Klarinet Archive - Posting 000180.txt from 2000/10

From: "Dee D. Hays" <deehays@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Language - A Viewpoint
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 21:34:58 -0400

----- Original Message -----
From: "redcedar" <redcedar@-----.au>
Subject: [kl] Language - A Viewpoint

> It has been my misfortune to be chastised twice in recent weeks for
alleged
> inappropriate use of language on two different Internet lists.
>

Language is indeed a difficult problem since, as you mention below,
different areas of the world will interpret phrases based on the usage in
their own areas.

> [snip] We are often challenged in the posts on this list by language which
seems
> inappropriate in context, or frankly confrontational. When one of our
> Continental European or South American posters occasionally mis-express
> themselves in English with sometimes offensive consequences, I don't
recall
> that we leap on the "offender" and tear him/her apart. Yet, when those
with
> English as their first language appear to offend, we often don't offer any
> recourse, but invariably take offence as the first line of defence, and
beat
> him up. There is usually little evidence of a "standing-back" and
> contemplating whether we have misunderstood the "foreign" idea, or the
> writer's intent, or the idiomatic use of language.
>

Unfortunately very true. It is all too common to assume that the correct
usage is that of our own background and experience. We expect non-native
speakers to make mistakes. What we do not always realize is that English
does have a great deal of variety among its native speakers and locations.

> [snip] Interestingly, for
> centuries, before the computer age, we've written one another letters
> without resort to the graphic modifiers, although no doubt there is a
> lurking historian who may point to some letter's misunderstood language
> which sparked a war, or three. But I digress.
>

In the pre-email days, a person's letters generally fell into two (very
broad) basic categories. One was strictly personal, such as to friends and
family, and the people writing each other were generally using the language
the same way or knew each other well enough that differences were unlikely
to be miscontrued. The second category was basically business, both
personal and commercial. Here a very formal English was the norm since the
parties wanted to minimize the possibility of misunderstanding.

By contrast, look at our world today. Here we are exchanging casual notes
with people we've never met. We may have no idea where they come from or
what casual day to day English is like in their area. This creates numerous
chances to be misunderstood.

Dee Hays

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org