birdlike 0 #101 September 2, 2008 Quote No. It's just like that. And always wl b. 4 sure. But the question I ask is, would you like it if you picked up a book or magazine or newspaper, and found the text written that way, or in the way kids are writing their telephone text messages? It's not standardized, it's not clear, and it takes more time to decipher when reading than standard writing does. The problem as I see it is that if kids in school are submitting papers that contain this garbage, they are indicating that they might not even have command of the RIGHT way to write. What does the future hold for them besides McJobs? All because parents and teachers and administrators are not insisting that students in their charge do as they are instructed, and they tolerate the "rebellion" instead. This is what I refer to as "the inmates running the asylum." Adults have ceded authority and the results will be disastrous in the end. "Every kid gets a trophy" mentality is dangerous and will have a serious backlash.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #102 September 2, 2008 QuoteI'm glad that English is such an absorbent and informally adoptive language without the official "academies" of dictatorial control like some others. - "Why he did dat?" Simpler than "Why did he do that?" The voiced "th" sound is more difficult for some than the voiced "d" sound. Many languages through time have gone through consonant shifts more extensive than that. - "What you said?" As opposed to the less simple "What did you say?" In some languages it would be literally "What said you?" Much simpler. - "My car run good!" In the present tense, the third person singular is the mutant exception and mostly needs an 's' at the end of the infinitive form. All other forms don't, and "run" is correct. It would be easier and better if English ends up dropping that mutation. So, "degeneration will be a blessing." I disagree. We could end up talking in grunts and snorts again -- think of how much simpler that would be than articulating glottals and what-all. If simplicity is the goal, rather than specificity, you would be right. But specificity in language is the blessing that our intellects have provided for us, and you appear to be saying that reversing it would be beneficial. I disagree. Quote- "Why it's like dat?" In a statement, the subject comes before the verb, but in a question like this it's reversed. Why? Would be easier if it was the same. Would be less specific if it were the same. And therefore not as good.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #103 September 2, 2008 Quote Your village called--their idiot is missing... I think I know where several of them are jumping at these days. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
misaltas 0 #104 September 2, 2008 >So, "degeneration will be a blessing." I disagree. So do I. Because that isn't what I said. >If simplicity is the goal, rather than specificity, you would be right. Then you're saying I'm right, because my examples described increased simplicity with no loss of specificity. a. Why is it like that? vs Why it is like that? b. Why he did that? vs Why did he do that? c. What said you? vs What did you say? d. My car run good. vs My car runs well. Zero loss of specificity. All components of the message in their proper tense and case are still there.Ohne Liebe sind wir nichts Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
misaltas 0 #105 September 2, 2008 QuoteSee? Misaltas has called people who care to speak and write properly "elitists". Hmm, not what I said. Plus, I didn't call anybody anything. IMO, people are free to use language in the best way they see fit. If you care to use what you learned to be "standard English", doesn't make you an elitist. It's simply your free choice. I applied the "elitist" label to the reasons behind why some criticize the way others use the language, when they're more concerned with preserving archaic and arbitrary rules above practicality of sending an effective message to a given audience using a given medium, or when they're resistant to language change just because that's the way they learned it, or that way is the way they associate with intelligent educated use.Ohne Liebe sind wir nichts Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #106 September 2, 2008 QuoteThis argument has NOTHING to do with race and everything to do with the current anti-education attitude that prevails in this country today. Sigh. I'm not sure if you're deliberately denying the obvious, or if you've actually convinced yourself of that. But because I've heard it so many times in my lifetime, to me the thrust of the OP was blatantly obvious: to cast aspersions on the dialect spoken in particular by uneducated black people, ostensibly for an "innocent" purpose, but in reality with a clearly racist agenda. Other similar examples in recent threads on DZ.com: - "Will the Negroes riot - as usual - if Obama loses?" - "Will the Negroes in New Orleans be lazy, shiftless welfare leeches and criminals YET AGAIN when Hurricane Gustav hits?" -The weekly (sometimes daily) diet of anti-Muslim threads. Racism and bigotry thinly-veiled is still racism and bigotry. I really wish people would stop insulting our intelligence to our faces by claiming that it's anything else. (I also wish that pigs would fly, which is about as likely.) I will now await the usual staple of horseshit rebuttals (keywords: "plausible deniability") and ad hominem diversions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #107 September 2, 2008 Quote Well, you're not -- as long as you continue spelling it that way! 2 nations separated by a common language !!! (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #108 September 2, 2008 ok fine. I'll admit. MY opinion on this thread has nothing to do with race. Degradation of language and a culture of anti-intellectualism, IMHO, has nothing to do with race. Hell, some of the people who are the strongest perpetrators of this "education = elitism" attitude are Caucasian. As i said in a previous post, when *I* read the OP, race did NOT cross *my* mind. But please, by all means, continue to tell me what I am *truly* thinking, I must have been mistaken before. By the way, if you are calling me a racist because I prefer to read or listen to articulate writing or speech, well, then, we have a different issue. Because then it would be YOU assuming that INarticulate speech or writing are dependent on race, not me. Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #109 September 2, 2008 Quote Quote See? Misaltas has called people who care to speak and write properly "elitists". Hmm, not what I said. Plus, I didn't call anybody anything. There's a technical term for what BikerBabe just did. It's called "boiling down your meaning." Quote IMO, people are free to use language in the best way they see fit. Is that what's happening? The kids and inner city urbanites who are butchering normal English are not in fact butchering it but are modfiying it according to a plan to make it more streamlined and efficient? Yeah, right. Quote I applied the "elitist" label to the reasons behind why some criticize the way others use the language... If we were truly elitist, we would be snobbish and condescending toward those who use the bastardized forms of English but wouldn't want them to join us in using the standard form. I would truly prefer it if everyone used a standard form of English and didn't, through laziness or ignorance or both, deform it and degrade it. That would mean fewer "lower class" people would be kept out of decent jobs because they made a shitty impression on the college-educated, articulate interviewer. Can't you see the good that would come from our society not being divided into "those who know" and "those who do not know"?Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #110 September 2, 2008 QuoteQuoteThis argument has NOTHING to do with race and everything to do with the current anti-education attitude that prevails in this country today. Sigh. I'm not sure if you're deliberately denying the obvious, or if you've actually convinced yourself of that. But because I've heard it so many times in my lifetime, to me the thrust of the OP was blatantly obvious: to cast aspersions on the dialect spoken in particular by uneducated black people, ostensibly for an "innocent" purpose, but in reality with a clearly racist agenda. Yes, in spite of my direct disavowal that it was race-based (which means you're just taking the long route to calling me a liar), and in spite of the fact that I stated clearly that there are whites and hispanics in my vicinity who do these very things I bemoaned. How do you manage to keep a straight face while so blatantly misrepresenting what you see? I just can't fathom it. Why do you continually misrepresent what I have said? QuoteOther similar examples in recent threads on DZ.com: - "Will the Negroes riot - as usual - if Obama loses?" - "Will the Negroes in New Orleans be lazy, shiftless welfare leeches and criminals YET AGAIN when Hurricane Gustav hits?" -The weekly (sometimes daily) diet of anti-Muslim threads. Did I start those threads?? I started this one. How do you attach the motivations for those threads to the motivation for this one?? QuoteRacism and bigotry thinly-veiled is still racism and bigotry. I really wish people would stop insulting our intelligence to our faces by claiming that it's anything else. (I also wish that pigs would fly, which is about as likely.) Imagine our consternation, as the people who know what our own motivations actually were, constantly having people such as you trumpeting that we are really just deplorable racists and are lying to cover it up. QuoteI will now await the usual staple of horseshit rebuttals (keywords: "plausible deniability") and ad hominem diversions. What ad hominem? If anything, you are the one making the veiled ad hominem attacks by pre-accusing any rebuttal of being "horseshit"!Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #111 September 2, 2008 Why on earth would you "wish" that pigs would fly? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #112 September 2, 2008 Quote That's ok, I'll say that an astronaut is more "elite" than a hip-hop artist. So you are approving the "elitism" that you think you are providing against the illiterate. Aren't you afraid they are going to accuse you of keeping them "down"? Isn't this what you don't like? Sounds like you just need a reason to bitch and hate. Quote they won't KNOW how to use the good skills! If they knew them, why don't they use them? Because their friends are impressed with their "rebelliousness"? When the junior types talk to me, they use the formal voice. When they talk to their peers, they use their language most similar to their culture. The kids today seem to know transition than you give them credit for. Quote "Can't" and "don't" and such are "legitimate" contractions. For a while, they weren't in dictionaries. Maybe "fo-shizzle will be in the "F" section next year. Quote No, but we'll have social unrest eventually (possibly) because of misplaced blame coming from the unread masses who want to claim the right to lead even though they are unread, and unskilled in the things they would need to know in order to lead well. No, it won't happen. Too Clive Cussler-esque. Civilization collapsing around because of people who don't have the initiative and drive to persue an education demanding to be in charge: too bad-fiction. The literate will be able to easily displace someone like that way before he rises to power. Quote There's a big difference between people who get offended when someone shows them the correct way, and someone who takes constructive criticism (or who at least makes an effort to be able to do so). Nope. There is a right way to talk to people; to help them learn to talk correctly to certain types of people without insulting and pissing them off. If they are offended, it's because you offended them. They dont think you are credible enough to warrant the right language. They think you are "down at their level"._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #113 September 2, 2008 QuoteQuote they won't KNOW how to use the good skills! If they knew them, why don't they use them? Because their friends are impressed with their "rebelliousness"? When the junior types talk to me, they use the formal voice. When they talk to their peers, they use their language most similar to their culture. The kids today seem to know transition than you give them credit for. Then why is it reported fact that they are submitting school essays and papers that are being rejected by teachers for being composed of this bullshit "l33tspeak" crap? QuoteQuote"Can't" and "don't" and such are "legitimate" contractions. For a while, they weren't in dictionaries. Maybe "fo-shizzle will be in the "F" section next year. More's the pity. QuoteQuoteNo, but we'll have social unrest eventually (possibly) because of misplaced blame coming from the unread masses who want to claim the right to lead even though they are unread, and unskilled in the things they would need to know in order to lead well. No, it won't happen. Too Clive Cussler-esque. Civilization collapsing around because of people who don't have the initiative and drive to persue an education demanding to be in charge: too bad-fiction. The literate will be able to easily displace someone like that way before he rises to power. This is why I said that you folks are evidently IN FAVOR of the caste-system-esque thing we have going on right now. The low, street-folks who talk with dese and dem and dose and ain't and a'ight and foshizzle and "why you did dat" will stay low and NOT IN POWER all the while the educated "elite" will remain in power, and the Non-Star-Bellied Sneetches will continue to bitch that they are disenfranchised and KEPT out of the power loop... It just backs up what I was saying. I thought that YOU were saying that it's not a problem for them to remain ignorant and to talk fucked up. QuoteQuoteThere's a big difference between people who get offended when someone shows them the correct way, and someone who takes constructive criticism (or who at least makes an effort to be able to do so). Nope. There is a right way to talk to people; to help them learn to talk correctly to certain types of people without insulting and pissing them off. If they are offended, it's because you offended them. But kids are not taught IN SCHOOL to talk in these bastardized ways. The books don't contain sentences to copy, that say, "Bobby, he try to climb dem monkey bars, but he ain't did dat before." Now, there are people who, if I were to go up to them and talk the way I normally talk (which some would call "educated"), would TAKE OFFENSE and probably mock me back to my face and attempt to affect my "accent" -- because of a mistaken belief that I am, just by virtue of being myself, trying to insult them. This is not because of what I am actually doing, but because of THEIR OWN IGNORANCE.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #114 September 2, 2008 Those that worry about the impact to the future of our society by the morons who can't speak the language - - DON'T PANIC. Don't even worry. The chances that the gangsta rapin, trash talkin crowd will have any long term effect on anything of significance is pretty much nil. What they effect is popular culture, and pop culture is what effects them. They are chasing cool in a blindered feedback loop without realizing that by attaining it they have lost it. But that is what most young people do. They'll grow up eventually; and find out that cool is defined internally, not by copying somebody else; even if it was the hottest, and also the coolest video they'd seen in days. Those that don't grow up end up on the fringes as prisoners, street people, French Foreign Legion, etc. Most kids make it out the other end alive and well; though I will acknowledge that the size of the prison population indicates that whatever my "most" is, it could stand for some improvement." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #115 September 2, 2008 Quote Those that worry about the impact to the future of our society by the morons who can't speak the language - - DON'T PANIC. Don't even worry. Spoken like a man who has not watched the film Idiocracy Watch it, and see if you can argue with what they're saying about the outbreeding that stupid people are doing over smart people. Quote Those that don't grow up end up on the fringes as prisoners, street people, French Foreign Legion, etc. In case you were not aware, we have a record number of people in prison, and every city of any appreciable size has a significant problem with homeless "street people," although I'm not up on the numbers regarding French Legionnaires. (But Legionnaires Disease pops up on the cruise ships running out of Miami every now and then)... There are those who believe that the decadent nature of this pop-culture, combined perhaps with the way people take it with them and feed it to themselves almost intravenously in our modern age, has a lot to do with the burgeoning prison population, or slipping place in the world (far fewer graduates in tech and science fields, for starters, than lots of other countries)...Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #116 September 2, 2008 Quote[ In case you were not aware, we have a record number of people in prison, and every city of any appreciable size has a significant problem with homeless "street people," ... Yes, a problem dating back to Reagan's absurd policies concerning people unable to take care of themselves. So now it's either the streets or prison.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #117 September 2, 2008 Quote Quote [ In case you were not aware, we have a record number of people in prison, and every city of any appreciable size has a significant problem with homeless "street people," ... Yes, a problem dating back to Reagan's absurd policies concerning people unable to take care of themselves. So now it's either the streets or prison. We've had, um, one two three different administrations since then, one of them Democrat, and even some Democrat-controlled Congresses... None of them took care of the problem, or had the opportunity to correct whatever it is you say Reagan screwed up? In all that time, it's still down to blaming Reagan, and not whoever did not fix it?! Do you see yet why we say that Democrats would rather bitch about who caused a problem than solve it?! Because the homeless we see, many of them weren't even BORN when Reagan was in office, man. These are people who became homeless long after Reagan's policies. Are you really telling us that they could not be reversed by anyone who cared to make the attempt? Say, a compassionate Democrat president and man of the people who "feels people's pain"? Nothing? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pendejo 0 #118 September 2, 2008 Quote I have been hearing more and more people talking in this way: - "Why he did dat?" - "What you said?" - "My car run good!" - "Why it's like dat?" They are asking questions, in most cases, but not phrasing them as questions. They add the interrogative inflection, yes, but the syntax is what one would use when making a statement. At work, in an office environment, a woman left her wedding/engagement rings in the washroom and later, the hunt was on for them. I heard the woman who found them telling another woman that she had done so: "Hey, yo, I found that lady ring." NO possessives. NO plurals. What is happening to this language?! To this culture?! Don’t worry, our President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho has his man Not Sure on the case! Using his three step plan he will fix all the fucked up shit! Pendejo He who swoops the ditch and does not get out buys the BEER!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #119 September 2, 2008 Quote Don’t worry, our President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho has his man Not Sure on the case! Using his three step plan he will fix all the fucked up shit! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #120 September 2, 2008 Quote Don’t worry, our President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho has his man Not Sure on the case! Using his three step plan he will fix all the fucked up shit! AS the Brits say... Brilliant Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #121 September 2, 2008 Quote Quote Quote [ In case you were not aware, we have a record number of people in prison, and every city of any appreciable size has a significant problem with homeless "street people," ... Yes, a problem dating back to Reagan's absurd policies concerning people unable to take care of themselves. So now it's either the streets or prison. We've had, um, one two three different administrations since then, one of them Democrat, and even some Democrat-controlled Congresses... None of them took care of the problem, or had the opportunity to correct whatever it is you say Reagan screwed up? In all that time, it's still down to blaming Reagan, and not whoever did not fix it?! Do you see yet why we say that Democrats would rather bitch about who caused a problem than solve it?! Because the homeless we see, many of them weren't even BORN when Reagan was in office, man. These are people who became homeless long after Reagan's policies. Are you really telling us that they could not be reversed by anyone who cared to make the attempt? Say, a compassionate Democrat president and man of the people who "feels people's pain"? Nothing? Having a little trouble with the old reading comprehension this morning, Jeffrey? And you claim to be a proofreader too.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #122 September 2, 2008 Quote Having a little trouble with the old reading comprehension this morning, Jeffrey? And you claim to be a proofreader too. Hey, I survived the layoffs. I must be good for something. But here, I'm obviously deficient. Would you mind pointing out where my reading error must have taken place? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #123 September 2, 2008 Quote Quote Having a little trouble with the old reading comprehension this morning, Jeffrey? And you claim to be a proofreader too. I'm obviously deficient. Would you mind pointing out where my reading error must have taken place? I simply indicated the origin of the problem, accurately. No need for you to get your blood pressure raised even further. In fact I agree that failing to fix it is a deficiency of both parties.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #124 September 2, 2008 He totally dissed my Peaceful comment...think the Jeffrey will get anything? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #125 September 2, 2008 Quote He totally dissed my Peaceful comment...think the Jeffrey will get anything? What are you talking about? I didn't diss anything... If you thought you saw it, it wasn't meant...Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
