Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page
Ha Ha, 'The Sun' doesn't get the good grace of being mentioned, it isn't even a paper, it is a gossip rag.
I agree with all your points and would like to point out that grammatical laziness in England started when MSN Messenger (AIM, Yahoo Messenger etc.) came out. There was a boom of people using IM programs and I can even remember when 'lol' hit the mainstream and people started saying it in school- 'el-oh-el' *rolls eyes*
Point being that this instant messaging fad spilled over into 'txting' (the gross overuse of text messages on mobile phones to communicate what a phone call could easily do.) Every single teenager in UK has a mobile phone and a laptop and they all use MSN and txting; as a result they 'forgot' how to write properly. Also let us consider how many assignments, essays and homeworks are done on a word processor which auto corrects spelling and grammar.
When using Microsoft Word's auto spelling and grammar check, who actually looks to see what is wrong with a spelling? Not only do the mistakes get corrected for them but they don't even learn what the mistake is that's being corrected, this must have an impact as well.
But on the up-side have you seen a book- 'Eats, shoots and leaves'? A very lighthearted look at the grammar Nazi's state of mind; what I find most interesting is the artful preservation of grammar and writing that the book implements- and art which I think is sadly being lost.
I think the same people who may be the main culprits of lexical pollution on internet forums may be people who are at least exploring language. Things change I guess- I will be most interested to see what the next couple of generations get up to, especially with regards to handwriting, use of word processors, texting and IM'in.
So you like the 'thought experiment' idea? Some of them are just popular paradoxes, some classic 'thinking puzzles' and a few originals- regardless they are all quite provocative. I also got another similar collection of paradoxes called 'Can a Robot be Human?' so if you want anymore just ask .
Dan.
Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, 'I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so'. Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:[INDENT] 'While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.'
[/INDENT]
Urgh, how do we go about getting better at forming our own oppinions? that sounds liek a tought nut to crack .
Dan.