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

[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]

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]

   

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]

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]

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.

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