# Correct Grammar, Punctuation... vs Text (Tweets, Emoji…)



## Roy Harding

It has been (correctly) noted in other forums that I am somewhat of a stickler for correct usage of the Queen's English.  Those observations are accurate - I am.  The reason I am is that I have a sincere desire to understand what folks are driving at - the English language has a set of rules which we have all agreed upon - even if we DON'T agree with them, we can look them up and figure out what someone is trying to say.

One of the most eloquent explanations I've ever seen was written by a participant on another board - the SOCNET board.  The author is addressing a young fellow who has been making various inquiries - some of the content will seem strange out of context, but the main gist of his statement is germane:

QUOTE

The devil is in the details... attention to details is what separates the ordinary guys from the extraordinary guys. All the men who have served with SOF units are extraordinary guys who pay attention to the details... including little details like using conventional spelling in written correspondence. When you use abbreviations like "u" instead of "you", and you ask for "sum information" instead of "some information", then you show a disregard for details, and a complete disrespect for your own language.

We don't talk in computer slang here... we use complete sentences, correct punctuation, and we make an effort to correctly spell all the words we use. When we want to say "I am", we form a proper conjunction and use the word "I'm". It has an apostrophe in it. The word "im" is NOT a proper English word or contraction. This isn't an online chat room for kids who want to be "kewl". This is a forum that permits interaction between veterans who have served the nation; some of them as members of SOF units. The particular focus of THIS section of the SOCNET forum is Navy SEALs. The focus is NOT to provide young children with pen pals.

The questions you have asked are clearly addressed in numerous books and on numerous web sites dealing with military service. Your initial questions were answered by directing your attention to a book and a web site. Although you mentioned that you'd visited the web site, I seriously doubt you have read the book mentioned, or you wouldn't have asked the question.

We expect you to do your research before coming here and demanding answers to questions. We expect that you will present those questions in clear, concise, and understandable ENGLISH... not computer 'leet speak' and lazy abbreviations. We expect questions... but we expect that they will be offered with respect, and that once an answer is provided you'll take the time to do a bit more research before coming back with another question, and another, and another... and insisting that you receive answers.

I'm going to recommend that the first thing you do when you get to High School is spend some time with your English teacher, studying the English language. We respect people who can express themselves clearly... and properly. Learn to do that, and you'll get a lot more usable responses out of the men who post in this forum.

UNQUOTE

To add my own two cents to this - I've always equated language to a "code" - the rules of which we've all agreed, and which enables us to express our thoughts to each other.  When you make up your own "rules", very few people "get" what you actually mean.  Try making up your own "rules" and sending it via CANFORNACODE or CANOPSCODE - nobody will know what you're saying.

Of course, all of us are going to make typos, or unintentional spelling errors - it is the INTENTIONAL spelling/grammatical errors that drive me crazy.

Just a pet peeve of mine.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie

I can appreciate your statement and use of a well written summary.  That said I think you may be dismayed at the current level of education taught in our schools and you will probably find that most of these people using the abbreviated writing style of are the younger very computer savvy people.  Not an excuse just an observation.


----------



## Britney Spears

> you will probably find that most of these people using the abbreviated writing style of are the younger very computer savvy people.



If by younger, you mean from the ages of 5 to 8, then you might be right. Can't really say how "computer savvy" they might be, though. 

Come now, have any of you ever corresponded with an intelligent adult worth talking to, who resorts these methods? I haven't, and I've been surfin' for a while now. Children who communicate in such a manner should be banned as a simple practical measure. Like children, nothing useful to the community can possibly be extracted from them until they reach the age of majority.


----------



## Roy Harding

CFL said:
			
		

> I can appreciate your statement and use of a well written summary.  That said I think you may be dismayed at the current level of education taught in our schools and you will probably find that most of these people using the abbreviated writing style of are the younger very computer savvy people.  Not an excuse just an observation.



You may be correct.  

However (ahem), I am ALSO "computer savvy" - built my first one in 1978 (Heathkit - anybody remember those?), and have been on the front edge of the technology since.  My last "_technological edge_" project was writing the software for the robot hand my (then) engineering student son built during his university days.  He's gone on to other things, I'm left with a "hand" that can pick up an ice cube from a bowl (precisely placed) and put it into your drink (again, strategeically placed) - neat party trick, but not worth much on the open market!!  I could copy the code that makes it work (FORTRAN for those who care) here, but it wouldn't make much sense to you unless you understood the "code".

The fact remains that, no matter your specialty, you MUST remain able to communicate with your fellow human beings - if you can't, you are, indeed, an "island".

Another way of putting it - when you are addressing a forum of civilians, do you not find yourself explaining the "military acronymns" you use?  Of course you do, you need to put them into plain English in order to be understood.

Of course, if it is your desire to NOT be understood, then perhaps making up your own rules is the way to go!


----------



## Vigilant

Many people of all ages seem to prefer shortcuts. It is indicative of their own lives when they can't even put out a little more effort to type properly. Yes, it takes take a little bit longer to formulate a proper sentence rather than spew out a continuous line of incomprehensible garbage. However, quality is more important than quality.

Our HR department discards all resumes with poor grammar and spelling. In this day and age of spell-checkers and grammar aids, it is astounding how many still fail to use these tools.


----------



## Roy Harding

Vigilant said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Our HR department discards all resumes with poor grammar and spelling. In this day and age of spell-checkers and grammar aids, it is astounding how many still fail to use these tools.



Excellent point.  

At my current place of employment we just went through the hiring process (to replace ME, actually - I'm off to a technical college in the fall).  I was involved in the process from creating the "short list" based on resumes, to assisting the proprietor in conducting the interviews, to recommending who will replace me.  MANY resumes didn't make it past the garbage can located next to the fax machine for precisely that fault.  Even some that I kept had I typo or two - it made me wonder how much thought and care went into these documents, which were not mere postings on an Internet forum.

Retired CC


----------



## paracowboy

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Children who communicate in such a manner should be banned as a simple practical measure.


further, I submit that *adults* who communicate in such a manner should be subjected to retroactive abortions.


----------



## 48Highlander

In their defence....

the ICQ/MSN shortcuts came into wide usage not because of a lack of education, or no desire to "pay attention to details" but because of the inherently slow speed of written communication.  When you are attempting to hold several real-time conversations at once, it becomes almost neccesary to use abbriviations; otherwise you lose the attention of the other party.  So I don't see the shortening of certain words as a problem in and of itself - the problem is that these children don't comprehend the difference between a real-time chat between friends, and an organized, somewhat formal  and proffesional debate on a forum such as this one.


----------



## Roy Harding

48Highlander said:
			
		

> In their defence....
> 
> the ICQ/MSN shortcuts came into wide usage not because of a lack of education, or no desire to "pay attention to details" but because of the inherently slow speed of written communication.  When you are attempting to hold several real-time conversations at once, it becomes almost neccesary to use abbriviations; otherwise you lose the attention of the other party.  So I don't see the shortening of certain words as a problem in and of itself - the problem is that these children don't comprehend the difference between a real-time chat between friends, and an organized, somewhat formal  and proffesional debate on a forum such as this one.



You're absolutely correct - both as to the origins of and the appropriate place(s) for the practice, and as to the lack of comprehension (or what I would call ignorance - in it's ORIGINAL, non-pejorative sense) on the part of some posters on these forums.

What's the cure for ignorance?  Knowledge.  How does one gain knowledge?  One way is by exposing one's ignorance and BEING CORRECTED by others.

Ignorance is a normal and correctable state - and is nothing to be ashamed of.

Continued and repeated practice of an unacceptable (to the members of an online community such as this) form of communication however, is not ignorance - it's arrogance.  It's insisting that the rest of the world change to suit MY needs and/or desires.

Ignorance doesn't bother me - in fact it encourages me that folk from such diverse backgrounds are reading these forums.  Arrogance, on the other hand, as displayed by some (an admittedly small number) who have been repeatedly corrected, and yet continue this practice, bothers me no end.

In the great scheme of things, the use of this short hand is hardly a major issue - but for all the reasons previously posted, it does not contribute to anyone's understanding of other's thoughts and opinion.

As you may have noticed by now, this happens to be one of my "hot button" issues.  I was one of those parents who caused their kids eyes to roll  : when I replied to a question "sure, you CAN go to the park, now let's discuss whether you MAY".   ;D

Edit:  Spelling (mea culpa)


----------



## 48Highlander

Retired CC said:
			
		

> As you may have noticed by now, this happens to be one of my "hot button" issues.   I was one of those parents who caused their kids eyes to roll   : when I replied to a question "sure, you CAN go to the park, now let's discuss whether you MAY".     ;D



I do the same thing, however, seing as I don't have children, I have to settle for doing it to new recruits  ;D  As for the rest of your post, I agree absolutely.  Ignorance is a shortcoming which I'm more than happy to assist someone in correcting;  arrogance on the other hand, drives me insane.


----------



## Burrows

At army.ca we like to maintain a professional environment.  Police each others grammar and spelling, newer members especially.


----------



## Slim

In fact this was enforced with a verbal warning not too long ago...And upped to C&P when the offender decided to disregard the origional warning by continuing to post using very unacceptable abreviations in a second thead. He then attempted to play the race card and to claim his english was not good enough to spell the offending words correctly. (you, and, I'm, ect.)

This is a privately owned website. Many, many times new members have come here and thought that they could treat the forum like their own private chatroom, then become upset when the rules are enforced.

Well, out of respect to the present members in good standing, they will continue to be enforced and without fail. That is what the site owner wants and that's what we've all agreed to do.

Slim
STAFF


----------



## Gunner98

Ideas - Option 1 - Move the really offensive ICQ/MSN style posts to a Folder titled *Unacceptable Nonsensical Posts* with the Author's Call Sign highlighted. This would serve two purposes - remind people through some vivid examples what is not acceptable, a sort of VW, RW/C&P historical file and second - these posts would be removed from normal flow as "unreadable".   

Option 2, force all messages to go through automatic Spell Check before they appear, if the Spell Check function includes more than 5 "ignore" hits it is rejected for post. 

Option 3 is to just delete those offending posts - replace them with the statement - "Broken, distorted, unreadable, say again, over" in both official languages of course. 

I understand that Radio Chatter threads are and could continue to be less stringently policed.  

I generally type or review my longer posts in MSWord, Spell/Grammar check them before copying back into Army.ca.   Just some ideas.


----------



## Guardian

Certainly, people should be reminded that there is a spell checker, and that it's great for catching typos and other gross errors...

I like Gunner98's Option 3. Number one might just make more work for the mods, and encourage more of the same ("Hey, look at what I did !!!"). Option 2 would work, except that spell checkers aren't perfect ("Know, dew knot trussed yore spell chequer!!") and that some words and acronyms commonly used on this forum aren't in the program.

You'd be surprised at the terrible quality of writing I see almost every day from university-educated officers... and the best grammarian I ever saw was a former Adjutant who was a CFR who had no degree. It really isn't education - it's personal pride in one's (electronic) appearance. Most people who talk in this ridiculous manner are just simply too lazy to do it right. 

It seems to me that if this is an Army board, and we want to reflect a professional appearance, then we should police each other for this stuff. After all, it's the same thing as straightening out a fellow soldier whose pocket button is undone - professional pride. And those who wish to post here should aim to reflect the standard set by the mods. A kid who isn't willing to accept correction, even for something as simple as complete words and proper sentences, is going to have the wrong attitude when it comes to Army training...


----------



## FreeFloat

Just a quick personal observation -- 

I, also, absolutely abhor seeing all those "Instant Message" style abbreviations....... in my case, i happen to be a speed reader (of *normal* English) and trying to decipher sentences spewed out in that style is infuriatingly slow and choppy.

It's become such a big pet peeve of mine that I've even requested my IM friends to make an effort to spell things out in full, explaining the speed reading thing.   Most comply, although a few need gentle reminders from time to time.   I cut them slack on the usage of "emoticons" and phrases such as LOL, etc.


----------



## George Wallace

Maturity

Does it matter?  Does a future recruit to the Canadian Armed Forces need maturity?  Does it count at all in your interview?  Does your physical bearing show maturity?  Do good manners come with maturity?  Does a sense of responsibility come with maturity?  Respect?  Does respect for your seniors come with maturity?  Is patience a virtue and a sign of maturity?  How old does one have to be to become a mature adult?  I ask these questions because of the posts being made on this site by people who say they are researching a career in the CF, posting in their profiles that they are between 20 and 35 years of age.  People claiming to be educated adults, who can't spell or use proper grammar.  People who ask questions in the same fashion as four year olds.  If they cant show any maturity, how can they be treated as mature adults?
If they want to play the fools, they will be treated as such.


----------



## P-Free

When do the silly questions end?


P.....


----------



## George Wallace

P-Free said:
			
		

> When do the silly questions end?
> P.....



Doesn't take long.  Does it?


----------



## Fry

LOL, I understand what you're trying to say George. Just that sometimes I find it hard to use 100% exact perfect grammar and punctuation, but a good 90% of the time I pick up on the errors.

But, yeah... I've got no time for those who come on here and are just terrible posters, grammatically... let alone those damn MSN talkers  :rage:


----------



## Wolfe

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Maturity
> 
> Does it matter?   Does a future recruit to the Canadian Armed Forces need maturity?   Does it count at all in your interview?   Does your physical bearing show maturity?   Do good manners come with maturity?   Does a sense of responsibility come with maturity?   Respect?   Does respect for your seniors come with maturity?   Is patience a virtue and a sign of maturity?   How old does one have to be to become a mature adult?   I ask these questions because of the posts being made on this site by people who say they are researching a career in the CF, posting in their profiles that they are between 20 and 35 years of age.   People claiming to be educated adults, who can't spell or use proper grammar.   People who ask questions in the same fashion as four year olds.   If they cant show any maturity, how can they be treated as mature adults?
> If they want to play the fools, they will be treated as such.



Personaly my English is not that good so excuse me for my bad sentences. I don't think that there is an age for maturity it depends of each person's past and how they live, i would say that maturity is a big factor, it is really important for the CF and for the personal life and i think that with maturity there is a lot of thinks that come along like, good manners, patience, respect, responsibilities and especially WISDOM.



> Statements describing ot referring to a mature person:
> 
> If an individual is going to grow toward the kind of maturity we are talking about, he will find it helpful to have secure development, pre-adult underpinnings - he should not have to deflect his energies into "refighting" childhood battles or nursing old hurts. Maturity can only be built on sound foundations.
> 
> When a person can live with his past without being bogged down by it, he remains adaptable, capable of continued change.
> 
> Another characteristic of becoming mature is the development of wisdom.
> 
> The mature individual can be ribald or genteel, sweet or acid, jolly or glum. The important point is that he be alive, with vigorous interests that make him interesting to be with. He should have a sense of humor.
> 
> An important characteristic of the individual who becomes mature is that he is at home with reality.
> 
> The mature individual cannot look outer reality in the face unless he is prepared to look himself in the face, too. He is at home with himself.
> 
> It follows that the mature individual has to be able to love comfortably with his own body, whether it be strong or weak, handsome or ugly, healthy or failing.
> 
> If the individual's growth toward maturity is rooted in the positive emotional bonds of early infancy, human relationships are going to have a high priority for him.
> 
> The person equipped with the human sensitivities that make for maturity will usually have powerful concern with social problems and ways of alleviating them.
> 
> For all his social-mindedness, for all his savoring of human relationships, the maturing individual is not dependent on always having company.
> 
> It is apparent that the person who is becoming mature does not accept values readymade.
> 
> The mature individual has to learn when to conform and when not to conform, when to speak out and when to remain silent. His values must be so structured and scaled that he can distinguish between what is central and inviolable and what is peripheral and expendable - or at least can be postponed.
> 
> To live realistically (which by no means forbids the conscious exploitation and employment of fantasy) means to live in consciousness of one's own mortality.
> 
> The mature person knows that he has to go on choosing alternatives, that each alternative costs him something, and there are things he will never be able to do and experience. He also knows that there are things he will never be able to do again, that he can never recapture his youth or relive his first encounters with certain experiences. He knows that his integrity is continually threatened by practical demands, by seductive temptations, by concessions and compromises, by conflicting values, and can only be preserved at the cost of some psychic strain.
> 
> He knows that the only real rewards in life come with continued growth, and that there is no room in the one material life he has for major regrets. This individual who has approached maturity can know that he has loved, had done his work, has made his mark on people and, although he wishes there were more time, that he has made the most of what there was.
> 
> *From Childhood and Adolescence:
> A Psychology of the Growing Person,
> By: Stone & Church, 1968
> University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire



Also something really important maturity is learned trought experience, if somebody comes in the forum and says something stupid or do something stupid you should make him realise, reply and make him realise that what he/she did is stupid and maybe the person will think twice and if the person
does not take your advice and argues with you, that is not a good sign and it means that the person is not capable to be in a social environement and especially far from being a good member of the CF, maybe the person will learn his mistakes trought more life experience.



> In Summary: The adult with a capacity for true maturity is one who has grown out of childhood experiences without losing childhood's best traits. He has retained the basic emotional strengths of infancy, the stubborn autonomy of "toddlerhood", the capacity for wonder and pleasure and playfulness of the preschool years, the capacity for affiliation and intellectual curiosity of the school years, and the idealism and passion of adolescence. He has incorporated these into a new pattern of simplicity dominated by adult stability, wisdom, knowledge, sensitivity to other people, responsibility, strength, and purposefulness.
> 
> *From Childhood and Adolescence:
> A Psychology of the Growing Person,
> By: Stone & Church, 1968
> University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire



Sometimes a good sign fo maturiy is when you don't want and don't feel to do something like clean or cook and many more things, is to do them but not only do them fast to get finished but do them well, it is hard but its life and it shall be like that.

George i think you just touched a big subject and i think is good that you mentioned that it makes me think and i am sure other people too.

BTW : I think that there is a problem with the Spell Check it does not replace my words it makes them double and messes my reply  .

Cheers 

Wolf


----------



## visitor

As a civvie, i noticed that about 15 -20 years ago, schools were on the "whole language" band wagon, in which  young  students were encouraged to use "invented spelling" and the teaching of grammar pretty well went out the window. Students were not given the building blocks of spelling writing or reading.  Things have returned to more rational teaching methods, but those kids who are now grown up are at a real disadvantage, through no fault of their own.


----------



## DJ

Fry said:
			
		

> LOL, I understand what you're trying to say George. Just that sometimes I find it hard to use 100% exact perfect grammar and punctuation, but a good 90% of the time I pick up on the errors.
> 
> But, yeah... I've got no time for those who come on here and are just terrible posters, grammatically... let alone those darn MSN talkers  :rage:


   

Ha.  I like how "LOL" and "I've got no time for.....those darn MSN talkers" are nicely in the same post.


----------



## atticus

LOL is internet talk not msn talk.


----------



## GNR

Maturity earns respect and shows respect for those around you.

Don't misread and think that it isn't okay to joke around or have fun, it's great...I do it all the time.
But don't do it at another's expense and don't do it ALL the time.

You act the fool, you ARE the fool.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as short forms and other "internet" speak.  The more common ones are okay, but when you start speaking "leet" speak (MSNish) it just annoys everyone around you.  Imagine going into a meeting and everyone around you was using short-forms and acronyms for everything, it would be almost impossible to understand them........wait I do that all the time, it's called an O group.


----------



## Fry

Calvin said:
			
		

> Ha.   I like how "LOL" and "I've got no time for.....those darn MSN talkers" are nicely in the same post.



Stop being a smart-ass. That is accepted here, it's just like saying HAHAHA. What everyone here means by the whole "MSN Talk" thing, is when people come here and start talking like this:

"Sup all u peepz, jus cuz u dun liek l33t talk I liek suff dood. BRB cuz I am AFK so I wish u peepz will chill un hang a lil. I GTG so I will TTYLO, l8r."


----------



## paracowboy

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Doesn't take long.   Does it?


the irony here is just too delicious!


----------



## dearryan

I'll bite, (I tried to bite my tongue all day). 


Mr. Wallace, (with respect)

The harshest criticism I would have for this is that, for someone so concerned with maturity, that neither your tone, nor your decision to make such a posting at all, strike me as particularly mature moves (what's your problem?  you sound like a displaced, disgruntled English prof who has to make himself feel smart by putting down others). 

Aren't online posting boards supposed to be relatively informal?  I'm sure the people your accusing in this message would be careful about spelling and grammar on an application form, or a graded essay, but do you have to be so anal about discussion taking place in an informal setting?
You take a person's disregard for proper spelling/grammar as an indication of their maturity.  Shouldn't you be looking first and foremost at the content of these messages?  If some guy was posting messages like, "I want to get into the CF so I can get a gun and shoot some Afghanis", well then, that would be immature sir.  Likewise, if someone was asking questions, like, "how many times have you got l#$d just because you wore the uniform", or something like that, it would definitely be a sign of immaturity.  I think then you could justifiably call someone immature and question their motives.

Your decision to attack people's personalities based on innocent mistakes strikes me as a borderline malicious attack (literally, "to the person").  In other words, rather than criticizing the content or logic of the postings, you take their grammatical mistakes as warrant to attack the character of the people making the postings.  You equate grammatical mistakes with immaturity of character - which isn't really a justifiable argument at all.  I might remind you that a person's grammatical mistakes are not sufficient data on which to determine maturity, or immaturity, of character.   


Thank you

Ryan


----------



## Fry

dearryan said:
			
		

> I'll bite, (I tried to bite my tongue all day).
> 
> 
> Mr. Wallace, (with respect)
> 
> The harshest criticism I would have for this is that, for someone so concerned with maturity, that neither your tone, nor your decision to make such a posting at all, strike me as particularly mature moves (what's your problem?   you sound like a displaced, disgruntled English prof who has to make himself feel smart by putting down others).
> 
> Aren't online posting boards supposed to be relatively informal?   I'm sure the people your accusing in this message would be careful about spelling and grammar on an application form, or a graded essay, but does you have to be so anal about discussion taking place in an informal setting?
> You take a person's disregard for proper spelling/grammar as an indication of their maturity.   Shouldn't you be looking first and foremost at the content of these messages?   If some guy was posting messages like, "I want to get into the CF so I can get a gun and shoot some Afghanis", well then, that would be immature sir.   Likewise, if someone was asking questions, like, "how many times have you got l#$d just because you wore the uniform", or something like that, it would definitely be a sign of immaturity.   I think then you could justifiably call someone immature and question their motives.
> 
> Your decision to attack people's personalities based on innocent mistakes strikes me as a borderline malicious attack (literally, "to the person").   In other words, rather than criticizing the content or logic of the postings, you take their grammatical mistakes as warrant to attack the character of the people making the postings.   You equate grammatical mistakes with immaturity of character - which isn't really a justifiable argument at all.   I might remind you that a person's grammatical mistakes are not sufficient data on which to determine maturity, or immaturity, of character.
> 
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Ryan



I agree, on a lesser scale. However what I think Mr. Wallace is getting at, is that this website is an Armed Forces webforum(Duh). However, while not associated with the DND, this site represents the CF in an "unofficial" aspect. Spelling and grammar do represent someone's ability to present themselves. What looks better? Someone who will not put in a little extra effort and spell with no caps... all caps... 'leet speak', etc... Or someone who has 'near perfect' or perfect spelling and grammar?  

I'm surprised no one on here insists on putting their messages in ASCII art.


----------



## NavComm

Ryan, with all due respect to you. I don't get the same message you do from George Wallace's post.

He isn't saying just use of proper grammar shows maturity, he's also talking about those posters on here that open threads on the same question or ask silly questions over and over again (like a 4 year old). Some posters seem to think that if they keep asking the same question over and over again, eventually someone will tell them what they want to hear.

I don't think he's attacking anyone's personality. Maturity isn't a personality trait. Basically the message I got from his post is: grow up and stop behaving like a spoiled kid who needs constant attention. Some people on this forum unfortunately need to be told that over and over again. He just put it in plain english.


----------



## Mojo Magnum

Well whether or not you're impressed with us young (not used to putting myself in that category) guys, I'm still buying you that beer.
And...not one but two strippers if it'll help. ;D

c'mon, when you told me you were twenty six and expecting to die on a field in Germany, I'll bet you liked beer and strippers. ;D
(and I don't doubt you could wup everyone of these young monkies.  present company included)


We love you George.


----------



## ReadyAyeReady

Personally, I don't have much of a problem with an individual's spelling or grammar.  As long as I can get an idea of what they are trying to say then I couldn't care less.  I don't think that a person's grammar should be used as an indicator of how mature/immature they are.  That being said, I can see where Mr. Wallace is coming from in a sense.  What scares me more is what motivates people to want to join the CF.  I've seen and heard alot of people (Both on this forum and elsewhere) talking smack about wanting to be a sniper and "all that cool stuff."  IMO, these are the wrong reasons for wanting to join and that definitely reflects on a person's maturity level.  Being in the CF is serious stuff and its not all about "blowing stuff up" and trying to become a super-special-forces-sniper.  I'm not in yet (Knock on wood...application was sent to the selection board on the 7th) but I seriously took a long time to consider why I wanted to join.  I think that there are alot of people who want to join that have the wrong motivations in mind.  IMO, those are the ones who are perhaps not at the level of maturity that the CF needs.  I hope I'm making sense.  In the end, I totally agree that the CF needs serious people who are mature enough to handle the job and not just someone who is in it for the "cool stuff."

Again, this is just my opinion based on what I have seen, heard and experienced throughout my application process.


----------



## WannaBeFlyer

_People claiming to be educated adults, who can't spell or use proper grammar._

I am sure we can consolidate at least 5 threads on this subject. 

Bottom line - people are lazy. It will continue to make posters mad, and it will continue to happen.

While I agree that you should use proper grammar and spelling when posting, treat your subjet matter with maturity (especially if you are researching a career in the CF); I feel most people are detached from their posts and don't put any effort into them because of that.

I also feel, after several visits to the CFRC, that most would-be's don't have an accurate interpretation of what the CF is about. For example, I went in worried about my hair, the press of my pants, the shine of my shoes etc. just to pick up an application package and maybe ask one or two questions (you know, first impressions last); while others were having "one on one" sessions with recruiters looking like they just rolled out of bed and threw on their best Metallica t-shirt.


----------



## NavComm

I just got home from a YAG weekend and been busy so this is my first chance back to the boards but this is a good discussion so I'm going to add to it again.

IMO AyeReady is right on about questioning why people join. Especially after spending a weekend with people from CO's with 30 + years of experience to new recruits not even through bmq it is an eye opener to hear some of the comments from new recruits and able seaman who haven't done much training. Some seem to have joined thinking they are about to play a real-life video game or to party and drink and when they realize that they really might have to do some work, they whine and complain about it They don't add anything to the excercise except more work for the already tasked-to-the-hilt Leading and Master Seaman, who IMHO handle it all very well.

Some people at 18 are mature beyond their years and some 30 year olds are like 3 year olds. Hopefully the immature ones will be weeded out before someone's life depends on them being mature enough to 'get with the program'.

So far, in my limited military experience, I have seen the officers and LS, MS and MCpls in charge are all on the ball as far as taking charge of their charges go, no matter how frustrating that may be. Maybe I just come from a very good unit, I don't know. But I definately agree that maturity can be measured and is an important quality when it comes to any military operation. This can be fun, but it's serious business and must be taken thus.

I have some officers who are at least 20 years younger than I am. I have nothing but respect for those young people who take their jobs and rank seriously and have taught me so much about pride of uniform, pride of a job well done, when to be serious and when to have some all out good times where you laugh til you almost cry.

Good thread Mr. Wallace!


----------



## GNR

> I agree that you should use proper grammar and spelling when posting, treat your subjet matter



What kind of matter was that again?  :
Too lazy to spell check MG?


----------



## WannaBeFlyer

I was scared of doing that and yet, despite hitting the spell check button, I did it.  :-\ Stupid poetic justice.


----------



## George Wallace

As I sit here contemplating my navel, I too realize I am not perfect.    ;D


----------



## GNR

LMAO!  George, that was great!
BTW MG I had the same fear when making the wise crack.


----------



## Elfy

I simply couldn't resist adding my two cents to this topic.



			
				Roy Harding said:
			
		

> However (ahem), I am ALSO "computer savvy" - built my first one in 1978



I believe when he mentioned 'computer savvy' he was referring to software not hardware.  The internet short hand comes from programmers need to have a language that they could type as fast as possible, yet was still readable.  After entering a couple thousand lines of script, your in no mood to add notes using the correct spelling.  Since the programmers were using short hand, anyone who wanted to edit their work (or check it for errors) needed to learn the language.  Eventually it ballooned out to where it is now, where 'geeks' in schools attempt to stand out and put themselves above other students by understanding a language others sometimes cannot read.  It started as a way for a professional to save themselves some time, but has turned into a way for children to feel 'cool'.

Also, ICQ is short for 'i seek you'.


----------



## Shamrock

I'd like to add to the grevious abuses to the English language I've witnessed here.

1.  The use of the subjective case of nouns in the objective position.  I mean, really.  English grammar has very clear rules about this; descriptive usage does overwrite prescriptive rules.

2.  The ending of phrases with prepositions.  This is sloppy communication and quite often leaves the preposition dangling.

3.  Hyphenation in the predicate.  I mean, come on people, is this a hard rule to remember?

4.  Internet.  Capitalize it correctly.  Intranet.  Capitalize it correctly.

5.  The colloquial use of "Queen's English."  It's _Received Standard  English_.  We in Canada do not use RSE nor do we use American English.  We use Canadian English; spoken, it is phonetically similar to AE (though with Canadian Raising) and written similar to RSE (our -c- instead of -s- is similar, our -er/-re inversion is similar, but our -our endings vary).


----------



## muskrat89

> I'd like to add to the *grevious* abuses to the English language I've witnessed here.




You did mean grievous, right??








> grievous
> 
> Main Entry: griev·ous
> Pronunciation: 'grE-v&s
> Function: adjective
> 1 : causing or characterized by severe pain, suffering, or sorrow <a grievous wound> <a grievous loss>
> 2 : OPPRESSIVE, ONEROUS <grievous costs of war>
> 3 : SERIOUS, GRAVE <grievous fault>
> - griev·ous·ly adverb
> - griev·ous·ness noun


----------



## George Wallace

I notice that I will still have to go out and buy an Enigma Machine to decipher some of the posts made by some on this site.  It is very time consuming to try and figure out which there, they're, their they're talking about.  Especially when they can't get their where, were, wear right either.  Add to that which witch which they may have included and one really begins to wonder which one won the nightly discusion.  I'll often be thrown off topic when reading someone who states "ill be" something or other.  Are they sick or just illiterate?  No wonder they can't carry on a descent discussion; they can't communicate clearly.  To sum up, some really shouldn't post until they master the written form (not to be confused with 'from').


----------



## scotia1088

Bad language skills used in conversations should not be pinned on youth alone. I have met enough "adults" who like to blast through conversations on the internet. I think I can speak for most who have faults in their communication skills when I say " It's more of a habit then anything" I do understand that it can be quite annoying to those not used to this "electronic" language but most people including myself (had the topic been different I probably would have had the odd shortcut here and there) just don't think about it, then again most can understand  and don't have to take an extra 10 minutes to read something. I am in know way a professional in grammar, but I like to think I get my point across. This post isn't suggesting that all your beliefs and comments on the issue are wrong, and I agree 100% about the importance of professional conversation on this site and others like it (which is why I made my attempt to add to this discussion in a professional manner, and probably have mistakes, constructive criticism welcome =) ). Just adding my thoughts...


----------



## George Wallace

The written word is visual, while the spoken word is audio.  In you post, although you may have used Spell Checker, we all know you can not always trust it,we can notice a couple such errors.  When reading, unlike listening to, a 'conversation' how am I to know which word you may have actually meant unless I stop and analyse your sentence.  You made a mistake in using "know" instead of "no" in your post.  If I were listening to you speak that, I would not observe any difference, but in reading it I do and it can be rather disconcerting.  

"Know ways to go." means a completely different thing than "No ways to go."  This is a communication problem that we are trying to address here.   You either know ways to go about this, or there are no ways to go about doing this.......


----------



## the 48th regulator

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I notice that I will still have to go out and buy an Enigma Machine to decipher some of the posts made by some on this site.  It is very time consuming to try and figure out which there, they're, their they're talking about.  Especially when they can't get their where, were, wear right either.  Add to that which witch which they may have included and one really begins to wonder which one won the nightly discusion.  I'll often be thrown off topic when reading someone who states "ill be" something or other.  Are they sick or just illiterate?  No wonder they can't carry on a descent discussion; they can't communicate clearly.  To sum up, some really shouldn't post until they master the written form (not to be confused with 'from').



Well if you are in the market George.....

Enigma Machine  

dileas

tess


----------



## Michael OLeary

scotia1088 said:
			
		

> Bad language skills used in conversations should not be pinned on youth alone. I have met enough "adults" who like to blast through conversations on the internet. I think I can speak for most who have faults in their communication skills when I say " It's more of a habit then anything" I do understand that it can be quite annoying to those not used to this "electronic" language but most people including myself (had the topic been different I probably would have had the odd shortcut here and there) just don't think about it, then again most can understand  and don't have to take an extra 10 minutes to read something. I am in know way a professional in grammar, *but I like to think I get my point across*. This post isn't suggesting that all your beliefs and comments on the issue are wrong, and I agree 100% about the importance of professional conversation on this site and others like it (which is why I made my attempt to add to this discussion in a professional manner, and probably have mistakes, constructive criticism welcome =) ). Just adding my thoughts...



The point, howver, is that some are simply NOT getting their point across.  Those who feel they have some sort of a Charter protection over the use of bad language don't get the answers they seek because they pose poorly presented questions.  Whether that is because of "msn-speak", laziness, inattention, etc., is immaterial. Alternatively, they may find themselves ignored because communicating with them is a frustrating chore, and there are few who come here with the intent or energy to interpret and aid those too lazy to even attempt passable literacy.  It's not a question of who is 'speaking', it's a question of who they are speaking to.  The audience, i.e., the bulk of the members of army.ca, prefer (at a minimum) readable prose that makes sense on first pass.  That improves the communication value of the site, ensures worthwhile responses, and also builds a storehouse of data that can support useful searches for the same information later. If someone wants information here, why should the respondent be doing all of the work starting with decyphering the question?


----------



## scotia1088

I agree 100%. I also agree that the reason behind bad communication skills is irrelevant. It makes total sense that for a clear and professional conversation, those involved should "speak" clearly… to the best of the persons ability. Obviously ability varies with different individuals.


----------



## GAP

> Obviously ability varies with different individuals.



Granted. But it is the intelligent, thoughtful person who, if he/she is to enjoy a debate, wants to get the information across clearly and concisely. That takes effort. No one here was born with the inherit ability to develop and write prose correctly, they all worked at it. 
The better ones worked harder.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

However since the rules on this are in the Guidelines and if people read the Guidelines as they are suppose to when they join then we should have no real issues....yet we still do time and time again.


----------



## MOOXE

The English language is evolving every day. The Internet is making many more noticable changes to every day language. Now aside from the obvious ignorance and blatant spelling errors I'd like to say my piece in defence of the "MSN/ICQ speakers." Some people speak differently than others, why is that hard to accept? English is changing *right now*. So you can act like dinosaurs and tell people to speak as you learned to speak, or you can fast forward yourselves to.....(please take a seat if your not sitting) *the present day!* BLASPHEMY you say? If you have a look in any modern dictionary, many of these instances of "MSN/ICQ speak" are recognized. Mostly the abbreviations. If you really cant understand the new short hand, look it up on www.dictionary.com. You cant stop the new short hand, people use it in the chat room here constantly, so why ask them to stop here? Its whats being used now, all around you, every day. Maybe not by you, and your circle of people, but its there, and it is being accepted. So lets all just get over our pet peeves of this new short hand and move on.

OMG.........RUNNNNNNNNNN


----------



## the 48th regulator

And short hand has been around for eons, and has not overtaken the common language

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shorthand


give your head a shake, and quit being the crusader, we dinosaurs don't like herbivore eating mammals..

dileas

tess


----------



## Shamrock

MOOXE, what you're arguing is prescriptive grammar ("The Rules") vs. descriptive grammar (usage).  Descriptive grammar is fluid and dynamic yet is not always reflective of prescriptive grammar; over time and if persistent enough, descriptive grammar can replace previous prescriptions.  Linguists are now debating the grammatical correctness of "whom" given the broad usage of "who" in any case.  

Certainly, the Internet (and now other forms of e-mail and IM) is having an influence on the way we communicate.  There's no denying that Internet English has broad usage.  However, the persistence of this form of communication is questionable.  

Next point, this is Army.Ca.  Army comes from some language meaning detail-oriented, accurate, and disciplined (translations vary.  To some, army translates into anal-retentive, pedantic, anachronistic but the gist remains the same).  Ca means Canadian, which means professional and courteous.  In this forum, non-standard English (either RSE or AE or both) is viewed as lazy and disrespectful.  Imagine a troop coming up to the CO unshaven and pockets undone and firing off a lazy salute with his left hand.  Sure, there was an intent to communicate, and to some people that's fine...


----------



## Gunnar

English has a standard, and a commonly accepted standard at that.  If I can't understand your message, and I need to waste time looking up things because you are incapable of using standard English, I will do one of two things:  I will ignore you completely, as you cannot be trusted to communicate reliably, or I will continue on with my own interpretation of what I think you meant, because you're always saying things that sound like language, but aren't.

Option 2 might not be that worrisome until I'm wiring the Claymore just behind where you went off to take a dump.  Maybe you told me...who the hell knows what you say when you open your mouth anyway?

In the military, bad communications get people killed.  When you are up to your eyeballs in mud and getting shot at,  you may not have the ability to balance your laptop on your latte mug to look up the latest English slang on the Internet.  It might in fact be more useful to you if you understood what your comrades in arms were saying.  It isn't bleeding edge, it isn't evolutionary, it's simply effective.  Language is for communication, not for cutesy, pedantic word games at the expense of communication.

Now, Army.ca is a site run by, for and with military members.  Do the math.  You want to play in this club, follow our rules, otherwise bugger off.


----------



## Shamrock

What Gunnar said.

Right now, I'm laughing myself silly thinking of Joe Rifleman yelling to his section commander in the middle of an A2C "Sarge! BRB AFR 1 sec K?"


----------



## Michael OLeary

MOOXE, even the weekly street rags published in most urban centres, which target you young hipsters, aren't yet being written in leet speek, when they are, come back with your argument.


----------



## big bad john

Gunnar said:
			
		

> Now, Army.ca is a site run by, for and with military members.  Do the math.  You want to play in this club, follow our rules, otherwise bugger off.



I would hope that he would get the drift by now.  Also try a real dictionary if you want the answer: the Oxford English Dictionary  http://www.oed.com/


----------



## McG

This quote, taken from another thread, gives a good explanation of the requirement and where it comes from.





			
				Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> CRZY214,
> 
> while your posts may be understood, that does not mean that net-speak is appropriate for any on line purpose. You wouldn't chatter at your grandparents or your principal in street slang, because it is more difficult for them to understand you, it insults their role in your life and it would make you look foolish to them and perhaps incapable of communicating properly in polite company.
> 
> Just as you adjust your spoken dialogue to meet the circumstances and audience, you should apply the same criteria in online situations. This forum, like many areas of the web, is NOT populated entirely by the pre-pubescent teens on your MSN contact list. We are not in your schoolyard or on your street corner chewing gum and chatting about skating and grls.
> 
> We, at Army.ca are mostly adults, ranging in age from your own to some senior enough to be your grandparent. We include many soldiers, sailors and airmen currently serving in the Canadian Forces, many who have previously served who follow military topics through the forum, and others thinking about joining. The average expectation is reasoned and asked/answered inquiries presented in clearly written Queen's English (or Francais in the applicable forum). Among other things, use of proper English (French) allows effective searches to be made for information.
> 
> Please keep in mind where you are when you post here, it makes obtaining useful responses to your questions so much more effective.


----------



## MOOXE

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> MOOXE, even the weekly street rags published in most urban centres, which target you young hipsters, aren't yet being written in leet speek, when they are, come back with your argument.



Ok I am not that young, and I do not use the leet speak. I know who does use it, and I know why. I also see the language changing because after all, this is the future generation. Things that dont adapt, dont survive. These weekly street rags you speak of, may not be using the ROFL etc shorthand, they do however write in a way that the youngsters can understand. That point is not valid though. Net speak is used to save time at typing (which has in turn created a sub culture), people who publish magazines have no need to save time, atleast the time it takes to type out ROFL. As a side note though, some do use leet speak, but not anywhere near the majority. So anyways....

Sure excessive use is annoying and I will most likely skip that post to. I wont however engage is a flamewar saying its inappropriate, especially if someone only uses a couple abbreviations. The language does appeal to many and is now very common. 

For Gunner...

"In the military, bad communications get people killed.  When you are up to your eyeballs in mud and getting shot at,  you may not have the ability to balance your laptop on your latte mug to look up the latest English slang on the Internet.  It might in fact be more useful to you if you understood what your comrades in arms were saying.  It isn't bleeding edge, it isn't evolutionary, it's simply effective.  Language is for communication, not for cutesy, pedantic word games at the expense of communication."

This, forums.army.ca, is not the military. Its a wide open forum available for ANYONE to join and talk. Theres no requirement to speak like your in the army or like someones life depends on what you say in your post. Its also not a training ground for learning how to communicate effectively in the army. Military members know (or will learn quickly after they join) that using non standard abbreviations in comms logs, any type of written request, radio chatter and just any form of comms is not allowed.

In summary. Net speak really isnt that hard to understand, I really, honestly cant believe someone here has had any real difficulty reading a forum post, unless there has been some extreme case. Its not a question of respect that CRZY214 states and people dont use this language to speak to a section commander as Shamrock states,(nobody says BEE-ARE-BEE). To be blunt you can just say the forum rules are this, follow them or dont participate here........ and then you can read lifes rules book that states learn or get left behind.


----------



## McG

MOOXE said:
			
		

> To be blunt you can just say the forum rules are this, follow them or dont participate here


Mooxe,
That little bit of your post is what matters.  This rule is not open to debate.  Follow it or you will be gone.
If it helps you sleep at night, you can think you are leaving us behind.  This debate is now closed.


----------



## kratz

from CBC.ca

The importance of proper grammar, spelling and use of punctuation continues to erode. 
In our role as CAF members, the requirement for clear, concise, coherent writing can not be
emphasised or reinforced often enough.  Today's news report updates the discussion to include
modern short hand tweets and emoji writing, as not acceptable in a military or business setting:



> Using the wrong emoji can cost you — literally
> A recent case in the Israeli courts saw a defendant pay $3000 over a few texts and emojis
> By Ramona Pringle, for CBC News  Posted: May 26, 2017 5:00 AM ET| Last Updated: May 26, 2017 5:00 AM ET
> 
> Imagine if an emoji — one casually fired off in a text-message conversation — ended up costing the sender thousands of dollars. Or $3,000, to be exact.
> 
> That's what happened in Israel recently, after a judge determined that a message containing a string of emojis conveyed clear intent.
> 
> The case was a dispute over rent. A landlord placed an ad for his apartment online, and a prospective renter sent the landlord a series of texts, including one that read, "Good morning — <smiley face> — we want the house — <flamenco dancer>, <dancing girls>, <peace sign>, <comet>, <squirrel>, <champagne bottle> —  just need to go over the details…When suits you?"
> 
> Based on this and a few other texts, the landlord removed the listing, presuming the renter's intent to take the apartment.
> 
> But the renter didn't follow up and never signed any documents. In fact, she disappeared after a few days of communication, which eventually led to this lawsuit.
> 
> According to the judge's ruling, the text messages — and the emojis, in particular — signalled clear interest on the part of the renter:
> 
> "The…text message sent by defendant…included a smiley, a bottle of champagne, dancing figures and more,"  he wrote. "These icons convey great optimism. Although this message did not constitute a binding contract between the parties, this message naturally led to the plaintiff's great reliance on the defendants' desire to rent his apartment…These symbols, which convey to the other side that everything is in order, were misleading."
> 
> The decision also made note of the consistency of the emoji use:
> 
> "The festive icons at the beginning of the negotiations...and those smileys at the end of the negotiations...misled the plaintiff to think the defendants were still interested in his apartment. [They] support the conclusion that the defendants acted in bad faith in the negotiations."
> 
> The judge ordered the defendant to pay the equivalent of just over $3,000 Canadian dollars.
> 
> Shifting communication
> 
> While this all might seem a little silly, it signals a not-so-silly shift in the way communication is changing. Short messages can deliver major consequences. Images, emojis and 140-character messages carry weight like never before.
> 
> The president of the United States, for example, can send markets tumbling or put foreign leaders on alert with just a short burst on Twitter, his platform of choice. And every few months, a scandal hits the headlines in which someone has resigned from his or her job based on a tweet —presumably, one issued with hardly a second thought.
> 
> But this ruling on emojis has set a totally new precedent and raised all sorts of new questions. Top of mind is this: who decides what a particular emoji means? While some are very clear — it's easy to make the argument that a champagne bottle says, "Let's pop open the bubbly to celebrate our new home!" —  many others are open to vast interpretation.
> 
> For instance, what was the meaning of the squirrel emoji in the renter's text? Or what if someone sends someone else a water gun emoji — could that constitute a threat? And doesn't the commonly used grimacing face look an awful lot like a happy smile?
> 
> The answer, of course, is that there is no objective answer — not yet. Which means we need to be ever more vigilant in taking that extra second before we hit "enter" to decide if that tweet, or text, or emoji is the one we really want to send. As we know, the consequences can sometimes be <dollar bills> emoji.


----------



## RocketRichard

kratz said:
			
		

> from CBC.ca
> 
> The importance of proper grammar, spelling and use of punctuation continues to erode.
> In our role as CAF members, the requirement for clear, concise, coherent writing can not be
> emphasised or reinforced often enough.  Today's news report updates the discussion to include
> modern short hand tweets and emoji writing, as not acceptable in a military or business setting:


As an educational leader and military member I concur. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

