The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The fight for English > Comments

The fight for English : Comments

By Malcolm King, published 7/3/2008

The rules for the use of apostrophes and capitalisation, have been sucked from the classroom like a road map out of the window of a speeding car.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Vanilla, those who set themselves up as arbiters of taste and virtue in the English language should at least avoid infelicities and clangers.

Take your sentence: "It appalls me how little people read." Are you saying that only tall people should read? Or that people who are short of stature read badly?

Or what are we to make of your sentence: "It appalls me that teachers put so much emphasis on what the author correctly calls 'relativist twaddle' - as if their analysis of Dickens is as good as David Lodge's"? Are you claiming that David Lodge's analysis of Dickens is as good as, or better than, teachers' analysis of Dickens?

I agree with you when you say, "Structuring one's sentences and spelling correctly is important..." and on OLO I have been shocked by the poor standard of English prose in some postings. Rushing to judgement, however, may lead you to miss some important content.

As you say, "But no one is perfect and mistakes happen". It's not so very long ago that teachers were teaching their students that you never start a sentence with 'but'. But I'm happy that we've relaxed that rule, aren't you?
Posted by FrankGol, Friday, 7 March 2008 10:56:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've been a critic of King's Toryism for a while but this article hits the nail on the head. Gee, I'm so worried about mixing metaphors here but I'll push on regardless like a bull at a train.

If my reading of this article is correct, the author is looking for a 'middle path'. He clearly ain't a follower of post modernist thinking but also reckons it shouldn't be completely disgarded from a currucula (or is it curriculums?) Damn the Latins!

It's a case for a return to Donnelly's values and I would suggest the 'close reading' techniques of Leavis but also let the students decide if Derrida, et al are still valid and useful critiques.

I wonder if King isn't being a bit disingenious in so far as much post modernist thinking has imploded and is hardly taught at all in Europe, so the result will be a forgone conclusion. I also think King is a vocationalist so that twists his argument.

I am STRONGLY in favour of a national school curriculum and now is the time to bring it on. The AEU arguments on seperatist state based curriculia are absurd. Bring it on!
Posted by Cheryl, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:08:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I dunno Frankgol. I've always used the word 'however' instead of 'but' which was enough of a loophole.

Given the nature of this article, I'm all too aware that I'll probably make a few grammatical errors in this post, which will open the door to pedantic criticism.

In fact, many of the comments thus far can be summarised as 'nitpicking'.

The essence of Mr King's article appears to be that we're placing less priority on proper English.
I'd argue there is still some degree of interpretation, as evidenced by the differing comments thus far on accurate grammar.

That being said, it can't be denied that there is an awful lot of poor spelling and grammar out there, often from places where I think we're justified in expecting better.
An alarming number of my peers in university had very poor spelling and grammar skills.
Mine probably aren't perfect. I suspect few people's skills in this area really are. At least I've got a pretty good handle on my spelling and apostrophes.

I concur with Vanilla on this one - we could use with more devotion to both grammar and literature in our education system.
Okay, so there won't be one single accurate standard - but if we raise the bar, then when we inevitable slip a little from the ideal, our average is still better.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:09:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Damn. That should have been 'inevitably.'

Well, that was bound to happen.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:10:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here here.

...waitaminute...

I feel like I've lost something everytime I read a comment on news sites that not only mispells that, but also misunderstands what it means and what they're actually trying to say.

Oh, and having a go at people's grammar on this site is a quick way to make yourself look like a complete elitist idiot. Mistakes like these aren't the issue that the author of the article is trying to raise; the simple ones are. Typing errors aren't the same, either!
Their. They're. Plurals with a flaming apostrophe! *sighs*
Posted by Chade, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:13:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Frank: "those who set themselves up as arbiters of taste and virtue in the English language"
Are you suggesting I'm one of those? I'm not. I believe there *are* markers of taste and virtue in literature, but an arbiter of them I am not. My reaction to this piece was purely emotional, not bossy. Reading has probably been the single greatest love of my life, and it saddens me that (as I believe) the education system no longer explicitly instructs students on the beautiful, meaningful game of Tetris that is English grammar.

"Take your sentence: "It appalls me how little people read." Are you saying that only tall people should read? Or that people who are short of stature read badly?"
What do you think? I'm assuming that, if there's ambiguity in this sentence, people will be able to use context and cleverness to resolve it. And understand that I meant it upsets me that people don't read many books. I appeal to your common sense. All you've pointed out here and with your other example is that I'm not a great writer. Believe it or not, I knew that. But even given my clear failings, I dislike the type of competitive pedantry that would have us remove all ambiguity form language.

"But I'm happy that we've relaxed that rule, aren't you?" Absolutely. As I said, I've no time for pedantry, and that extends to mid-20th-century fads for not starting sentences with conjunctions or never splitting infinitives. There were some clear liberations won in the language wars of the 60s - in some ways, throwing out grammar did allow children to express themselves creatively without feeling bound by form.

Clearly, I came across to you as very judgmental about language, so apologies to you and anyone else who thought that. The article struck a cord for me and my response was probably overly-emotional. But, as someone who learnt to parse sentences myself as an adult, I'd like for kids today to learn both creativity *and* form.
Posted by Vanilla, Friday, 7 March 2008 11:19:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy