Spelling out the window?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cue

Cue

ALAM STOP BREAKING THE S
we dnt ned to spel n e moar!

The Times said so.

“Text messaging, e-mail and internet chat rooms are showing us the way forward for English.”
Click to expand...

I just facepalmed, seriously.

“Change has to be [from the] bottom up. It is already happening on the internet – people are simplifying spelling all the time.

“Type the world rhubarb into Google without the ‘h’ and you will find thousands of references to it,” he said.
Click to expand...

Heh, that's more along the lines of people not knowing how to spell the word, actually.
 
Ironically, all we have to do now is make people use firefox instead of IE so they have red lines in their face all the time.

Although seriously, some people are idiots. Mainly the guy who wrote that article. Language is built from a set of rules and works it's way up. When you start simplifying your spelling, you can't tell what why the word is pronounced like it is.
 
I hope everyone sees how stupid and idiotic the times are being.

Next thing, they'll say l337 is the next step.
 
Jellybones69 said:
I hope everyone sees how stupid and idiotic the times are being.
Click to expand...
Hate to burst your bubble, but that's never going to happen. I learned that the hard way in my freshman year...
 
That's no big deal and does not classify the times as a bad magazine.


First, the article only quotes people who think that way. Hell, nearly everything is written in quotation marks plus even the title reads: "...says academic".

Second, they presented the other side of the medal, too:
“Would we continue spelling the word think with a ‘th’ because that is how some of us pronounce it, or would it be spelled ‘fink’ as it is in the East End of London or ‘tink’ as in Ireland?” she said.
Click to expand...
And third, magazines are often writing about controversial material. The reason they do it is because they know how people react and if they make you discussing about their articles they'll soon have more people reading their articles.
 
Nothing flares up people's interest more than controversy. They just love it. My evidence that people see all controversy as good? Obama. (Don't get me started on him. Seriously. You'll regret it.)
 
Here are the people I follow:
Danny said:
This is a joke right?

Way to turn our children into illiterate morons.

Give John Wells some form of "stupid badge" for this move.
Click to expand...
Henrik Rump said:
Just seems like an overall bad idea to me. Revamping an entire language, especially one that's being used as the international "standard" language would have terrible consequences on.. well, everybody! I learned English as my second language, and I'm doing just fine. And apostrophes are important!
Click to expand...
Bronze said:
Yes, our future generations won't be able to spell properly.
That's REAL nice. =\
Click to expand...
 
Sky Ninja said:
and I'm doing just fine. And apostrophes are important!
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Apostrophes are important. Schwas (silent "e") are important. Double consonants are important. Voiceless consonants are important.... too.

Try to read:

"hide" and "hid"

"site" and "sit" ("sit" exists, and it's a verb)

"spell" and "spel"

"light" and "lit" ("lit" is p.p of verb "light")

...seems silly, but there's who wants to get rid of them.
 
And it isn't even April Fools Day. I, at least, am proud of my good spelling.

That article made me laugh out loud.
 
Ezer.Arch said:
..."sit" ("sit" exists, and it's a verb)...
..."lit" ("lit" is p.p of verb "light")...
Click to expand...

Well duh, it's not like hardly anyone knows anything about these words. That's just what I think.

Oh, and hid is a word too...

But I agree with the point you are making.

If there were no apostraphes, words like "we're" would end up becoming "were", which is obviously a different word. It would cause major confusion between most plurals and belongings.
 
I believe that the opposite must happen. We should enforce correct spelling and grammar more strictly in order for people to actually get more literate and generally more intelligent. I have noticed that posts around here that have horrible grammar generally have the ideas presented horribly and usually consist of recolors and gigantic enemy boxes.
 
"txt spek" has no place outside of texts - when you run out of space to be literate, that is. 1337 speak would be kinda funny for a few days though. Forward slash back slash forward slash... *shot* We need to make sure people who learn English as a second language actually bother to learn it, not just go "lyke omg y r u cusing me ur rong im rite lololololololo"
 
Kopper said:
"lyke omg y r u cusing me ur rong im rite lololololololo"
Click to expand...

Let me try:

"Like: Oh my God! Why are you cursing me?! You are wrong, and I'm right. (laughing)"

Does it look more erudite?

Now it's lacking a "fix'd" from me. (Duh!)

http://ssntails.sepwich.com/mb/viewtopic.php?p=163418#163418

Ice said:
I have noticed that posts around here that have horrible grammar generally have the ideas presented horribly and usually consist of recolors and gigantic enemy boxes.
Click to expand...

That's because of laziness. If you want to do a serious and solid work, you'll try to do your best. You'll try to do right at the first time (I meant, use a bit of brain sometimes). Period.

When I wanted to learn SRB2DB, I didn't ask every time "wut i hav 2 do 2 make a thok barrier" and like... I only look for help when I did everything by myself and nothing worked.

I released my first level two months ago... it wasn't as bad as I thought.
 
oh soz thats wut lazyness meanz!

I have found that what I have written isn't exactly true, only one side of the If-Then statement works:
If the user has low intelligence, then the post will have bad grammar. <--That one is almost always true.
Here's the one that doesn't exactly work:
If the post has bad grammar, then the user has low intelligence.

I can't exactly blame horribly presented ideas all on laziness...
 
You know, hath we all forgotten thou olde tongue of Shakespeare? English has changed since then - so who's to say it'll not happen twice?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Who is viewing this thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Back
Top