuttyturnip pointed out, spelling-correction software has simplified (a.k.a. dumbed down) writing in English and, far from being a tool, may more accurately be described as a crutch that actually degrades language ability. The results have been similar in Japanese. My point in saying all this is that while the article makes it sound like other countries have been "simplifying their language for centuries," I suspect that all countries' respective group of linguists exercise a certain reluctance to let laziness dictate their respective language's progression.

Basically, this problem isn't isolated to English.

Scarletdeath Aug 18, 2008 07:48 PM
You forgot that Japan doesn't use Kanji alone. Kana is used on a more common basis than Kanji, and they do shorten their "spelling" on them. Particularly, English derived words written with Katakana. Words that have more than 4 syllables are commonly shortened to 4 syllables or so.

Even on Kanji, words that have more than 4 letters are often shortened. For example, South Korea and China's full name has about 4 Kanji chara. altogether, but are known as 韓国 and 中国 instead, only with 2 Kanji chara.

And besides, this:
Quote:
Now in Japanese, a single character can sometimes function in much the same way. So for example, the word kanji is formed with kan- 漢 (which means China) and -ji 字 (character, letter, etc.)--thus giving kanji the literal translation Chinese character.
Isn't the same as:
Quote:
So in English, for instance, the prefix "-ing" is used to nominalize verbs (e.g. the verb "read" becomes the noun "reading").
Putting a Kan with a Ji is like putting Home and Work and create Homework. Verbs in Japanese work entirely different from English. If you want to compare putting an "-ing" on "running" in Japanese, Kanji has nothing to do with this since the verbs in Japanese utilizes Kana for form changes.

Also,
Quote:
Individual kanji, in turn, can be further broken down into components, sometimes with amusing results (e.g. kusuri 薬 meaning drug, is formed from 楽 which means "comfort" and an abbreviated 艸 meaning "grass"--thus, "comfort grass").
Why are you explaining how Kanji characters are made? It has nothing to do with spelling at all.

Friendly reminder; you might want to actually try speaking Japanese first before jumping ahead on this.

ramoth Aug 18, 2008 08:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhsu (Post 638546)
At the risk of missing obvious irony, do you mean "piece"?
Hah! That's actually a perfect example of an eggcorn, which I posted about above!

Delicious.

Ridan Krad Aug 18, 2008 09:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 638570)
You forgot that Japan doesn't use Kanji alone. Kana is used on a more common basis than Kanji, and they do shorten their "spelling" on them. Particularly, English derived words written with Katakana. Words that have more than 4 syllables are commonly shortened to 4 syllables or so.
I'm aware of hiragana and katakana. I chose not to discuss them because I wanted to make a general point without getting bogged down on details that only someone studying Japanese would know.

Although, honestly, aside from particles, verb stems, and those occasional foreign words, do you really think kana get used more than kanji? I haven't found that to be the case at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 638570)
Even on Kanji, words that have more than 4 letters are often shortened. For example, South Korea and China's full name has about 4 Kanji chara. altogether, but are known as 韓国 and 中国 instead, only with 2 Kanji chara.
Right and you can even come up with constructions like 和英 for 和英辞書. But this just goes to my point that kanji can roughly be analogized to root words in English in the way they can be used as abbreviations and such.

Quote:
And besides, this:

Isn't the same as:
Yeah, I guess if you want to get technical, a true equivalent to -ing in the nominalizing sense would be 事 as in 読む事 which nominalizes 読む. Again, though, I was just trying to illustrate a general point of how one could compare English and Japanese.

Oh and since you bring it up, I wasn't referring to reading as in "I'm reading." Yes, that would be 読んでいる. But I was talking about the nominalized verb form, not the present participle form that you would use that for. Afterall, when you say "I'm reading," you don't actually mean "I am the noun reading." We're talking about two very different usages for the English usage of "-ing."

I do like your example of "home" and "work" forming homework, though. I guess that does illustrate the 漢字 example better.

Quote:
Why are you explaining how Kanji characters are made? It has nothing to do with spelling at all.
I disagree. The way you remember spelling is by taking note of patterns where they exist while being mindful of exceptions. Similarly, the way to develop proficiency in kanji is to learn radicals that form kanji and the patterns that develop in their usage. 金 illustrates this point well, I think, as it's used in a lot of various metals, over and over again.

Quote:
Friendly reminder; you might want to actually try speaking Japanese first before jumping ahead on this.
I'll admit that having been at it for a few years now, there's a lot that I don't know, and it could very well be the case that you're more knowledgeable on the subject than I am as well, but I actually have studied the language.

Temari Aug 18, 2008 09:49 PM
The idea of this kind of (kinda?) makes my skin crawl. As someone said, changing our language to appease the lazy folks who just dont want to learn how to spell correctly is just a bunch of bullshit. Its just another excuse for the people who dont want to try, and another example about how kids are being coddled these days.

And if college professors insist on the whole 'content vs presentation', they're not doing their students any favors because a misspelling on a resume or cover letter would leave them with nothing. Employers look for perfection in these things because it tells them something about who they could be employing.

(And honestly, if this article mentioned the words 'your' and 'you're' or 'there', 'their' and 'they're' as being acceptable mistakes, I was gonna punch something.)

Zergrinch Aug 18, 2008 10:01 PM
I personally consider syntax so important that I try to go and correct every single grammatical or spelling error that I make.

Hopefully I don't have a single mistake in any of my (serious) GFF posts! (Find 'em if ye can! :3:)

Scarletdeath Aug 18, 2008 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridan Krad (Post 638587)
Although, honestly, aside from particles, verb stems, and those occasional foreign words, do you really think kana get used more than kanji? I haven't found that to be the case at all.
Then maybe you haven't study the language deep enough.

Kana is EVERYWHERE. If you want to ignore that fact that Japanese people study Kana before Kanji, then I'd like to point out that the current Japanese society uses a crapload of 外来語, which are all in Katakana. Not to mention that a sentence cannot make sense with only Kanji, 送り仮名 are a must. Mind elaborating on how Kanji is used more than Kana?

Quote:
Right and you can even come up with constructions like 和英 for 和英辞書. But this just goes to my point that kanji can roughly be analogized to root words in English in the way they can be used as abbreviations and such.
Right, somehow I interpret your sentence as saying "Kanji cannot be abbreviated". My bad.

Quote:
Yeah, I guess if you want to get technical, a true equivalent to -ing in the nominalizing sense would be 事 as in 読む事 which nominalizes 読む. Again, though, I was just trying to illustrate a general point of how one could compare English and Japanese.
Again, I somehow thought you were saying that those two sentences that I pointed out were the same.

Quote:
Oh and since you bring it up, I wasn't referring to reading as in "I'm reading." Yes, that would be 読んでいる. But I was talking about the nominalized verb form, not the present participle form that you would use that for. Afterall, when you say "I'm reading," you don't actually mean "I am the noun reading." We're talking about two very different usages for the English usage of "-ing."
I'm fully aware on the usage of -している. I was also pointing out the difference between Kanji and verbs.

Quote:
I disagree. The way you remember spelling is by taking note of patterns where they exist while being mindful of exceptions. Similarly, the way to develop proficiency in kanji is to learn radicals that form kanji and the patterns that develop in their usage. 金 illustrates this point well, I think, as it's used in a lot of various metals, over and over again.
Actually, no. Like my "homework" example, these aren't spelling, these are nouns. A word that uses 金 all over are still nouns. For example, remembering which Kanji makes up 金属 or 金銭 is the same as remembering home goes with work for homework. Spelling are such as 殺された; knowing the 送り仮名 that follows or how to spell　コンビニエンスストア properly.

Quote:
I'll admit that having been at it for a few years now, there's a lot that I don't know, and it could very well be the case that you're more knowledgeable on the subject than I am as well, but I actually have studied the language.
I'll give you the slack since Japanese is a hard language, and you can very well forget plenty without practicing constantly. As for my qualification on the language, I have studied in an actual Japanese school, gotten enough exposure on the Japanese culture, and interacted with plenty of Japanese. In fact, my Japanese Proficiency Level is at 2. I hardly include actual Kanji/Kana in this because I'm too lazy to change the languages with the toolbar.

Ridan Krad Aug 18, 2008 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 638595)
Mind elaborating on how Kanji is used more than Kana?
Actually, on second thought, you're right. When I think about the sheer number of times certain hiragana must get used just to provide grammar, they probably do outweigh kanji, even factoring in long strings of kanji for proper names and such. It's just that you originally said "Kana is used on a more common basis than Kanji," which almost makes it sound like you could get by just knowing kana. Of course, we both know that's not the case. Anyway, I agree with you.

Quote:
I'm fully aware on the usage of -している. I was also pointing out the difference between Kanji and verbs.
And I'm fully aware that you do. My point wasn't to lecture you on the て-form, but to point out that you're not talking about the same -ing usage that I was. Your original response said verbs use kana for form changes which is generally true, and certainly true for ている. However, I was talking about turning a verb into a noun. Let's put it this way:

1) それを食べる事が嫌いだ --> I hate eating that.
2) それを食べている --> I am eating that.

The English equivalent uses -ing in both cases, but it has different functions. When I referred to nominalizing a verb in Japanese, I meant it in the sense of 1) not 2).

Quote:
Actually, no. Like my "homework" example, these aren't spelling, these are nouns. A word that uses 金 all over are still nouns. For example, remembering which Kanji makes up 金属 or 金銭 is the same as remembering home goes with work for homework. Spelling are such as 殺された; knowing the 送り仮名 that follows or how to spell　コンビニエンスストア properly.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't very clear. I meant 金 in the sense of a radical, as in 銀, or 鉄. Remembering the radicals can help break down the kanji itself into components, just as remembering certain letter combinations in English (e.g. -ation), even though they are never used by themselves, can help in remember many words that use them.

Quote:
I'll give you the slack since Japanese is a hard language, and you can very well forget plenty without practicing constantly. As for my qualification on the language, I have studied in an actual Japanese school, gotten enough exposure on the Japanese culture, and interacted with plenty of Japanese. In fact, my Japanese Proficiency Level is at 2. I hardly include actual Kanji/Kana in this because I'm too lazy to change the languages with the toolbar.
Haha, well to be honest it doesn't really feel like you're giving me much slack at all, but thanks I guess.

Congrats on passing the JLPT2, though. Any plans to ever try for JLPT1 anytime soon? I hear that thing's a monster.

Scarletdeath Aug 18, 2008 11:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridan Krad (Post 638608)
However, I was talking about turning a verb into a noun. Let's put it this way:

1) それを食べる事が嫌いだ --> I hate eating that.
2) それを食べている --> I am eating that.

The English equivalent uses -ing in both cases, but it has different functions. When I referred to nominalizing a verb in Japanese, I meant it in the sense of 1) not 2).
Point taken. Though, it is a little unfair to compare English and Japanese in this case, since, in the case of 1), それを食べるのが嫌いだ is more commonly used instead. I rarely come across nominalized verbs (like in your example) in Japanese sentences.

Quote:
Sorry, I guess I wasn't very clear. I meant 金 in the sense of a radical, as in 銀, or 鉄. Remembering the radicals can help break down the kanji itself into components, just as remembering certain letter combinations in English (e.g. -ation), even though they are never used by themselves, can help in remember many words that use them.
Yeah, but that doesn't make it categorized under "spelling". That's more on calligraphy me thinks; remembering the strokes and how to write certain characters.

Quote:
Congrats on passing the JLPT2, though. Any plans to ever try for JLPT1 anytime soon? I hear that thing's a monster.
I don't plan to go for JLPT1. I actually studied a majority of level 1 syllabus already, grammar and vocab alike, but I cannot catch up on the Kanji. I'm already half-dead memorizing 1.5k Kanji within 1.5 years time :gonk:

Let's resume this via PM. Getting quite off topic here.

Dhsu Aug 19, 2008 01:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridan Krad (Post 638587)
I disagree. The way you remember spelling is by taking note of patterns where they exist while being mindful of exceptions. Similarly, the way to develop proficiency in kanji is to learn radicals that form kanji and the patterns that develop in their usage. 金 illustrates this point well, I think, as it's used in a lot of various metals, over and over again.
I thought spelling is by knowing what letters make what sounds. From what I understand, while radicals may provide some indication as to meaning (and even then I'm sure there are some completely obscure etymologies), they often have no bearing whatsoever on pronunciation.

In English, if you know how a word sounds, you can usually figure out its spelling, or something reasonable close (I'd actually support spelling reform for the purposes of creating a 1-to-1 phonetic mapping). If one were to give you the pronunciation (or even meaning) of a Japanese word, would you be able to reconstruct the appropriate radicals purely from that?

Also, weeaboos.

Scarletdeath Aug 19, 2008 01:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhsu (Post 638656)
Also, weeaboos.
Says the guy that listens to animu music. How does knowing the language make someone a weaboo. Don't be jealous now. :mad:

Bigblah Aug 19, 2008 02:19 AM
Let's try a different example; if someone gave you a Japanese name, would you be able to reconstruct it? Heck, if someone gave it to you in kanji form, would you be able to deduce the pronunciation?

I've learnt Chinese all my life and honestly speaking, radicals don't do much to help pronunciation.

Dhsu Aug 19, 2008 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 638658)
Says the guy that listens to animu music.
:iceburn:

By the way, I don't remember the last time I've listened to an anime track (not including bad YouTube music videos).

Quote:
How does knowing the language make someone a weaboo.
If you're not Japanese, then knowing Japanese is usually a good sign that you're a weeaboo. If you are Japanese, then...well, fine, you've got me there.

Also if you're trying to tell me I misspelled "weeaboo," then that's a) kinda sad, and b) kinda wrong - see definition 2.

Quote:
Don't be jealous now. :mad:
I'll try my best, Sucaroletodesu-sama-kun-san~~~

Janus X Aug 19, 2008 01:22 PM
It may sound weird from me (ENglish is my 2nd language) but yes, spelling is important. If one has to read a text outloud to understand it, then it's not intelligible

French as gone a major reform in the 90s for the sake of simplicity. The hat (^) is no longer necessary if the word has no homonyns (forêt becomes foret, but dû - past participle of devoir - keeps it). During the Middle Ages, I learned that ''typist monks'' were paid by the number of characters they wrote, so they added some.

Languages may one day be written as they are spoken (so is Creole in Haiti). However, the process will be slow.

Bigblah Aug 19, 2008 02:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhsu (Post 638772)
By the way, I don't remember the last time I've listened to an anime track (not including bad YouTube music videos).
Um, you didn't need to get defensive there.





...weeaboo.

Ridan Krad Aug 19, 2008 07:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhsu (Post 638656)
I thought spelling is by knowing what letters make what sounds. From what I understand, while radicals may provide some indication as to meaning (and even then I'm sure there are some completely obscure etymologies), they often have no bearing whatsoever on pronunciation.
生 (sei) which is used as a radical in the kanji 性 (sei). Knowing the first kanji, you can guess the pronunciation of the second, more complicated one. This principle doesn't always apply, but it sometimes does and can serve as a mnemonic device as kanji became more complex.

Quote:
In English, if you know how a word sounds, you can usually figure out its spelling, or something reasonable close (I'd actually support spelling reform for the purposes of creating a 1-to-1 phonetic mapping). If one were to give you the pronunciation (or even meaning) of a Japanese word, would you be able to reconstruct the appropriate radicals purely from that?
There, their, they're
Too, two, to

Without context, how would you know which one to choose? I guess if you define "reasonably close" as picking one of the options, then sure; you're all set. But despite what the guy in the article says, I think to be taken seriously, knowing the correct spelling is important. Also, let's not forget about "silent" letters in English words. There's nothing intuitive about them, and sometimes certain letter combinations that are frequently used (-tion) would most certainly be spelled entirely different if the sound was isolated (shun).

Also, I don't know if 1-to-1 mapping would actually necessarily be a good thing. Although many people have trouble using the above examples correctly, there are distinct meanings for each word and different spelling helps make this more clear.

Regarding your question, I don't think that's a fair comparison. In English, when you're guessing spelling, you already have a large vocabulary and have been drilled on spelling all through grade school (although if the article is anything to go on, some people would say that's a waste of time). You pick the correct spelling based on a combination of context, vocabulary, and general rules of spelling. In Japanese, you get drilled on kanji instead of spelling. But just as English has patterns of spelling that can aid in memorization, Japanese has its radicals.

Quote:
If you're not Japanese, then knowing Japanese is usually a good sign that you're a weeaboo. If you are Japanese, then...well, fine, you've got me there.
I don't understand. Are you saying that you're against learning foreign languages, or that you're just against learning Japanese as a foreign language?

I always understood weeaboo to mean someone who thinks you can learn Japanese from just watching anime all day.

Dhsu Aug 19, 2008 09:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridan Krad (Post 638873)
生 (sei) which is used as a radical in the kanji 性 (sei). Knowing the first kanji, you can guess the pronunciation of the second, more complicated one. This principle doesn't always apply, but it sometimes does and can serve as a mnemonic device as kanji became more complex.
Citing an exception that "sometimes" applies does nothing to support your argument that the radical system is anything akin to spelling. Do even 40% of kanji follow the convention you just described?

Quote:
There, their, they're
Too, two, to

Without context, how would you know which one to choose? I guess if you define "reasonably close" as picking one of the options, then sure; you're all set.
Again you're using exceptions to support a weak argument.

Quote:
But despite what the guy in the article says, I think to be taken seriously, knowing the correct spelling is important. Also, let's not forget about "silent" letters in English words. There's nothing intuitive about them, and sometimes certain letter combinations that are frequently used (-tion) would most certainly be spelled entirely different if the sound was isolated (shun).
Sure they may not be intuitive, but there are still conventions that make it possible for someone with no knowledge of context or meaning to reconstruct the correct spelling. I don't see that being remotely true for the radical system. Honestly I don't see why you're so intent on pushing this point when Japanese has actual spelling system in the form of kana.

Quote:
Also, I don't know if 1-to-1 mapping would actually necessarily be a good thing. Although many people have trouble using the above examples correctly, there are distinct meanings for each word and different spelling helps make this more clear.
Fair enough. It actually might be in our best interests to eliminate homophones as well, but then where would all our wacky puns go...

Quote:
Regarding your question, I don't think that's a fair comparison. In English, when you're guessing spelling, you already have a large vocabulary and have been drilled on spelling all through grade school (although if the article is anything to go on, some people would say that's a waste of time). You pick the correct spelling based on a combination of context, vocabulary, and general rules of spelling. In Japanese, you get drilled on kanji instead of spelling. But just as English has patterns of spelling that can aid in memorization, Japanese has its radicals.
Not a fair comparison? You're the one who made it. :/ The purpose of spelling isn't to serve as a mnemonic to aid memorization...it's so you *don't* have to come up with mnemonics that sometimes work in order memorize thousands upon thousands of unique squiggle configurations. The fact that the English language in particular is often not conducive to this purpose at all is another matter entirely, but again, in general as long as you know what a word sounds like, you can spell it with a knowledge of basic conventions, which is not true of radicals.

Quote:
I don't understand. Are you saying that you're against learning foreign languages, or that you're just against learning Japanese as a foreign language?

I always understood weeaboo to mean someone who thinks you can learn Japanese from just watching anime all day.
First, I didn't say anything against learning Japanese, I merely suggested that it's a fairly accurate otaku-dar because the motivation more often than not stems from anime and/or video games. This has been supported by my general experience on both the Internet (just for fun, see how many Japanese threads there are on this forum for every thread about a different language) and real life (my sister is an "East Asian Languages and Cultures" major - read: huge weeaboo :gonk:). And unfortunately, you and Scarletdeath's little discussion didn't do much in the way of disproving that impression, you have to admit.

Second, are you guys really taking a word like "weeaboo" seriously? (Why you gotta make me cry, Bigblah? ;_; )

Bigblah Aug 19, 2008 11:18 PM
"Weeaboo" doesn't really bother me (I'm Asian, I live in Asia, I can damn well enjoy Asian entertainment without having to feel guilty about it), but still, considering that we can enjoy Disney movies, American cartoons and pop music without getting called names, you have to wonder why Westerners are derided for enjoying anime and J-pop/K-pop/whatever-pop.

Ridan Krad Aug 19, 2008 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhsu (Post 638902)
Citing an exception that "sometimes" applies does nothing to support your argument that the radical system is anything akin to spelling. Do even 40% of kanji follow the convention you just described?
Try 90%.

Quote:
Keisei-moji (形声文字)

These are called "phono-semantic", "semantic-phonetic", "semasio-phonetic" or "phonetic-ideographic" characters in English. They are by far the largest category, making up about 90% of characters. Typically they are made up of two components, one of which indicates the meaning or semantic context, and the other the pronunciation. (The pronunciation really relates to the original Chinese, and may now only be distantly detectable in the modern Japanese on'yomi of the kanji. The same is true of the semantic context, which may have changed over the centuries or in the transition from Chinese to Japanese. As a result, it is a common error in folk etymology to fail to recognize a phono-semantic compound, typically instead inventing a compound-indicative explanation.)

As examples of this, consider the kanji with the 言 shape: 語, 記, 訳, 説, etc. All are related to word/language/meaning. Similarly kanji with the 雨 (rain) shape (雲, 電, 雷, 雪, 霜, etc.) are almost invariably related to weather. Kanji with the 寺 (temple) shape on the right (詩, 持, 時, 侍, etc.) usually have an on'yomi of "shi" or "ji". Sometimes one can guess the meaning and/or reading simply from the components. However, exceptions do exist -- for example, neither 需 nor 霊 have anything to do with weather (at least in their modern usage), and 待 has an on'yomi of "tai". That is, a component may play a semantic role in one compound, but a phonetic role in another.
Granted, the system isn't perfect, and this only helps with guessing the on-yomi (Chinese reading) of the kanji, but I have heard that after learning a certain number of kanji, it does become possible to guess at meanings and pronunciation.

As for English, it's easy for you to dismiss examples I give as "exceptions," but if spelling is so intuitive, why do we have spelling tests? Why does most people's spelling suck? Why was this article written? Someone who only has studied the alphabet and learned about what vowels and consonants are isn't going to have good spelling. Even with a decent "speaking" vocabulary, in writing, it would not be unexpected to see a child misspell words, substituting in what they feel are more intuitive spellings. An educated adult will certainly do better, because they will have gotten lots of reading practice, and will be used to English conventions. For instance, if you ask a child to spell the word "phonetically," it probably won't go so well, because they aren't used to the Ph- F sound, and even if they are, may not recognize that this is a root word being used in this longer construction.

All I'm saying is being able to break down words into subcomponents is really useful for spelling correctly in English, and likewise being able to break down words and kanji in Japanese into subcomponents is also useful.

Quote:
Honestly I don't see why you're so intent on pushing this point when Japanese has actual spelling system in the form of kana.
I just thought it was interesting that they mentioned Japanese in an article about spelling. That's why I made the original post, at least. As for this long discussion that's followed, I don't know.

Quote:
Not a fair comparison? You're the one who made it. :/
I was talking about being able to guess meaning/pronunciation when seeing a new word in print. You're talking about hearing a word and then putting it to print yourself.

Incidentally, since you make Japanese sound so completely unintuitive, "thousands upon thousands of unique squiggle configurations," why is Japan's literacy rate so high? Human Development Report 2007/2008 - Adult literacy rate (% aged 15 and older)

Quote:
weeaboo
I guess I take offense to it because it trivializes something that I've worked hard at for several years now. When most people use this term, that is the intended meaning, anyway. But then, it doesn't seem like you really meant it seriously, so nevermind.

Bigblah Aug 19, 2008 11:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridan Krad (Post 638927)
Granted, the system isn't perfect, and this only helps with guessing the on-yomi (Chinese reading) of the kanji, but I have heard that after learning a certain number of kanji, it does become possible to guess at meanings and pronunciation.
Meaning, probably. Pronunciation, not recommended. Chinese students are actually reprimanded if they try that. There's so many exceptions, you can't ever do it reliably.

mortis Aug 19, 2008 11:33 PM
Geez, I hate to say it, but I still go with Pinyin. It really does feel like one is learning TWO langauges with Chinese, the Oral portion (complete with Pinyin to aid in Pronunciation) and the Characters.

Of course, there are even exceptions to both the characters and verbal communication that don't for both of them (i.e. certain slang or such is used only when writing).

I was told that Radicals would help you deduce the meaning. I...didn't have much luck with that. Then again, I was told that and was taught to look at the Radicals to get the meaning which can be pretty daunting for a first-time Chinese language learner. I found that instead learning commonly used words (i.e. bathroom, man, woman, food on a menu, etc) is more helpful with PERHAPS (never got this far) learning the Charactes and guessing meanings via radicals afterwards.

Scarletdeath Aug 19, 2008 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigblah (Post 638926)
"Weeaboo" doesn't really bother me (I'm Asian, I live in Asia, I can damn well enjoy Asian entertainment without having to feel guilty about it)
Same for my case here.

But of course, since this is an English forum, it's normal for Dhsu to assume we're all westerners. As for the weaboo thing, I just didn't appreciate the fact that Dhsu insults someone for studying hard to learn a language.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhsweeaboo (Post 638902)
And unfortunately, you and Scarletdeath's little discussion didn't do much in the way of disproving that impression, you have to admit.
And what. We didn't mention anything about animu or obsession on Japan, just a discussion on the language that we learnt mutually. You already admit on being a weaboo yourself, just don't drag us down to your level. :mad::mad::mad:

Kairi Li Aug 19, 2008 11:58 PM
While I think Dhsu's statement is a bit extreme, I do understand his sentiment. If someone ends up learning a language purly just for entertainment purposes only, especially if its "Japanese cartoons and video games", it kinda sounds silly and childish to some people. The world still percieves anime and video games as children toys. On the other hand, if someone becomes curious of Japanese culture and language through such mediums, and pursues learning the language and the real culture and history, then I think it's a good thing that it has broaden their horizons.

But back to the spelling topic. I think people should have a basic grasp of their own language. I think the trouble is most people don't, be it English or Chinese or whatever, despite the fact you have school, teachers, dictionaries, thesaurus and the web that can tell you how to spell words you don't know or teach you to fix your grammar. So we get people who blunder their way onto the web, not knowing how to post intelligently on any forums in any language. I think it comes down to laziness and probably bad parenting on the side.

My old British English tutor enjoyed teaching me most when I was a kid, because I actually sit down and converse with her, and of course doing the occasional written work. Her other students are rude and bratty, refuse to learn and rather play video games or something and ignore her. When she tells the parents, they don't do jackshit to discipline them. I bet right now they are going to some lame Hong Kong low level school because they now suck speaking and writing English.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigblah (Post 638926)
"Weeaboo" doesn't really bother me (I'm Asian, I live in Asia, I can damn well enjoy Asian entertainment without having to feel guilty about it), but still, considering that we can enjoy Disney movies, American cartoons and pop music without getting called names, you have to wonder why Westerners are derided for enjoying anime and J-pop/K-pop/whatever-pop.
Completely agree. While Western people go around thinking Miyazaki is the new hot stuff back when Spirited Away was showing in theaters, to us Asians he's been our version of Disney since I was born. But of course, people will just assume we're all being "weeaboo", whatever that stupid word is derived from...

Dhsu Aug 20, 2008 04:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigblah (Post 638926)
"Weeaboo" doesn't really bother me (I'm Asian, I live in Asia, I can damn well enjoy Asian entertainment without having to feel guilty about it), but still, considering that we can enjoy Disney movies, American cartoons and pop music without getting called names, you have to wonder why Westerners are derided for enjoying anime and J-pop/K-pop/whatever-pop.
If Japanese America-philes are even half as annoying as the majority of their Western counterparts, then maybe they should get called names.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridan Krad (Post 638927)
Try 4%.
Granted, the system isn't perfect, and this only helps with guessing the on-yomi (Chinese reading) of the kanji, but I have heard that after learning a certain number of kanji, it does become possible to guess at meanings and pronunciation.
Keyword being "guess." Your point would be much stronger if each radical had a standard pronunciation and 90% of pronunciations could be determined from the combination of radicals or vice versa, but even in the original Chinese this is simply not the case.

Quote:
As for English, it's easy for you to dismiss examples I give as "exceptions," but if spelling is so intuitive, why do we have spelling tests? Why does most people's spelling suck? Why was this article written?
Someone who only has studied the alphabet and learned about what vowels and consonants are isn't going to have good spelling. Even with a decent "speaking" vocabulary, in writing, it would not be unexpected to see a child misspell words, substituting in what they feel are more intuitive spellings. An educated adult will certainly do better, because they will have gotten lots of reading practice, and will be used to English conventions. For instance, if you ask a child to spell the word "phonetically," it probably won't go so well, because they aren't used to the Ph- F sound, and even if they are, may not recognize that this is a root word being used in this longer construction.
I'll be the first to say that English is a very hard language to learn because of all the exceptions. However, there are conventions, and if you learn them you will be able to spell the majority of words correctly without looking up a dictionary. The reason spelling tests and articles like this exist is that people don't bother learning these conventions.

Quote:
All I'm saying is being able to break down words into subcomponents is really useful for spelling correctly in English, and likewise being able to break down words and kanji in Japanese into subcomponents is also useful.
That may have been what you meant, but you ended up basically saying that spelling is a different form of the radical system, which it isn't, especially for languages that are more internally consistent than English.

Quote:
I was talking about being able to guess meaning/pronunciation when seeing a new word in print. You're talking about hearing a word and then putting it to print yourself.
I'm also saying that if you know English well enough, you don't *have* to guess as to pronunciation. I don't know how it is in Japanese, but if you're given a new Chinese character, no matter how well you know the language, that's the best you can do...guess. The radical for "wood" is pronounced mu. The word for "woods" (made of two "wood" radicals) is pronounced lin. While the meaning is intuitive, the pronunciation is completely unrelated.

Quote:
Incidentally, since you make Japanese sound so completely unintuitive, "thousands upon thousands of unique squiggle configurations," why is Japan's literacy rate so high? Human Development Report 2007/2008 - Adult literacy rate (% aged 15 and older)
I would attribute that more to culture and education. A spelling system that's actually phonetic also helps, I'd imagine.

Quote:
But then, it doesn't seem like you really meant it seriously, so nevermind.
:3:

Man I just gained like 10 backpedal levels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 638934)
And what. We didn't mention anything about animu or obsession on Japan, just a discussion on the language that we learnt mutually. You already admit on being a weaboo yourself, just don't drag us down to your level. :mad::mad::mad:
That's assuming you're not already there OSNAP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kairi Li (Post 638938)
whatever that stupid word is derived from...
http://img385.imageshack.us/img385/8...weeabooea1.gif


Wow long post is long.

Edit:
Haha I just noticed this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath
Dhsweeaboo
Too great for words. This just got freakin' REAL. :tpg:

Scarletdeath Aug 20, 2008 05:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhsu (Post 638974)
That's assuming you're not already there OSNAP.
What, because you saw my "ANIMU" journal entry? I don't even watch animu. Seeing how I'm doing a design and animation (nothing to do with J-anime for that matter) course, good art is VERY relevant to me. So again, don't drag others down to your level. :mad:x10

Quote:
Edit:
Haha I just noticed this.

That is too great for words. :tpg:
You know it's true :mad:

Dhsu Aug 20, 2008 05:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 638977)
What, because you saw my "ANIMU" journal entry? I don't even watch animu. Seeing how I'm doing a design and animation (nothing to do with J-anime for that matter) course, good art is VERY relevant to me. So again, don't drag others down to your level. :mad:x10


You know it's true :mad:
Hahaha, wow, seeing as you have clearly missed it to this point, I'll let you in on a little secret...

Your :mad: only makes my penis harder.

Fluffykitten McGrundlepuss Aug 20, 2008 06:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigblah (Post 638926)
you have to wonder why Westerners are derided for enjoying anime and J-pop/K-pop/whatever-pop.
Because it's shit?

Bigblah Aug 20, 2008 06:27 AM
o i c


No seriously, cut that shit out. It's bad enough when people get into an internet fight about weeabooism, we don't need more of that sort of faggotry. And you've been trolling Animespot since forever.

OmagnusPrime Aug 20, 2008 06:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shin (Post 638991)
Because it's shit?
Gross generalisation ahoy.

Getting back to the topic at hand, I have to say I completely disagree with the points raised by the lecturer named in the top post. If people are managing to get to this level of education without a proper understanding of their language, or without the common sense to utilise the plethora of tools available to check spelling, then there's clearly an issue in the earlier education system. I can understand that he feels he shouldn't bear the burden for this failing earlier in the system, but his solution is a terrible one.

I'm a big advocate for correct spelling and whilst I would never claim to be a perfect example (I'm more than aware that I'm prone to spelling cock ups on occasion), I always try to ensure I'm as correct as possible and it bothers me when I do get things wrong. All in all I've got to agree with Crash's sentiment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash Landon (Post 638504)
There's a reason spelling counts: standardization.

...

Standardization holds each of us accountable to the same rules. Without them, we could be as cavalier as we wished and chalk all misinterpretations up to reader error, not authorial stupidity. It also allows us to observe relative levels of intelligence; an employer does not wish to hire morons. It is not the employer's duty to lower the hiring requirements; it's the applicant's responsibility to achieve competency!

Shanks Aug 20, 2008 10:12 AM
This thread reminds of me a (stupid) joke I read:

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5 year phase-in plan that would become known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of "k". This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have
one less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like fotograf 20% shorter.

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters
which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and it should go away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v". During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a
reil sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru. Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze forst plas.

Shorty Aug 20, 2008 02:38 PM
EDIT

I had a perfectly reasonable response to Sass but after reading all the dumb shit about weeaboo-ism on a thread discussing "is spelling important in the English language," I had to stop.

The answer to the opening question is yes. Spelling is important. It can evolve to accommodate how language is used (i.e., behavior as opposed to behaviour), but not to accommodate lazy students and their equally lazy professors.

And to those arguing Japanese usage of language and kanji forms in retrospect to English spelling and grammar, you are posting and presenting your arguments on a wrong thread. Please kindly go back to Animespot and continue your blabbering there.

Bigblah Aug 20, 2008 03:43 PM
What the fuck? The people who are doing that are the ones posting according to conversation flow. Or did you just glance over the lover's spat between Scarlet and Dhsu and assume that everyone is talking about lol animu?

The unmovable stubborn Aug 20, 2008 03:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shanks (Post 639027)
a (stupid) joke I read
This joke is essentially stolen from Twain

And is therefore not stupid

ramoth Aug 20, 2008 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 638658)
Says the guy that listens to animu music. How does knowing the language make someone a weaboo. Don't be jealous now. :mad:
Dyin' at the cognitive dissonance between this and your Disgea 2 avatar and signature.

Too much.

Scarletdeath Aug 20, 2008 03:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramoth (Post 639144)
Dyin' at the cognitive dissonance between this and your Disgea 2 avatar and signature.

Too much.
Dude, this is a game. If it had Mario style drawing and I liked the game, I'd still put on the theme. You don't seem to understand the usage of weeaboo.

ramoth Aug 20, 2008 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 639147)
Dude, this is a game. If it had Mario style drawing and I liked the game, I'd still put on the theme. You don't seem to understand the usage of weeaboo.
You're getting all hot and bothered over a term used by Japanophiles to insult other Japanophiles...

...while you have in your avatar and signature Disgea 2, published by a studio whose name translates as "Japan #1" and is wildly popular amongst those same Japanophiles.

It's like a guy in a Batman costume making fun of a guy in a Superman costume for wearing his underwear on the outside.

Scarletdeath Aug 20, 2008 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramoth (Post 639149)
...while you have in your avatar and signature Disgea 2, published by a studio whose name translates as "Japan #1" and is wildly popular amongst those same Japanophiles.
Again, it's a bloody game. I don't like/dislike a game because of whatever the game publisher is called. I already mention that certain art styles are relevant to me due to the course I'm doing.

Quote:
You're getting all hot and bothered over a term used by Japanophiles to insult other Japanophiles...
Did you not see what I said; I don't like the fact that Dhsu insulted someone for working hard to learn a language.

[edit]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramoth (Post 639152)
Anyway, I am with Bigblah on this. This thread is so incredibly far derailed at this point that I'm just going to stop posting in it.
You were the one who started this (again) outta nowhere :mad:

ramoth Aug 20, 2008 04:02 PM
Anyway, I am with Bigblah on this. This thread is so incredibly far derailed at this point that I'm just going to stop posting in it.

Additional Spam:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarletdeath (Post 639150)
You were the one who started this (again) outta nowhere :mad:
You're just as bad as Elixir. "CAN'T LET THAT INSULT GO UNRESPONDED TO.........."

Shorty Sep 1, 2008 03:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigblah (Post 639141)
What the fuck? The people who are doing that are the ones posting according to conversation flow. Or did you just glance over the lover's spat between Scarlet and Dhsu and assume that everyone is talking about lol animu?
I apologize, first for the delayed response, and second of all if I had misinterpreted them and offended them in anyway. I did read the long extensive arguments, just didn't think it was that applicable to the question on hand.

Comparing Japanese to English is like comparing oranges with apples. It's nice to be able to point out similarities in the importance of being able to use and apply the language properly, but the thread doesn't necessarily call for extremely detailed examples of Japanese grammar implications or correct Kanji configurations to illustrate how important it is to know the ENGLISH language and be able to write it properly.

I appreciate that they both went far and beyond to exemplify that example but it was getting further and further away from the main topic, "ENGLISH: is spelling important?"

I work with both of these languages in order to feed myself and all I really have to say to the matter is, "YES, any language needs to be used correctly;" I don't feel the necessity of explaining in great detail why certain words needs to be configured in the right kanji otherwise someone can read it differently. The knowledge of knowing how to use the kanji correctly has nothing to do with spelling English words correctly other than that they both need to be applied and used properly.

At least it's easier to correct your work in English; spell check or a kanji usage checker doesn't really exist in Japanese application for Microsoft Word or Outlook, last time I checked. (I usually have my managers that transferred here from the Tokyo office check and read my emails to the Japanese clients make sure my grammar/kanji/tone usage is correct)

Bigblah Sep 1, 2008 03:40 AM
The thread title does not specifically mention English, and while this is a predominantly English speaking board, it does not necessarily preclude other languages from being discussed as long as the discussion itself is in English. As for whether it's disrupting the "main topic", that's for moderators to decide.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.