Spelling, punctuation and handwriting

[coachmann]

We haven't touched on Ow'do, sithee, were's 'bin, hey-up, shew and now't.

A reet minefield an' no mistake... .

[Guest dilbert]

A recognized phenomenon known as Muphry's Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry's_law

 

And not Murfie's lore ...dilbert

[Pacific231G]

I was in the foyer of a Voyager , waiting to detrain ( ? - modern word) standing behind two students chatting.

 

I've got an OED from the 1950s and the verb detrain is defined as "Discharge (troops etc) alight from railway train."

It also includes shew as a variant of show though I've never seen that used by anyone apart from the GWR.

 

I also had to deal with internal communications from younger colleagues written in text speak, which was incomprehensible to me, as the next test message I sent will be the first.

 

Did you mean "the next text message I send will be my first"?

 

I believe the Victorians used to worry just as much about "telegraphese"

 

American English spelling is interesting as it's not just sloppiness. Spellings such as honor and honour, centre and center, used to be fairly interchangeable before the grammarians tried to nail the language down. When the British lexicographers opted for particular spellings, their American counterparts especially Webster deliberately chose the other spelling as they wanted to assert the republic's independence by having an "American" language that would eventually diverge completely from English. They failed of course and, ever since it was born in a head-on collision between Anglo Saxon and Norman French, English has always been a language made up of dialects with no one of them being "correct".

[SRman]

 

I am all for correctness in grammar, punctuation and spelling but British/American dissent over spelling is a hobby horse compared with the core issue. These differences don't effect the ability to communicate clearly - which is what common spelling is all about anyway.

 

Ummm ... that should be "affect", not "effect"! That's another pair of words people often mix up.

 

I'm not blameless here; anyone who refers back to my original post on page 1 will realise that I had to correct my own grammar after re-reading the post! That was the result of changing my mind after starting the sentence.

[Adrian]

It's also go shew as variant of show though I've never seen that used by anyone apart from the GWR.

Which is presumably why it's often used by Raymond Walley, http://www.raymondwalley.com/reviews/loco/32xx.html, as an ardent GWR enthusiast.

 

 

 

[Ohmisterporter]

A recognized phenomenon known as Muphry's Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry's_law

 

Having the wrong spelling of Murphy is sod's law I suppose.

 

The only person I know who spells shew that way is Raymond Walley. 0 guage giuld member's mite know him.

 

Geoff.

[John_Hughes]

No, because I was referring to "the greengrocer" as a class of person. Thank you for giving some thought to this matter!.

 

Chris

 

But would you write Beginner's books for sale on the grounds that 'beginners' are a class of person? I suspect not!

 

FWIW, Jane Austen (or possibly her editor) happily wrote their's and her's, which are both certainly incorrect by modern rules.

 

What fun English orthography is!

[Welchester]

It's also go shew as variant of show though I've never seen that used by anyone apart from the GWR.

 

That's the spelling used throughout the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible. I don't know whether its use by the GWR was a conscious archaism.

[coachmann]

Do you paint your GWR wagons gray or grey?

 

I suspect most of us know what is and isn't correct, but it seems sloppiness is a virtue these days. As for 'Americanisms' such as color, trunk, elevator and yer darn tootin', no one is forced into using them and there is now't wrong with someone adopting them in light-hearted conversation. The cowboy movies I watch much of the time must have some influences, but probably the bigger problem is my Cheshire-Lancashire-Yorkshire speak tinged with a Welsh accent.....

[Guest Max Stafford]

And I thought my use of Cumbrian words in my native Glasgow tongue was a weird fusion...

Right, ah'm away furra ratch aboot, marra!

 

Dave.

[Steve K]

Ummm ... that should be "affect", not "effect"! That's another pair of words people often mix up.

... and so many people, even the BBC, use "infer" when they mean "imply". The words are pretty much opposites, yet most don't seem to know the difference!

 

Anyhow, I want to keep this lighthearted, and I'm really not too fussed about the odd spelling or typing mistake (there's a big difference of course, and the laater often occur when we're trying to bash out a quixk reply on the keyboard...), as long as the sense is clear.

 

A li'l ole Americanization here and there is not enough to distract me from my reading, btu it relly greats when somone hassnt takan the trubble to chek there offring before hitting add rep[ly.

[PhilJ W]

As has been said many times on this thread languages evolve. If you look back at the literature of 400/500 years ago (Shakespeare and the King James bible for example) you will probably find some 'American' spelling and terms. So who is to say which is correct? Also America has had a lot of immigration from Europe and has absorbed many words from languages other than English. Cookie meaning biscuit is one example (from the Dutch 'kooken'). At the same time the British empire was expanding and words from the empire were being absorbed into the language such as 'Bungalow'. The point is that the English language has evolved separately in two different places 3000 miles apart and only come together again in the last 100 years. Language is evolving as we speak (or should I say type), the classic is the word 'gay' this has changed its meaning entirely in my lifetime and I have seen youngsters snigger at film titles such as 'The Gay Divorcee'.

[Ohmisterporter]

If the written word is not bad enough, we have not even started on pronunciation. I was once in an audience at a school debating society when a woman with what I shall call a BBC accent stated that all children should be compulsorily taught to speak with the same accent. At this point the headmaster said in a broad Lancashire accent that he didn't always use, "Aye lass, but dust tha really want to talk like me?".

 

Geoff.

[Fenman]

Language is evolving as we speak (or should I say type), the classic is the word 'gay' this has changed its meaning entirely in my lifetime and I have seen youngsters snigger at film titles such as 'The Gay Divorcee'.

 

I think the meaning of the word gay had gone round in a circle.

 

Doesn't the OED list 19th century meanings which are heavily associated with double entendre and bawdiness (prostitutes were often described by using the word "gay" as a euphemism), so the de-sexualised meaning of the word that was dominant in the early/mid-20th century was less common than the sex-related usages associated with the word over its whole life.

 

It seems to be mutating meaning again, with juveniles (of all ages) now using it to mean "rubbish" ("Heljan's first batch of Claytons was so gay...").

 

Paul

[coachmann]

Not sure when so-called Americanisms started to flow back into the UK. I don't think the Red indians had any influence except perhaps to give the English Government 'speaking with forked tongue' ! It would take a very long time for the German, French, Spanish, Polish, Russian, English, Welsh, Irish and a whole host of other languages to melt down into a common wordage.

[NGT6 1315]

Anyhow, I want to keep this lighthearted, and I'm really not too fussed about the odd spelling or typing mistake (there's a big difference of course, and the laater often occur when we're trying to bash out a quixk reply on the keyboard...), as long as the sense is clear.

 

A li'l ole Americanization here and there is not enough to distract me from my reading, btu it relly greats when somone hassnt takan the trubble to chek there offring before hitting add rep[ly.

 

I'm with you on both counts, and indeed with your previous statement that you tend to correct typos of your own which occurred months ago - I've been doing much the same thing on various occasions . That is to say - though I can be very unforgiving to myself and probably am a stickler for perfection I personally am absolutely willing to allow for genuine glitches and indeed for persons who may have serious disadvantages like dyslexia, but am quickly annoyed by people who just can't be bothered to be so polite as to at least make a serious effort at reducing errors as far as possible. This always leaves me with a snotty impression which I guess might be circumscribed as "what I'm writing here is SO incredibly important that those who are really meant to understand it will do so regardless of how I type - and screw the remaining imbeciles."

[Poggy1165]

In my last role as an employee I had subordinates earning in excess of 30K who could not construct a simple letter. At first I amended and improved their work, and was regarded as a bit of a nazi for daring to do so. After a while, I gave up, as my own job was more than adequate to keep my brain ticking over without running after senior staff.

 

Sadly I think the spelling/punctuation/handwriting/grammar cause is lost.

[cb900f]

Posted as a relief and is not intended to offend anyone. Maybe spelling isn't that important after all.

 

If you can raed this, you have a sgtrane mnid too

 

Can you raed this? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

 

I cdnuolt blveiee that I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd what I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in what oerdr the ltteres in a word are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is that the frsit and last ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can still raed it whotuit a pboerlm. This is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the word as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! If you can raed this forwrad it

[edcayton]

Agi lagike thagat aga lagot. Whago agelse cagan agunderstagand Pago?

 

Aged

[28XX]

Poor spelling and grammar tells me several things about the writer. Viz:

 

I have written this just to get it off my chest. I don't care if you understand it or not, it is your job to untangle it, not mine to communicate accurately, I am not interested in your reply.

 

So I don't.

[jonny777]

... and so many people, even the BBC, use "infer" when they mean "imply". The words are pretty much opposites, yet most don't seem to know the difference!

 

Anyhow, I want to keep this lighthearted, and I'm really not too fussed about the odd spelling or typing mistake (there's a big difference of course, and the laater often occur when we're trying to bash out a quixk reply on the keyboard...), as long as the sense is clear.

 

A li'l ole Americanization here and there is not enough to distract me from my reading, btu it relly greats when somone hassnt takan the trubble to chek there offring before hitting add rep[ly.

 

 

Many people now misuse the word ironic, when they mean coincidental. Yes there can be ironic coincidences, but not exclusively so.

 

I can just about cope with a profusion of "like", "sort of" and "you know" in conversation, but the next person to add the word "simples" at the end of a comment will have my size 12s where it hurts.

[bluebottle]

Posted as a relief and is not intended to offend anyone. Maybe spelling isn't that important after all.

 

If you can raed this, you have a sgtrane mnid too

 

Can you raed this? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

 

I cdnuolt blveiee that I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd what I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in what oerdr the ltteres in a word are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is that the frsit and last ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can still raed it whotuit a pboerlm. This is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the word as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! If you can raed this forwrad it

 

 

To adapt one of Eric Morecambe's best lines: You're typing all the right letters, but not necessarily in the right order!

[45156]

Did you mean "the next text message I send will be my first"?

Oops - not the best place to make a spelling mistake in a debate about spelling

 

Now then, there's also the question of the use of the word "gay" and its current context. I was told that the current usage of "gay" came about as an acronym of Good As You.

 

And finally (I sound like the newsreader) handwriting. Mine is totally dreadful, to the extent that I gave up with script many years ago, and started writing in block letters. For note taking, I developed a form of shorthand which was vry smlr t txspk. However, my point is that when I was at primary school about couple of lifetimes ago, handwriting was scored as part of your overall performance, and the best mark I ever achieved was about 3/10, while the "best" writers were scoring about 9/10. On paper, these individuals were "performing" better than I was based on an average across all the subjects. When we reached Secondary level, writing was no longer one of the measurable subjects and all of the marking went to cover the academic subjects, and at that stage, I was normally in the top performers. My writing is still dreadful, but who cares? And which is better, grammatically and linguistically correct bad handwriting, or good handwriting which is fraught with errors - to hear my primary school teacher, it would have been the former, but to the secondary teacher it would have been the latter.

 

This post has been spell checked twice LOL

[10800]

If you can raed this, you have a sgtrane mnid too

 

Can you raed this? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

 

I cdnuolt blveiee that I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd what I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in what oerdr the ltteres in a word are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is that the frsit and last ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can still raed it whotuit a pboerlm. This is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the word as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! If you can raed this forwrad it

Yes I could. Certainly interesting from the point of view of how the brain works, and something that probably most of us take for granted once we move from letter recognition to actual reading.

 

It came home to me when working in the Balkans and learning to read (phonetically at least) Cyrillic - for the most part I was reading letter by letter because it was unfamiliar (and in the case of place names on road signs, we had passed it before I finished). Only after a while did I learn to recognise the shapes of whole words or syllables, such as 'Sofia' or '-grad'.

 

As for handwriting, mine has definitely suffered since emails and the internet came along.

 

As for spelling and punctuation, I'm fortunate in never having had a problem with either, but it's no good just knowing the basic rules - you learn and improve from constant usage, either by writing but just as importantly from reading. If all you ever read is text messages and captions to photos in gossip mags (sweeping generalisation but you know what I mean) you will never absorb it properly.

[bluebottle]

And finally (I sound like the newsreader) handwriting. Mine is totally dreadful, to the extent that I gave up with script many years ago, and started writing in block letters. For note taking, I developed a form of shorthand which was vry smlr t txspk. However, my point is that when I was at primary school about couple of lifetimes ago, handwriting was scored as part of your overall performance, and the best mark I ever achieved was about 3/10, while the "best" writers were scoring about 9/10. On paper, these individuals were performing better than I was. When we reached Secondary level, writing was no longer one of the measurable subjects and all of the marking went to cover the academic subjects, and at that stage, I was normally in the top performers. My writing is still dreadful, but who cares? And which is better, grammatically and linguistically correct bad handwriting, or good handwriting which is fraught with errors - to hear my primary school teacher, it would have been the former, but to the secondary teacher it would have been the latter.

 

This post has been spell checked twice LOL

 

Excellent spelling and grammar, 45156, but is there not an error of meaning in the sentence beginning: "And which is better..." ?