Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Schools failing to teach English proper, like.

1356

Comments

  • #62
    robman60
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭robman60


    Text speak and social networking has a lot to do with it. I'm a teenager and I feel compelled to write in text speak when communicating with peers, whatever the means of communication employed.

    I swear, Junior Cert English should encourage proper speaking and proper written language. Surely this must be known before difficult texts can be understood?

    As someone who just finished third year, I must say the standard of spoken language is terrible. If pupils were told that the use of the verb "to have" changes some of the irregular verbs (as in: I saw, I have seen) it would greatly improve spoken/written language.

    Text speak has lowered the standard of written language too. The worst mistakes that can be regularly seen are:

    1) Use of all lower case letters. Some people even use a small "i" when referring to the first person of the verb.

    2) People spell "does" as "dose".


    The Department needs to bring primary school education back to the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic. Things like Geography and History can be learned at a later date, and priority should be put on grasping the basic concepts of literacy in Primary School.


  • #63
    PseudoFamous
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,514 ✭✭✭PseudoFamous


    gigino wrote: »
    Too much time, money, effort is wasted on the dead and ugly and useless Irish language.

    I disagree, but due to you taking such a harsh stance on it, there's no point in me making points about it, as you'll simply ignore them.
    gigino wrote: »
    Oh, plus our teachers get too much holidays , + are paid too much.I know teachers now swanning it around exotic hotspots, living it up in holiday homes etc.

    Teacher's holidays are dictated by how much time off students get. We were an agriculturally based economy right up to the 80s, so students were needed to help around the farm, etc.
    Now, a reform is needed, so what do YOU suggest be done?
    gigino wrote: »
    In the UK teachers are paid half as much and do not get summer holidays until the end of July.

    The lowest rung on the UK teaching ladder is half the wage of the highest rung of the Irish. Many teachers in London earn £60K., which is a considerable amount more than the highest wage in Ireland. Teaching holidays in England were not dictated by agriculture, as the UK has not been agriculturally based for more than a hundred years.


  • #64
    5starpool
    Subscribers Posts: 32,866 ✭✭✭✭5starpool


    Text speak is not more efficient.

    It would take me 3 times as long to read a textspeak paragraph, as it would to read a correctly written paragraph.

    Also, as evidenced by 'our friend' the negative equity bearing 'journalist' with the sensitive soul has shown, it's not only people entering journalism courses who haev a basic level of how to wriet, but also some of those who have been doing it for the last few years.


  • #65
    flutterflye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,538 ✭✭✭flutterflye


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    If not, then why is it becoming so prolific?

    Normally when something is not good at it's specific task it tends to fall by the wayside.

    I'd take a guess and say that it is due to the ever increasing laziness of society in general, especially the boom generation.


  • #66
    maximoose
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,210 ✭✭✭maximoose


    The main grammatical error I see on a daily basis is the apostrophe. Seems a lot of people in Ireland think that if a word is plural it needs an apostrophe before the s. I dont just mean the general public either, it's everywhere - billboards, newspapers, TV ads. Can't understand how these f*cking morons can get jobs in marketing, journalism etc with such poor basic grammar.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    robman60
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭robman60


    maximoose wrote: »
    The main grammatical error I see on a daily basis is the apostrophe. Seems a lot of people in Ireland think that if a word is plural it needs an apostrophe before the s. I dont just mean the general public either, it's everywhere - billboards, newspapers, TV ads. Can't understand how these f*cking morons can get jobs in marketing, journalism etc with such poor basic grammar.
    Very true. I was in a take-away a few days ago and there was a sign that said "Milk Shake's" I shed a tear.


  • #68
    flutterflye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,538 ✭✭✭flutterflye


    maximoose wrote: »
    The main grammatical error I see on a daily basis is the apostrophe. Seem's a lot of people in Ireland think that if a word is plural it need's an apostrophe before the s. I dont just mean the general public either, it's everywhere - billboard's, newspaper's, TV ad's. Can't understand how these f*cking moron's can get job's in marketing, journalism etc with such poor basic grammar.

    fyp ;)


  • #69
    emeraldstar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,383 ✭✭✭emeraldstar


    gigino wrote: »
    In the UK teachers are paid half as much and do not get summer holidays until the end of July.

    And are striking today.


  • #70
    bnt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,138 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    If not, then why is it becoming so prolific?

    Normally when something is not good at it's specific task it tends to fall by the wayside.
    So what you're saying is: unless you're going to use knowledge straight away, for a specific defined task, there's no reason to learn it? Remind me never to get in a car with you, if you're going to learn how to perform an emergency stop when you're heading for the side of a bus at 60mph. :eek:

    You might argue that communication skills are not as "life-or-death" as driving skills, but so what? Driving is not just about getting from A to B: sometimes we like to take a car out on a track, throw it around and have some fun. If you take an advanced driving course, you don't know in advance which of those skills will be used on the track and which might be needed on the road: you learn them all.

    The analogy with communication holds true: some of us think that advanced language and communication skills are worth learning for their own sake. You might never need to use half of what you learn in earnest, but you don't know which half! :cool:

    You are the type of what the age is searching for, and what it is afraid it has found. I am so glad that you have never done anything, never carved a statue, or painted a picture, or produced anything outside of yourself! Life has been your art. You have set yourself to music. Your days are your sonnets.

    ―Oscar Wilde predicting Social Media, in The Picture of Dorian Gray



  • #71
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    flutterflye wrote: »
    I'd take a guess and say that it is due to the ever increasing laziness of society in general, especially the boom generation.

    To be honest, while i am not a fan of textspk i have to say i think you are looking at it from a purely elitist point of view. You don't like it so the people who do it are lazy, this in turn makes you not lazy.

    I think you are missing out on a few key issues.

    One prime example would be the advancement of communication. When you are writing a letter it never really mattered how long or short the letter was, as the an extra sheet of paper would not cost more to post, however a limitation on the number of characters that constitute a SMS message would mean another charge to send more than that number...this kind of pricing of product was always going to lead to people cutting down on the number of characters used to fit more information into the communication for the same price.

    I also dispute that idea that the proliferation is strictly down to increasing laziness in recent generations as similar methods would have been adopted when sending telegrams. Interesting neough though telegrams were charged per word, so people would often find longer 2 word combo's to say what they would instantly think of in short 3 world combos. So instead of "reply at once", people would say "reply immediately"... almost exactly the opposite of the current system but once again most driven by the price structure.
    bnt wrote: »
    So what you're saying is: unless you're going to use knowledge straight away, for a specific defined task, there's no reason to learn it? Remind me never to get in a car with you, if you're going to learn how to perform an emergency stop when you're heading for the side of a bus at 60mph. :eek:

    You might argue that communication skills are not as "life-or-death" as driving skills, but so what? Driving is not just about getting from A to B: sometimes we like to take a car out on a track, throw it around and have some fun. If you take an advanced driving course, you don't know in advance which of those skills will be used on the track and which might be needed on the road: you learn them all.

    The analogy with communication holds true: some of us think that advanced language and communication skills are worth learning for their own sake. You might never need to use half of what you learn in earnest, but you don't know which half! :cool:

    Hmmm...I find it slightly weird that you feel the need to imply i am thinking a certain way about this subject. I don't like textspk myself and i do not use it in any form of communication. I am just taking issue with the idea that something that is not at all effective would become so commonplace. I think part of the reason for the rise of textspk is exactly that, it's effectiveness and efficiency to do what the people who use it want it to.

    As a self confessed Autodidact i completely agree with you, advanced communication and language skills are definitely worth learning. I guess i just fall into the category of people who like to debate issues and go a bit deeper in my thinking and study of them than a simple dismissal because certain aspects of them do not appeal to me.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #73
    Jesus Unimportant Tarp
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Jesus Unimportant Tarp


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    One prime example would be the advancement of communication. When you are writing a letter it never really mattered how long or short the letter was, as the an extra sheet of paper would not cost more to post.

    Yeah it did... well, a long time ago


  • #74
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Yeah it did... well, a long time ago

    Interesting! Any examples or info?


  • #75
    Jesus Unimportant Tarp
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Jesus Unimportant Tarp


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    Interesting! Any examples or info?

    Um... let's see...
    google is throwing up a lot of different stuff but this'll do

    http://janeaustensworld.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/the-postal-service-in-18th-century-britain-letters-and-the-penny-post/


  • #76
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    To be honest, while i am not a fan of textspk i have to say i think you are looking at it from a purely elitist point of view. You don't like it so the people who do it are lazy, this in turn makes you not lazy.

    I think you are missing out on a few key issues.

    One prime example would be the advancement of communication. When you are writing a letter it never really mattered how long or short the letter was, as the an extra sheet of paper would not cost more to post, however a limitation on the number of characters that constitute a SMS message would mean another charge to send more than that number...this kind of pricing of product was always going to lead to people cutting down on the number of characters used to fit more information into the communication for the same price.

    I also dispute that idea that the proliferation is strictly down to increasing laziness in recent generations as similar methods would have been adopted when sending telegrams. Interesting neough though telegrams were charged per word, so people would often find longer 2 word combo's to say what they would instantly think of in short 3 world combos. So instead of "reply at once", people would say "reply immediately"... almost exactly the opposite of the current system but once again most driven by the price structure.

    Free texting seems to eliminate that problem for most for the last fair few years though. Its down to keeping the texts shorter alright, but mainly to have to actually do less typing rather than saving money. I hate them myself. I sometimes have to read a text a few times to decipher it.


  • #77
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Um... let's see...
    google is throwing up a lot of different stuff but this'll do

    http://janeaustensworld.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/the-postal-service-in-18th-century-britain-letters-and-the-penny-post/

    Nice one. :)


  • #78
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #79
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    sock puppet wrote: »
    How does spelling there, their and they're the same way remove ambiguity?
    The same way it does in other shorthands, with context.
    flutterflye wrote: »
    But just wanted to say that using shorthand or text speak is an efficient tool to use for note taking, so long as you expand on it later when you need to use it.

    It is not sufficient for decent communication on any level.

    Not necessarily, some shorthand systems do remove words for efficiency but even then the context allows it to be read. Txtspk doesn't remove words (unless the writer chooses to).
    5starpool wrote:
    It would take me 3 times as long to read a textspeak paragraph, as it would to read a correctly written paragraph.
    Only if you can't read/write it fluently. I'm pretty bad at txtspk (I never use it) but can read 1337 fluidly. If you're used to it you can read it.
    robbie77730 wrote:
    Its down to keeping the texts shorter alright, but mainly to have to actually do less typing rather than saving money
    And because of small screens (less scrolling on mobile phones)


  • #80
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Free texting seems to eliminate that problem for most for the last fair few years though. Its down to keeping the texts shorter alright, but mainly to have to actually do less typing rather than saving money. I hate them myself. I sometimes have to read a text a few times to decipher it.

    When i first got a mobile SMS was free, myself and friends would send each other very long messages and have very extended conversations via the medium. I think i kind of got spoiled by that and still won't bow to text speak to shorten messages.


  • #81
    flutterflye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,538 ✭✭✭flutterflye


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    To be honest, while i am not a fan of textspk i have to say i think you are looking at it from a purely elitist point of view. You don't like it so the people who do it are lazy, this in turn makes you not lazy.

    I think you are missing out on a few key issues.

    One prime example would be the advancement of communication. When you are writing a letter it never really mattered how long or short the letter was, as the an extra sheet of paper would not cost more to post, however a limitation on the number of characters that constitute a SMS message would mean another charge to send more than that number...this kind of pricing of product was always going to lead to people cutting down on the number of characters used to fit more information into the communication for the same price.

    I also dispute that idea that the proliferation is strictly down to increasing laziness in recent generations as similar methods would have been adopted when sending telegrams. Interesting neough though telegrams were charged per word, so people would often find longer 2 word combo's to say what they would instantly think of in short 3 world combos. So instead of "reply at once", people would say "reply immediately"... almost exactly the opposite of the current system but once again most driven by the price structure.

    Riiiight.

    Well I actually don't understand any of your points there.

    If you had read my posts, you would have already seen that I am not viewing it from an elitist point of view.
    I actually cannot for the life of me figure out why you would think that, or what it even has to do with anything.

    I think that it is all a silly, dumbed down form of communication, that would be perfectly fine used solely in text messages, or note taking.

    The reality though is that it has seeped over into everyday communications, including academic communications, and is fast becoming its own language.

    This in itself would not be a bad thing, if it were of any substance.
    However, it is all pure drivel.

    Could you imagine reading 'War and Peace' in emoticons and txt spk?
    Or going to school or college, and all of your text books written in this manner?

    It takes the creativity, the symbolism, the analogies, the poetry, the degree of comprehension, the level of descriptions etc... out of communication.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Logical Fallacy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,933 ✭✭✭Logical Fallacy


    flutterflye wrote: »
    Riiiight.

    Well I actually don't understand any of your points there.

    If you had read my posts, you would have already seen that I am not viewing it from an elitist point of view.
    I actually cannot for the life of me figure out why you would think that, or what it even has to do with anything.

    I think that it is all a silly, dumbed down form of communication, that would be perfectly fine used solely in text messages, or note taking.

    The reality though is that it has seeped over into everyday communications, including academic communications, and is fast becoming its own language.

    This in itself would not be a bad thing, if it were of any substance.
    However, it is all pure drivel.

    Could you imagine reading 'War and Peace' in emoticons and txt spk?
    Or going to school or college, and all of your text books written in this manner?

    It takes the creativity, the symbolism, the analogies, the poetry, the degree of comprehension, the level of descriptions etc... out of communication.

    I don't disagree with you on any point, especially you last section...but basically what i am saying is that maybe the people who are using it, and the circumstances under which it is being used...such things are not in demand. They just want to get a quick burst of information across and thats it.

    I have to say, i have yet to read a novel where it appears except maybe in irony, i have yet to read an academic paper where they used textspk in anyway. I'm not really seeing it's infiltration beyond text messaging and social media.


  • #83
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    When i first got a mobile SMS was free, myself and friends would send each other very long messages and have very extended conversations via the medium. I think i kind of got spoiled by that and still won't bow to text speak to shorten messages.

    I had one a while before any texts were free. It seems to have come about because of the huge amount of texting that started happening with free texts. Im never bothered by spelling and grammer being perfect, which is just as well with my level, but text spelling i hate. Imagine if it was allowed on this site.

    I will have to get a text speak - english dictionary with some of them i get.


  • #84
    stevejr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭stevejr


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I see no compelling reason to be sympathetic toward these lazy students...:pac:

    What's the reason for being reasonable?

    Is that an unreasonable question?



  • #85
    flutterflye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,538 ✭✭✭flutterflye


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    I have to say, i have yet to read a novel where it appears except maybe in irony, i have yet to read an academic paper where they used textspk in anyway. I'm not really seeing it's infiltration beyond text messaging and social media.

    There are alot of teachers out there that will be able to give you a million examples of this.

    I have spoken to many myself, and this is the main reason for my concern.
    They detailed regular problems with essays and homework being handed up full of text speak, and poor general English skills.


  • #86
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,316 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Biggins wrote: »
    Sooner or later some kids will need a large dictionary to understand a basic dictionary!
    Reminds me of:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4SRQ42fj18


  • #87
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Logical Fallacy wrote: »
    I don't disagree with you on any point, especially you last section...but basically what i am saying is that maybe the people who are using it, and the circumstances under which it is being used...such things are not in demand. They just want to get a quick burst of information across and thats it.

    Often though, its only saving them one or two characters in a short text. It just becomes a habit with them. And it was a method learned from other texts received. Trend followers or something.


  • #88
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    flutterflye wrote: »
    It takes the creativity, the symbolism, the analogies, the poetry, the degree of comprehension, the level of descriptions etc... out of communication.
    Which is why the point was made earlier it wouldn't be any good for literature, no one is arguing that it would.

    However for day-to-day communication it is fine, it does exactly what it needs to do and it does it better than the current method of writing (it's faster, and with two symbols can add context. It's also shorter for sites with character limits (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter) and for devices with small screens).


  • #89
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,243 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    bnt wrote: »
    You would expect that evolution would lead to improvements, but what we see is the opposite. When someone uses "where" instead of "were", that's not an improvement, it is just a mistake. Where there were two words, with two meanings, now there is just one word, and meaning has been lost.

    Quiet!


  • #90
    mconigol
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,583 ✭✭✭mconigol


    looksee wrote: »
    You cannot communicate unless there is agreement on the meaning of words and the use of grammar. Two kiddies may be able to communicate with each other, but if they wish to communicate with anyone who does not know their personal language then they have problems.

    It has become fashionable to use language as an expression of anarchy - we will speak/write anyway we wish and you can't do anything about it. In fact all that has happened is that an alternative language is evolving which it is 'cool' to use. Unfortunately it is not precise and does not permit communication on subjects other than personal relationships and interests.

    The people who use it are forcing themselves into a subculture that is unable to communicate in the world of employment, education, even social and consumer rights. People who are capable of communicating in standard English but use 'cool' English on Facebook and Twitter are exacerbating the problem.

    Boards is, thank goodness, making some effort to keep things literate. It would not be desirable to have grammar nazis picking on every detail so Spell Czechs is a great outlet for the grammatically picky ;)

    I don't agree that people consider it "cool" or feel that they are somehow using it as an expression of anarchy as you say. It is a means of communication that they find effective.

    Look at English a couple of hundred years ago and it won't be anything like the way we speak now.

    I think changes are happening now at an accelerated rate due to the widespread use of the internet and mobile communications where communication is less formal.

    Before we had the internet or mobile phones (not so long ago!) I used to write letters and if I was to write the same letter now but as an email there is no way I would use the same language or formality now as I did then because it would sound ridiculous.

    We're in a period of turmoil now and I reckon eventually there will be a common ground found. I'd have no problem envisaging that we are heading towards a global language in the future.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    slum dog
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 240 ✭✭slum dog


    endabob1 wrote: »
    It's basically the lowest common denominator argument, never argue with a fool because they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

    did you come up with that one yourself or was it necessary for you to consult the wisdom website?


Advertisement