I think you really hit the nail on the head here, Jim, where having your errors pointed out to you so you can correct them can greatly reduce the prevalence of this issue. My sister and I were emailing back and forth a few years ago and she used ‘your’ when she should have used ‘you’re’. She is a teacher – I reminded her that she’s responsible for shaping young minds and should know better. She made it through five years of post-secondary studies without being corrected, and so have many of my peers. Social media has definitely had an impact on the way we communicate, there is absolutely no question, but not knowing you’re even making an error is a fundamental issue here. Taking a few grammar lessons in elementary school is not enough; the lessons need to be consistently reinforced (which I suspect isn’t done because some teachers may not know, either). Apologies for sounding rather melodramatic, but the future of the English language is dependent upon it.
_________________________________________________________________Comment #3
Video credit YouTube
The article I responded to can be found here.
Reading this article conjured up a rather unpleasant memory from when I first started working with the military. The jargon use was extreme and I was constantly referring back to an online guide to understand what the heck people were saying. There was one acronym I couldn’t find, “PA”, but it was rarely used and I never bothered to ask about it. Fast forward five years and it came up again, so I had to ask. You know what it means?! Put away…seriously. I still have no idea why someone thought it was necessary, or a good idea, to ‘acronym-ize’ it. The problem with Ћ is that there is nothing easy about it. Both “@ and &” can be written without lifting your pen off a piece of paper, so they do save time. Unless it has a dedicated key, Ctrl + X, or Shift + X would take longer to type than, “the” (never mind Alt + XXXX). It’s a bad idea almost any way you look at it, but if you must abbreviate it why not use the shorthand version?
Reading this article conjured up a rather unpleasant memory from when I first started working with the military. The jargon use was extreme and I was constantly referring back to an online guide to understand what the heck people were saying. There was one acronym I couldn’t find, “PA”, but it was rarely used and I never bothered to ask about it. Fast forward five years and it came up again, so I had to ask. You know what it means?! Put away…seriously. I still have no idea why someone thought it was necessary, or a good idea, to ‘acronym-ize’ it. The problem with Ћ is that there is nothing easy about it. Both “@ and &” can be written without lifting your pen off a piece of paper, so they do save time. Unless it has a dedicated key, Ctrl + X, or Shift + X would take longer to type than, “the” (never mind Alt + XXXX). It’s a bad idea almost any way you look at it, but if you must abbreviate it why not use the shorthand version?
____________________________________________________________
Comment #2
 |
| Image credit |
The article I responded to can be found here.
I would have to agree, Shelley, that It is quite disconcerting how quickly many of her sponsors have jumped ship, especially after she helped make them household names (Smithfield, anyone?). The Paula Deen fiasco and Walmart slip-ups are/were handled very differently, and there is a very valuable PR lesson there. When people or brands mess up (usually) the best thing to do is to acknowledge the goof, sincerely apologize, attempt to make it right, and then lay low to regroup and move on. People know you can’t draw blood from stone, but until they feel there is some real sincerity in your apology they will relentlessly attack you to drain those last drops. Paula Deen acted against/without the advice of a publicist (she's hired Judy Smith now), and there was fallout. Guaranteed Walmart has an iron-clad PR team and they work well together. Having a strong PR team does not absolve horrible actions, but it does impact the time spent on the media firing range.
_________________________________________________________________
Comment # 1
 |
| Where's the gargantuan word love? Image credit |
I found this article through PR Daily, and find it very relevant for writers from all disciplines. And you definitely hit the nail on the head with simplicity being paramount (wish this study had been done when "The Communist Manifesto" was written). The results from the study are not surprising at all, but may be over-simplifying the issue. If writers keep some of the points below in mind before they hit send/print their audience shouldn't place their intelligence in question.
* Know your audience and consider your medium. If you are unsure of whom your full audience is then write for the ‘lowest common denominator.’
* Your reader’s time is valuable – no one wants to read fluff. People throw large words around when their content is lacking, and it doesn’t fool anyone. If you have great content throwing in a large (appropriate) word can really add value.
* Buried verbs, overuse of passive voice and incorrect agreement really make EVERYTHING difficult to read, and are usually the real culprits. Always double-check your grammar, and then check it again!
According to Oxford Dictionary there are approximately two hundred and fifty thousand words in the English language – if you cannot flex your lexis bank while writing, where do you do it?
Great article - thank you for sharing it!
No comments:
Post a Comment