Wait until this texting-crazy generation gets to grad school. They will not have
a clue how to write papers. Spell check doesn't catch all the errors. The
ability to write well about a topic is still one mark of an educated person.
Technology is great, but it should not cause society to sink to the lowest
possible education level.
Yep, because "Imma show you dat work" will work well for communication.
This reminds me of the "Eubonics" debate of a decade or so ago. Or, the
hysteria over the idea that English should be considered the "official"
language.Then, as now, my response was that to argue for a
relaxation or even the abandonment of language standards without considering the
effect it has on communication, the whole point of language, is very short
sighted.Producing irregular and thus potentially confusing words
because of multiple or even ad hoc spellings simply reduces their effectiveness
in doing their job of conveying ideas between people.Simply put, it
harms people to hobble them with a reduced ability to communicate. In so doing,
it harms society.
@ birder: The way you write would probably have not been considered acceptable
in the not too distant past - and would probably have been considered the mark
of an ill-educated individual.There was a time when not knowing
Latin meant you were uneducated.Standards change and what my parents
considered horrible is now more than acceptable.I actually semi
agree with you - spell and grammar check do not catch everything (although they
are getting better) so it is important to know how to write and spell without
relying on technology. But language does constantly evolve and the
more "common" usage is what survives.(And besides which,
grad school professors have been complaining since before the days of Plato that
"kids these days" are lazy and don't know how to properly form a
This is pathetic and really makes it questionably to the intelligence of these
teachers and government to streaming intelligence as a flat line measurement. A
teacher who thinks this has some credibility issues to even be in education. If
they think a smartphone (dumb-phones to the informed and educated) are
emblematic of low standards and knowledge that those are the lazy teachers we
need to remove from the schools as non performers and unskilled.
Next thing you know, they will teach our kids that they don't really need
to know how to do math.It seems like the elites are doing all they
can to ensure that the population is too ignorant to know that their lives could
@ Redshirt1701: According to my dad, people haven't been taught how to do
math properly since they have been allowed to use calculators to do it.I must say, I find it interesting that you would consider Sen. Aaron Osmond,
R-South Jordan, to be an elitist.
To "spring street" Senator Osmond isn't promoting dumbing down the
school cirriculum. We have a liberal elitist doing that. Removing the
compulsory element of education is not a bad thing. If you look at literacy, it
has gone DOWN since implementation of compulsory education. You could easily
argue that it is compulsory education that is creating more illiterate and
100101010101110110101 101010 11 1011101 1 10100101 101001 10101010101111
00011101 11 0100011010Since I've got to do it my phones way. I
think that is the way it does things. Not sure what it says though.
Hope it's nothing seriously bad. With my luck, I probably just insulted
my bosses wife or confessed to not paying taxes.
All language, whether informative, descriptive, figurative, allegoric, artistic,
or scientific should first of all not be full of ambiguity unless the ambiguity
is intended by the author. The pointless ambiguity of sloppy writing comes from
undisciplined thinking, not particularly poor language or grammar skills. Anyone
who wants to accomplish anything with their written or verbal language skills
needs first to understand logic--both deductive and inductive. Every sentence,
even if there is intentional ambiguity, should be meaningful and broadly
understandable (hopefully in the same way by different listeners). Otherwise it
is style without substance.If not, then all you have is the tripe we
are fed by the politicians on both sides of the aisle, the financiers who
deceive, and the feel-good rhetoricians who have no limits to the truths they
are willing to bend to get money or power.A common language is at
the core of the social contract, but we are getting closer to another Tower of
I think the professor has a point. Being able to spell correctly is a
consequence of having read a lot. Eventually you develop a feel for it - you may
not be 100% sure of how to spell something difficult, but you have this internal
alert when you see the wrong spelling so you keep correcting it until it looks
right and you will get it right most of the time even without the auto-correct.
But teaching specifically how to spell is a gimmick to make a person that has
not paid the price of reading appear as if he has, and in my opinion is a waste
of time.I remember learning a bunch of Russian spelling rules which
are as complex as US tax laws and still occasionally misspelling but my mom and
aunt could always get it right without the rules because over the course of
their lives they've read more than I have. In English I never bothered to
learn the rules - I just read.
re: Redshirt1701"It seems like the elites are doing all they can
to ensure that the population is too ignorant to know that their lives could be
better."Agreed. Its the whole bread & circuses mindset from
(if memory serves) Brave New World.