How articulate are you?

Username567

RainyDay wrote: »

Would you like to give me a specific example of a passage or text that can't be put into simple language?

Off the top of my head no.

There are some things which are very difficult to describe, it depends what you mean by simple language really.

For an example of people lacking in eloquence watch the Dail on tele. I never want to hear "in relation to" again. It drives me mad. It's a cookie cutter phrase they throw in everywhere to patch up the wholes in their sentences.

4zn76tysfajdxp

Username567 wrote: »

It's a cookie cutter phrase they throw in everywhere to patch up the wholes in their sentences.

Why would you need to patch up a whole?

TheUsual

Usually I get a nice warm smug feeling reading threads on here, that I am so smart.

This thread is really making me feel a bit Forest Gump.

Username567

I can see this thread dying soon as everyone is afraid to posting something with bad grammar.

BBDBB

Brooklyn Acidic Choke wrote: »

Why would you need to patch up a whole?

Im half tempted to tell you on his behalf

Capt'n Midnight

Abi wrote: »

I recall being accused by an ex that I made the word 'audacity' up. Moron.

The sheer audacity !

Capt'n Midnight

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Lamarr: “My mind is ...

Hedley Lamarr: My mind is aglow with whirling, transient nodes of thought careening through a cosmic vapor of invention.

Taggart: Ditto.

Antar Bolaeisk

Oregano_State wrote: »

I also fall into the 'read loads of books as a child' category, and I distinctly remember being told by one of my class-mates in primary school at the age of 6 or 7 that I used to "talk posh" (sic). It was probably as much to do with me having had a very neutral accent due to moving house a lot as a child, as the words I used; I was pretty reserved and didn't say much back then.

I value the use of language, and I notice (and mentally approve) when I meet someone who speaks well, although I have plenty of friends who don't, and I wouldn't hold it against them.

If I notice that I've messed up the syntax of a sentence when speaking, or have used the wrong word, I usually get pretty pissed off with myself and replay the sentence in my head the correct way... Does anyone else do this?

I think it shows that my speaking ability isn't as good as my vocabulary.

Everyone around here also comments on my 'posh accent'. Like yourself I put it down to reading a lot as a child but I've never moved around so my neutral accent is a bit of a mystery. People always ask me where I'm from, often forwarding England or Canada as my place of origin.

I also do the correction of a sentence in my head thing as well.

coffee_cake

StudentDad wrote: »

Communicating effectively is entirely subjective. There are parts of Ireland where the accent used and local idioms leave me baffled. So, I suppose whether or not you are articulate depends on your audience.

Its a bit like accents, most people pick up and adopt the accents around them. The use of language has to be equally flexible. Just because you are able to use big words like 'marmalade' in every second sentence doesn't mean you should.

If your language alienates people, what's the point?

SD

Why are you addressing that to me?

Jimmy Iovine

seven_eleven wrote: »

indubitably...

...piper pied,
Now hold on my brother no, no, no, no, can't stop the stride.

PhlegmyMoses

Not very. I spend most of my day cursing like a sailor, even in important meetings.

The King of Moo

Username567 wrote: »

I'm making a conscious effort to become more eloquent. Hearing someone speak with good grammar, concisely and expressively and with nice pauses instead of filler words such as ummm, uhh, ya know is a melody to behold. Contrast that with say Bertie Ahern who literally gives me a headache to listen to.

I think the goal should be to speak concisely as possible while expressing your thoughts as accurately as possible.

I pride myself on being very well-spoken. My use of language comes largely from my innate interest in the English language, and my early-flowering love of reading, each of which influenced the other. I'm also quite pleased that my ability to use English has helped me to stand out in my job.

Reading really is the key to having a powerful command of English. It's the single best thing you can do to improve your eloquence. I particularly recommend the greatest fiction writers, not only for their creative use of English and vast vocabularies, but also for their ability to choose the right words and sentences. Reading great non-fiction also helps too, of course.

One trick I think may be useful is to think in sentences. Become aware of how you verbalise your thoughts, and try to organise them so they become clear sentences, with pauses between them, and shorter pauses in between clauses within sentences.
I believe that this helps one to to provide a similar structure and consequent clarity to one's speech, avoiding replicating the rambling nature of most thoughts.
It can also help with structuring one's writing. It's sometimes easy to identify the posts of people who don't write much in real life, or aren't attentive to their online writing. They tend to write incredibly long run-on sentences with no punctuation or linking words between different ideas, which I find very difficult to read.

Username567 wrote: »

I realised recently I've a terrible habit of saying "get here" instead of arrive for example. I think arrive sounds so much better.

I wouldn't see anything wrong with either. Don't go too far in the opposite direction and only use "arrive." The beauty of this language is its vocabulary which gifts one with a number of ways to say something. Try to use both on different occasions. Even throw* in the odd "turn up" while you're at it.

Agricola wrote: »

Something I find to be a bothersome quandary is how many posters on After Hours adopt the style of a BBC continuity announcer circa 1954. In the real world, I can say with some assurity that I rarely if ever hear Irish people speak or see them write with such affected panache, unless they happen to have the letters "SC" after their name.

I don't see anything wrong with that. Why should one's writing reflect one's speech, or vice versa?
Speaking and writing are very different things, as are listening and reading.
My speech and writing are quite different. I'm more precise in my writing, as written communication lacks the visual cues which aid in spoken communication.
I also have more time to think about what I want to write and how best to put it when I'm writing. In contrast, my speech is more fluid and less florid, though still far more carefully structured than the average person's and filled with delightful puns.

My basic rule in communicating is to produce what I personally would like to hear or what I would like to read, and those two are usually quite different.

*EDIT: I also just changed "through" to "throw." lol im so tick!

PhlegmyMoses

"The girl arrived" doesn't have the same ring to it.

Jimmy Iovine

Lollipops23 wrote: »

My mother was told at various parent-teacher meetings that I had an extremely advanced vocabulary for my age- at the time they put it down to my being an avid reader (constantly had my head in a book as a kid).

It's something I'd certainly strive to instill in my own children when I have some- reading the facebook messages on my 16 year old brother's page is incredibly depressing. Although maybe it's like when txt spk came out and we all used it, but eventually grew out of it? Perhaps in 10 years' time all those inarticulate morans will be able to string a coherent sentence together..?

I don't know if people really fully grow out of it. I am friends with people doing some very good degrees, and they spell all their words like your brother does when they text and write on Facebook.

I read through a few of their essays before the deadline in college last month, and the mistakes they made were depressing. Their punctuation was all over the shop, and they were making some basic spelling mistakes.

I have another friend who would never use the correct tenses when we were having a conversation. I reminded him every single time about it until one day he told me to shut up and that he'd be able to turn it on when he went into do an interview :pac:.

Reading isn't the only way to develop your ability with words, but it is definitely one of the easiest. Half an hour a day will do you the world of good. I devoured books when I was younger - I read the Harry Potter books in 3/4 days when I was 12 or 13. I can't get through the books I'm reading at the moment as quickly due to the fact that I have a lot more things to do with the rest of life.

If I have children, I will definitely be reading to them on a daily basis. I was very lucky that both of my parents were teachers, and they realised the importance of reading. Not everyone is as lucky.

EDIT:

Also, in college you are pretty much never penalised for poor spelling, even in an English essay. I think this is ridiculous to be honest. Your argument will be more cogent if your spelling and grammar is correct, but you won't benefit marks wise. I think that some part of the marking scheme should be allocated to correct spellings. It might go some way towards improving it.

JuliusCaesar

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Also, in college you are pretty much never penalised for poor spelling, even in an English essay. I think this is ridiculous to be honest. Your argument will be more cogent if your spelling and grammar is correct, but you won't benefit marks wise. I think that some part of the marking scheme should be allocated to correct spellings. It might go some way towards improving it.

Believe me it's really difficult to mark an essay when the person has no idea how to construct sentences, never mind entire paragraphs. It can be really difficult and take four times the average duration to mark such an essay. If it were left up to me, I'd send it back with no mark at all. It does mean that a coherent essay is a joy to mark, and this just might inadvertently be reflected in the mark given.

There is talk of having Remedial English classes at university - and making them compulsory for people who can't write, spell, punctuate, or structure an argument.

While I'm at it, "I done" is WRONG!!! Surely everyone knows this by now! It's "I did". Do you not hear what other people say??? :mad:

jimmyRotator

Im a fcuking ninja when it comes to speech.

TheUsual

jimmyRotator wrote: »

Im a fcuking ninja when it comes to speech.

*ninja hand signal for shhhhhhhh*

April O Neill

OP, learn how to imitute articulate people exaltly.

Czarcasm

April O Neill wrote: »

OP, learn how to imitute articulate people exaltly.

I see what you did there! :pac:




That WAS on purpose... right?

Jimmy Iovine

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Believe me it's really difficult to mark an essay when the person has no idea how to construct sentences, never mind entire paragraphs. It can be really difficult and take four times the average duration to mark such an essay. If it were left up to me, I'd send it back with no mark at all. It does mean that a coherent essay is a joy to mark, and this just might inadvertently be reflected in the mark given.

There is talk of having Remedial English classes at university - and making them compulsory for people who can't write, spell, punctuate, or structure an argument.

While I'm at it, "I done" is WRONG!!! Surely everyone knows this by now! It's "I did". Do you not hear what other people say??? :mad:

Well I hope that might play a part in increasing the mark, even if it is by only one per cent. I've written countless essays in college and I'm pretty certain that I have spelt every single word correctly.

I'm doing a postgrad in primary teaching and the level of spelling of some of the people on the course is embarrassing.

One girl openly admitted that she avoided using words that she was uncertain of when writing on the board. She almost seemed proud of the fact that she did this. She was teaching 2nd class!

Last week, I spent a few minutes explaining to one of the guys in my class about the difference between 'affect' and 'effect'.

Both of those people are English by the way. There are another two lads on my course who are atrocious at spelling. They're both English as well, so it's not just an Irish problem.

I'm amazed that they were let onto the course with their grasp of the language, especially when it forms the basis of almost everything that they will be doing on the course - from the essays to the actual teaching.

There is a written piece that you write before the interview, but I'm not sure what emphasis is placed on it, if any. That first girl also admitted that she memorised words that she was able to spell and didn't attempt to write the more difficult ones. I'm not sure what 'the more difficult ones' were but that's pretty shocking. She will be totally lost when she teaches the older age groups if lacks that much confidence in her spelling.

Not everyone is like that. There are some people who have a fantastic ability with English. It only serves to highlight the inadequacies of the rest of the cohort though.

3qsmavrod5twfe

Pffffftttt, articulation. Constant velocity joints are where it's at.

Antar Bolaeisk

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Last week, I spent a few minutes explaining to one of the guys in my class about the difference between 'affect' and 'effect'.

Had this with an English teacher in secondary school, we were going through some words that looked and sounded similar but meant different things. When we came to elicit and illicit she claimed they were just different spellings but meant the same thing, I, being the fool, argued with her. She did not like that one bit.

spankysue

I have a spectacular vernacular...... nice t1ts too

Jimmy Iovine

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

Had this with an English teacher in secondary school, we were going through some words that looked and sounded similar but meant different things. When we came to elicit and illicit she claimed they were just different spellings but meant the same thing, I, being the fool, argued with her. She did not like that one bit.

You weren't a fool at all. She was completely at fault. She should have done her planning the night before and realised that they were two completely different words.

I pulled up a teacher on a spelling in secondary one time. Admittedly, I was being a bit of a pain (and I despised her). She gave me a very, very cold stare. It gave me a real sense of satisfaction though. She tried enough times to make a fool of me, and she tried to frame my brother for something that he never did. She was a proper bitch.

JuliusCaesar

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

I'm doing a postgrad in primary teaching and the level of spelling of some of the people on the course is embarrassing.

One girl openly admitted that she avoided using words that she was uncertain of when writing on the board. She almost seemed proud of the fact that she did this. She was teaching 2nd class!

My youngster had a primary teacher who spend a fair amount of time explaining the difference between two, to, and too. All the class finally got it.

The next year they had a teacher who thought these words were interchangeable. They argued with her - and ended up being punished.

April O Neill

Czarcasm wrote: »

I see what you did there! :pac:




That WAS on purpose... right?

Yes. Yes it was.

Jimmy Iovine

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

My youngster had a primary teacher who spend a fair amount of time explaining the difference between two, to, and too. All the class finally got it.

The next year they had a teacher who thought these words were interchangeable. They argued with her - and ended up being punished.

Jesus wept.

I've no doubt that some of the people that are on my course will be doing similar in a few years. It's a vicious cycle. They were taught incorrectly when they were in school, and they will be teaching incorrectly in a few years.

Not all teachers are or will be like that. Only a small few are. They are the ones though who will do the long-term damage, which may be irreparable in some cases.

The Government are pretty strict with the Irish examinations that have to be passed in order to get into teaching full-time. Why not have a grammar and spelling test that you have to pass?

If you're good enough to get 480/490 points in the Leaving then you should be able to spell correctly and differentiate between something as simple as to, too and two. There is no excuse for this problem in my opinion.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Didn't work.

Me: "A single full-fare transit to the Fort of Leary, oh fair coachman!"
Driver: "???"

Such a disenchanting experience in our cultural haunt.

KCC

Don't say: "Ornithological specimens of identical plumage invariably congregate in the closet proximity" when you could just say: "Birds of a feather flock together".

Keep it simple. Being articulate is not about using big words.

Johro

Y u ask?