Opera to Firefox

  • Thread starter Thread starter richk
  • Start date Start date
David said:
Perhaps, if more people complained, the quality and tenor of posts
would rise, maybe even dramatically.
Click to expand...

The quality, probably; the tenor, probably not.
 
Florestan said:
Obviously. It takes which powers to know that.

Now, seriously,

I consider slips like this trivial. By now, almost everyone knows they
are mistakes, even the most literate writers can commit them, while some
people feel that their self-importance is enhanced when they correct the
culprits.
Click to expand...

I agree that the "loose"/"lose" error is relatively trivial but the
reader doesn't know whether it's a slip due to carelessness in
proofreading before posting or the result of ignorance. Where the
error only appears once in a post I'll usually assume it's a slip
and let it pass; if the same error appears several times I'll
usually send a private e-mail to the poster (if possible, in these
days of anti-spam addresses it's not always possible).
I am slightly more worried by mistakes that go unnoticed, although, as I
see it, they betray an equally serious lack of understanding about how
language works. For example, you wrote "the marginally-illiterate".
Grammatically, nothing calls for this hyphen. It is perfect nonsense. An
adverb is not meant to be joined by a hyphen to an adjective (in this
case an adjective used absolutely as a collective noun) that it governs.
At the same time, one sees everywhere phrases like "open source
implementation" without a single hyphen. I you are not familiar with the
subject, as members of this NG are, this could also taken to mean: "open
implementation of source".
Click to expand...

I could argue about the hyphen, but I'll concede that you're correct.
I should have used "the marginally literate" instead.
About a decade ago, when I started noticing, mainly in the web, mistakes
like "it's" for "its", "their" for "they're" etc. I was shocked. (I was
slightly embarassed when I saw my own "loose", but it was too late, and
IMO it would be pedantic to post again to correct it.) Then I realized
that this is unavoidable. Up to the very late 20th century, most, if not
all, people who communicated in writing had an education that was
adequate for this type of communication. Since the advent of internet
(and I don't mean usenet), this is not so any more. This may shock the
pedantic, but I see it as good. It helps, even forces, the "marginally
illiterate" to think and express themselves more clearly and coherently,
since written speech lacks the extratextual signals that facilitate
communication in person or, say, over the phone.
Click to expand...

And if the errors that the marginally literate make aren't pointed
out then they'll continue to be made. Then those who don't really
understand the difference between the words will use the more
common "loose" instead of "lose". Then those who *do* know the
difference and use the right word will tire of being "corrected"
and give in to the tyranny of the majority, the result being that
we will have lost the word "lose" in favor of "loose" - one word
with two different meanings which have to be distinguished by
context.
[end slippery slope analogy] <grin>
{discussion of Lord Byron's spelling snipped}
 
Marten said:
[...] the result being that we will have lost the word "lose" in
favor of "loose" - one word with two different meanings which have
to be distinguished by context.
Click to expand...

I think you meant: "we will have loost the word 'lose' [...]". ;)
 
Marten said:
I agree that the "loose"/"lose" error is relatively trivial but the
reader doesn't know whether it's a slip due to carelessness in
proofreading before posting or the result of ignorance. Where the
error only appears once in a post I'll usually assume it's a slip
and let it pass; if the same error appears several times I'll
usually send a private e-mail to the poster (if possible, in these
days of anti-spam addresses it's not always possible).
Click to expand...
Hello, Marten,
I'm glad to know that. Sending a private message is polite and
considerate, and also a sign that you really care about this. But it
won't do for the grammarian smart alecs, will it?
And if the errors that the marginally literate make aren't pointed
out then they'll continue to be made. Then those who don't really
understand the difference between the words will use the more
common "loose" instead of "lose". Then those who *do* know the
difference and use the right word will tire of being "corrected"
and give in to the tyranny of the majority, the result being that
we will have lost the word "lose" in favor of "loose" - one word
with two different meanings which have to be distinguished by
context.
[end slippery slope analogy] <grin>
{discussion of Lord Byron's spelling snipped}
Click to expand...
Your analogy describes very well what happens usually. Personally, I
find it good to care about clear and unambiguous expression that does
not depend on the context to convey its message, and I do care myself,
but ISTM that, beyond a certain point, there is not much you can do.

About the tyranny of the majority, my view is differnt, a bit stoical
maybe. I think that the important thing to recognize is this: We all
gave in to the tyranny of the majority when we learned to speak. At
infancy and childhood the submission is unconscious; but, as modern
societies are not static, and new majorities of all kinds, linguistic
and other, tend to form all the time, when you are confronted with this
as a conscious adult, set in your linguistic ways (and maybe proud of
them), it's hard to adapt.

However, usually you can go away with it, at least in language, without
adapting in the slightest: language cannot change that much within a
person's lifetime! So I'm confindent that, in the rest of my life, I
will not have to adopt "recieve" for "receive", "catagory" for
"category", "it's" for "its", "then" for the comparative "than", or
whatever incomprehensible construction for "nuclear" (well, maybe not
this, as it comes with the highest authority), in order to get myself
understood. I'm also confident that whenever the occasional "loose" for
"lose", or "two" for "too" (I do that too :)), slips my fingers, my
meaning will be sufficiently clear from my context.

So, that's one less worry in my life. :)

Regards

PS
I wonder what happened to the Opera bookmarks of the original poster.
 
Keyboard said:
Marten said:
[...] the result being that we will have lost the word "lose" in
favor of "loose" - one word with two different meanings which have
to be distinguished by context.
Click to expand...

I think you meant: "we will have loost the word 'lose' [...]". ;)
Click to expand...

Which will probably morph into "we loozed the wurd 'lose'".
(I'd add a smiley if I didn't have the chilling vision of
this actually happening, as 'txtspk' oozes into the language
much like the malodorous, viscid ichor of crushed cockroaches.)
 
Florestan said:
Hello, Marten,
I'm glad to know that. Sending a private message is polite and
considerate, and also a sign that you really care about this. But it
won't do for the grammarian smart alecs, will it?
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand. In this context, *I* am the grammararian
smart alec.
And if the errors that the marginally literate make aren't pointed
out then they'll continue to be made. Then those who don't really
understand the difference between the words will use the more
common "loose" instead of "lose". Then those who *do* know the
difference and use the right word will tire of being "corrected"
and give in to the tyranny of the majority, the result being that
we will have lost the word "lose" in favor of "loose" - one word
with two different meanings which have to be distinguished by
context.
[end slippery slope analogy] <grin>
{discussion of Lord Byron's spelling snipped}
Click to expand...
Your analogy describes very well what happens usually. Personally, I
find it good to care about clear and unambiguous expression that does
not depend on the context to convey its message, and I do care myself,
but ISTM that, beyond a certain point, there is not much you can do.
Click to expand...

Well, I sometimes have the feeling of fighting a rearguard action
against the forces of ignorance and stupidity. I may not win too
often but I *am* able to metaphorically slap the dullards about a
bit, which lends a bit of spice to newsgroups too often taken over
by flamefests involving g*n c*ntrol, ab*rtion, religi*n or p*litix.
It's also a way to show off. said:
About the tyranny of the majority, my view is differnt, a bit stoical
maybe. I think that the important thing to recognize is this: We all
gave in to the tyranny of the majority when we learned to speak. At
infancy and childhood the submission is unconscious; but, as modern
societies are not static, and new majorities of all kinds, linguistic
and other, tend to form all the time, when you are confronted with this
as a conscious adult, set in your linguistic ways (and maybe proud of
them), it's hard to adapt.
Click to expand...

Actually, my linguistic ways were formed by omnivorous reading as
a child (Barefoot through the snow to the library, uphill both
ways. Those damn' clay tablets were *heavy* ,lemme tell ya.)
 
Back
Top