kallend 1,672 #51 February 9, 2013 QuoteI don't believe that to be the case here in SC. We have a very rare collection of superior intellect and perfect people here. Surely they have put you in your proper place a time or two, no? Age, eyesight, lighting, alcohol, humans. We ALL make mistakes. In everything we do. Most of us anyway. I don't think Wendy is referring to typos here. The issue is poor sentence construction, such that no-one except the writer is able to fathom what the sentence means.... 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
wmw999 2,166 #52 February 9, 2013 Nope, we all make typos, word-os and the like. Most people fix most of them. Some people have legitimate reading disabilities, some people aren't native English speakers. Most of both of them keep it simple enough. I honestly think that when you're talking about writing, the responsibility is more the writer's to articulate what they want to say, than it is for the reader to dig it out. That "dig it out" only happens with stuff assigned in school, and some instruction manuals. And even for those, there are Cliff Notes, and pictures Wendy P. There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #53 February 9, 2013 Quote the responsibility is more the writer's to articulate what they want to say, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,166 #54 February 9, 2013 Gender-neutral, ya know. But RWRATP (real writers rewrite around the problem). I'm just not a real writer. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #55 February 9, 2013 Quote Quote the responsibility is more the writer's to articulate what they want to say, "They" is acceptable in this case and has been for awhile in recognition of the fact English has no gender neutral personal pronoun. It sounds a bit odd, and isn't technically correct, but is acceptable.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #56 February 9, 2013 Quote English has no gender neutral personal pronoun. Not true. We call them "metrosexuals". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #57 February 9, 2013 QuoteQuote English has no gender neutral personal pronoun. Not true. We call them "metrosexuals". That's not a personal pronoun.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #58 February 9, 2013 Quote Gender-neutral, ya know. But RWRATP (real writers rewrite around the problem). I'm just not a real writer. Wendy P. If a writer has a problem with this, s/he can be inventive. Awkward, but gets the idea across.... 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
quade 3 #59 February 9, 2013 Quote If a writer has a problem with this, s/he can be inventive. Awkward, but gets the idea across. "S/he" is the world's shortest police murder report. Fairly gruesome if you think about it too. quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #60 February 9, 2013 Quote "But this about grammar and spelling I suspect not amount of copy." I can comprehend. Reason: I've been following along and know the context. So whose brain can't comprehend. Uh... no dude, you can comprehend because you know what you meant when you wrote it - which kinda gives you an unfair advantage, dontcha think?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #61 February 9, 2013 Quote Quote >I can comprehend. Reason: I've been following along and know the context. So >whose brain can't comprehend. Well, see, that's the point. If only the author understands it - it's piss poor writing. Everybody assumes you know what you wrote. The ability to write is the ability to let _others_ know what you are talking about. And as Wendy mentioned, if a poster can't do that, it doesn't really help their cause. I'm laughing. I said I can comprehend the sentence you composed, you as author, and me as reader. Look back up there. That's the sentence you composed with poor grammar. ...WTF? Dude, he's quoting you. You composed the sentence, he quoted it, and less than two hours later you stated that you could comprehend it. Of course you can!Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #62 February 9, 2013 QuoteQuote>And what writer carelessly composes a sentence so that the reader can't understand? After reading this forum - apparently a lot. An unintentional spelling error is not intended miscomunications. No, no, no. Stop it now. Seriously. "Carelessly composes a sentence..." implies that the result is incomprehensible to the reader because of lack of attention from the author. Intended miscommunication would be something the author does deliberately.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #63 February 9, 2013 QuoteQuoteYounger generations seeing paragraphs, well written or not, don't get read. This is exactly what this thread is about: What the holy hell does that mean? I'm still waiting for you to tell us what that sentence meant. It is incomprehensible. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #64 February 9, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteYounger generations seeing paragraphs, well written or not, don't get read. This is exactly what this thread is about: What the holy hell does that mean? I'm still waiting for you to tell us what that sentence meant. It is incomprehensible. As a person who can still just about get away with claiming membership of a younger generation, I believe he was trying to say something along the lines of "Me big hippo crate not right goode." Maybe.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,076 #65 February 9, 2013 Hi John, QuoteIf a writer has a problem with this, s/he can be inventive. I heard on the radio the other day that the Oregon legislature has a committee working on gender neutral terms to be used in all gov't documents. One example they cited was that Freshman would now be known as First Year Students. There were some others but I do not recall them. It will get interesting. The attempt is to get rid of all 'man' designations. JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #66 February 9, 2013 QuoteOne example they cited was that Freshman would now be known as First Year Students. What about the studentresses?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OHCHUTE 0 #67 February 9, 2013 'But this about grammar and spelling I suspect not amount of copy.' I get the idea and I understand but as a copywriter one might re-compose the sentence to read as follows: But, this thread is about grammar and spelling; not about the amount of typewritten copy. Or, more specific: Wendy's post was about grammar and spelling; not about the amount of typed words. When twits see a block of typewritten copy, their minds immediately turn off, and the copy is not read. It is the author's responsibility to publish a work that is easily understood. Not knowing who might read the prose, it is undetermined if the prose would be understood. I can tolerate a few misplaced words or misspellings; what is irksome are trolls who purposely misconstrue an authors prose to satisfy their egotistical motives. A different topic perhaps, for a different thread. If you fail to understand: please, by all means, give me a call. I perfectly understand: Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe. ceehiro. And more challenging reading here: http://crookedtimber.org/2003/09/16/word-salad/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,465 #68 February 10, 2013 >It is the author's responsibility to publish a work that is easily understood. Yep. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OHCHUTE 0 #69 February 10, 2013 Quote >It is the author's responsibility to publish a work that is easily understood. Yep. And cutting in this sentence is just as important: Not knowing who might read the prose, it is undetermined if the prose would be understood. Bravo: in this case it appears we have communications Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #70 February 10, 2013 Quote Quote >It is the author's responsibility to publish a work that is easily understood. Yep. And cutting in this sentence is just as important: Not knowing who might read the prose, it is undetermined if the prose would be understood. Bravo: in this case it appears we have communications The pile of shit you wrote in post #25 is still incomprehensible, and it has nothing to do with spelling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oldwomanc6 38 #71 February 10, 2013 Still laughing at you all . Just sayin'lisa WSCR 594 FB 1023 CBDB 9 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OHCHUTE 0 #72 February 10, 2013 Quote Quote Quote >It is the author's responsibility to publish a work that is easily understood. Yep. And cutting in this sentence is just as important: Not knowing who might read the prose, it is undetermined if the prose would be understood. Bravo: in this case it appears we have communications The pile of shit you wrote in post #25 is still incomprehensible, and it has nothing to do with spelling. Not knowing who might read the prose, it is undetermined if the prose would be understood. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,465 #73 February 10, 2013 >Not knowing who might read the prose, it is undetermined if the prose would be understood. True. If no one read it, no one would have misunderstood it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OHCHUTE 0 #74 February 10, 2013 Quote>Not knowing who might read the prose, it is undetermined if the prose would be understood. True. If no one read it, no one would have misunderstood it. We are only talking about people who read it. Dummy OK, then since you have no idea the prose will ever be read then why worry about grammar or spelling? 'laksdf;lajsfljaslfjal;sdjf ;lSKDNFLAJSDLFJASLJFLASJFLA ;LASDFLIIIOJ3EJ3POKVCVN Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,465 #75 February 10, 2013 >OK, then since you have no idea the prose will ever be read then why worry about >grammar or spelling? That explains a lot of your posts! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
