Re: OT-ish: txt - Could it replace Standard Written English?

On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 11:29:09AM -0500, Mike Ellis wrote:
> Tristan wrote:
>
> >Mike Ellis wrote:
> >> "We don't correct spelling. It hinders students' creativity."
[snip]

IMAO, creativity does not come from sloppiness. True creativity is not
hindered by discipline; rather, discipline enables it to develop and
flourish.

>   The sad thing is that the attitude I quoted above is actually catching
> on. The result is that the kids, by not being forced to learn the right way
> to spell, have more difficulty learning to *read* the language. That's why
> they don't bother reading books for enjoyment anymore. We set them up for
> illiteracy from the start.
Exactly. I find these "correcting X hinders Y" arguments extremely
ludicrous.

[snip]
> >The written language is the tool of the people, not vice-versa.
>
>   So anything the kids use between themselves is correct? Should the class
> teach the teacher how to spell? They are after all, on the cutting edge of
> what's current in the language. I don't think so. If correct use of the
> language and spelling are not criteria for grading an English assignment,
> what criteria are there at all? Remember we're talking about English class,
> not Creative Writing.
Every famous composer got to where they did by first learning the current
state of the art. Many composers eventually depart from the traditional
music framework they grew up in (eg. Beethoven, Stravinsky, etc.), but if
they had never learned the basics to begin with, they'd never have gotten
where they did.

This whole "don't teach them, let 'em be the way they are" philosophy is
just ludicrous. You need a foundation before you can build a house. At
least if you don't want it to collapse on your head.  Everyone needs to
learn the basics before they can develop on their own.  Of course, they
should be given the freedom to explore once they attain to that stage; but
not giving them a solid foundation first is like feeding steak to a
newborn.

Or like not watering a plant, since that would impede its ability to
create new ways of growing. You'll kill off everything except the
cactuses...  which perhaps explains why a lot of people are such pricks
nowadays.

[snip]
> >Ah, but the method is more important than the answers! :P
>
> Without the correct answers, you still fail the test. Try it.
To ste^H^H^Hquote Tom Lehrer: "... but in the new approach, as you know,
the important thing is to understand what you're doing _rather_ than to
get the right answer. ...  [emphasis mine]

"And so you have thirteen tens,
And you take away seven,
And that leaves five...

"Well, six actually.
But ... the idea is the important thing."

[snip]
>   The problem is not correction alone, it's correction between people who
> don't actually know what a subject or an object *is*. These things are not
> taught anymore.
Indeed. Who needs grammar, she's way too old and when she croaks we get
her money, so... oh wait, you're talking about GRAMMAR? As in, that stuff
English professors spend their life arguing over? Oh.

>   When people do not know how thier language works, it is more difficult to
> learn how other languages work.
What? is yes from maybe not perceive me from words speak you thus, the
other speakings cause to hanky-panky thus?

['scuse me for the lapse into Ebisedian mode...]

> Back in grade ten (yes, that is what tenth grade is called here, don't
> even *think* about that tangent) I had to give up trying to explain
> Japanese word order to a fellow student who had been asking me some
> questions about the language. He didn't know what subject and object
> are.  His *universe* was SVO, and English word order was to him the
> correct chronological representation of events. "Well why don't they
> just say it the right way around, so you don't have to remember all that
> stuff?" Sigh.
*Gasp!* You mean there are people in the world who think differently??
*shocked*

[snip]
>   I graduated high school with a couple hundred people of my age, who have
> been through the same school system as I have, but they do not know what
> their own language is or how it works. They read -- when forced, since
> nobody reads for pleasure -- at a level once considered appropriate for
> elementary school.
Yep. Boasting 100% Graduation Rate, Satisfaction Guaranteed! Increasing
Success By Lowering Expectations! Increasing College Admissions By
Inflating Grades!

[snip]
> not the point. To bring a child up in a culture where everything is written
> in a certain language and not teach him to read that language is cruel. You
> set him up for failure. Can you imagine this kid's resume?
[snip]

That explains a lot of the passionate pleadings for employment which gets
passed around as resumes these days. Pleeze hair me, I tipe goot, I now
hte inernet two.

(P.S. Just in case you didn't know, this message is SOOO not imbued with
sarcasm. :-P)


T

--
Exaggerate?! I have never, *ever* exaggerated in my whole entire life, not
even 0.000001 times!

Replies