 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-09-10 15:29
I don't allow people to point out spelling corrections on this BBoard for a number of reasons. Here are a few of the reasons:
1) It's hard enough to write a post that has the possibility of thousands of people reading it. Why make things worse for the poster?
2) Some people are relatively good spellers but have "problem words" that they can't ever seem to get right.
3) There's enough junk posts without adding more meaningless ones.
4) Have you ever misspelled a word? Do you want to be publically called out on it every time?
If you're replying to the post to try and answer the question raised, by all means correct the title (if a word was misspelled there) and use the correct spelling in the body. I don't personally like the abbreviations used in Instant Messaging being carried over into a text post (where there isn't the same immediacy) but that's only my opinion and has nothing to do with the exchange of ideas here.
People can learn by example. Causing people to be fearful of posting for something like poor spelling (or grammar) keeps them away and causes a loss for all.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sandra F. H.
Date: 2002-09-10 17:34
Hi Everyone! I can spell quite well, but sometimes I don't see an uncorrected typing error until after I've posted. There are ways to correct an error without making the error the focus of your answer to a question. Thank you Mark!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw
Date: 2002-09-10 17:57
I was an editor for several years, and I'm as much annoyed as anyone by misspellings and bad grammar. Even more by non-use of capital letters or bits of 1337speak, which to me are simply showing off or being deliberately difficult. However, as I got more experience as an editor, I became easier and easier about letting writers have their own voices, as long as a reader wouldn't be brought up short.
I'd prefer that all the messages here fit "standard English" spelling and usage, and as those of you who read my posts know, I'm fussy about my own writing. I keep Word running. If I come across one of my problem words (obbligato, hindrance, embarrass), and before I post a message, I paste the entire thing into Word, which highlights the misspellings. Unfortunately, I can't compose the messages in Word, since when they're pasted into Explorer, they have non-ASCII characters that get rejected or don't reproduce right on the board.
I agree with Mark that messages that are easily understood should be criticized. That doesn't mean that I'm not a bit distracted by bad spelling and grammar. I'm even a little pissed at the lack of care of a few posters
I would appreciate it, though, if Mark added "definitely" (with no "a" for the 3rd vowel) to the Psst list.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2002-09-10 18:01
Thanks for the reminder, Mark. It is, after all, the Thought that counts. Spelling and grammar are secondary, in my opinion, to freedom of expression. This is the last place anyone should feel intimidated or fearful of.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-09-10 18:19
Ken Shaw wrote:
> I would appreciate it, though, if Mark added "definitely" (with
> no "a" for the 3rd vowel) to the Psst list.
Zing! I felt that ...
I was thinking of attempting to integrate new posts with pspell to let the computer double check your spelling before you post (you could always decide to ignore pspell's suggestions) but just don't have the time.
If any of you have the time & skill (this BBoard is coded in PHP4 & MySQL) let me know and I'll let you have at it in a protected environment. Please, though, only if you really posses the skills necessary. I don't have the time to mentor a new programmer, even though I'd love to.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bob gardner
Date: 2002-09-10 19:44
If you want to know the correct anything--- it is quite easy------ask my wife-----she know everything--- don't you dear
WHAT
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ron b
Date: 2002-09-10 19:49
BOB !!! WATC...... (o u t . . . )
...ohhhh, no. poor bob. he was such a nice fella too :|
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2002-09-10 23:08
Ken, most of the time I am a bit lazy - reword that 'have higher priorities in life' - but others, particularly when I have written what I think is a gem worthy of preservation, I use the spell check as you do.
However I do without using Word as such, which takes too long to get going, but within Outlook as a 'new' email. If does a spelling check but admittedly does not check grammar.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: spf
Date: 2002-09-11 03:16
Mark,
Thank you! And again thank you!
For Ken Shaw (et al.):
This is a clarinet board, not a spelling board. Nor is it a grammer board. There are several people that post here that do not speak english as a first language. Could we do so well?
Ken - great technique with Word. A bit of an overkill (IMHO) for an informal board used to discuss "clarinet." But knock yourself out if you want. I'll use it for e-mailing my boss in the future... but not here.
My 2 cents.
spf
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: spf
Date: 2002-09-11 03:28
p.s.
(tongue planted firmly in cheek)
Ken, after reading the "Perfect Pitch" thread, I suspect you are cursed with Perfect Spelling. I wonder if the perfect pitch folks are equally distracted and even a bit pissed at our imperfections.
Hmmm...
spf
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Kelly - Australia
Date: 2002-09-11 05:18
"For Ken Shaw (et al.):
This is a clarinet board, not a spelling board. Nor is it a grammer board. There are several people that post here that do not speak english as a first language. Could we do so well?"
I can understand the situation regarding those people where the principal language is other than English - but for those who are supposed to have learned English as their principal tongue -it's not really asking much to get them to use it correctly. One assumes that because they are playing/studying/have an interest in clarinet that they also have a reasonable command of the language and therefore if they want serious replies to their postings then their questions should be understandable.
I recall an earlier post where the person [name escapes me] was asking about loving her clarinet [I think] and although I read the post a number of times, I really did not know what it was all about!!?? I did attempt to correct her and I should have realised that this was a futile exercise on my part - anyway, I get the general message.
From now on I will reply only to posts of an obvious musical nature.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robert
Date: 2002-09-11 06:53
I'm the idiot who drew attention to a spelling mistake on the BB, and I'm feeling really bad about it. I thought I was being funny at the time, but I obviously wasn't. I certainly wouldn't want anybody to draw attention to my spelling mistakes, and I'm sorry that I did that to Cindy.
Please accept my sincere apologies!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: drc
Date: 2002-09-11 12:50
Have you ever misspelled a word? Do you want to be publically called out on it every time?
Just for the record, most dictionaries go with "publicly."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2002-09-11 14:09
Speling is only important when missinterpretation might ocur.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-09-11 14:48
drc wrote:
>
> Have you ever misspelled a word? Do you want to be
> publically called out on it every time?
>
>
> Just for the record, most dictionaries go with "publicly."
Just for the record - most dictionaries (at least the good ones) list publically as a perfectly good variant spelling. Check the O.E.D. (assuming you know what that is ...)
You illustrate my point on posts cluttering up the BBoard exactly. I have to go through the process of telling you that you've no business trying to correct a word that's already spelled correctly.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: drc
Date: 2002-09-11 17:41
Mr. Charette,
As the holder of a Ph.D. in English, and a professor of English at a major state university for almost thirty years, I will assure you that I indeed know what the OED is. And I will also tell you, again, that many dictionaries do not in fact recognize the spelling you use. Even a source as banal as Microsoft Word will recognize that and attempt to correct you if you type it in. The OED, as I'm sure you know because, after all, you play the clarinet, simply records and documents usage. It is not prescriptive, and most dictionaries don't intend to be. Usage is not a matter of being "right"; it's a matter of knowing what is preferred. If you want to go through life spelling the word your way, do so.
I'm not certain why this issue provokes so much rancor. In any case, I'm gone. You can have the last word on "your" list, and won't have to spend any time telling me what my business is. You, by the way, are the person who started the thread on spelling.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Stéphane
Date: 2002-09-11 19:37
Dear Bboarders,
Being French, English is obviously not my first language, and some of you might be aware of the terrible reputation that we frenchies have when it comes to foreign idioms! In that regard, it will happen to me pretty often to mispell some words.
I can remember one thread I initiated in the past about "dissembling a clarinet" where I obviously meant "disassembling". Perfect exemple of what we call "faux-amis" in French. Beejay (I think that was him) kindly sent me an email to point it out, correcting me in a very gentle way, and making me aware of the potential misinterpretation my mispelling could provoke. I think this is the right attitude as my prime objective (besides attempting to practice good english) was to make myself understood. Correcting is always welcome when it serves the idea and is being done with manners.
Stéphane.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-09-11 19:49
drc wrote:
> I'm not certain why this issue provokes so much rancor.
People like you do - I asked that spelling errors (or, indeed, a spelling that has been in existence for some time and is acceptable) not be pointed out. You chose to ignore a simple directive.
> In any
> case, I'm gone. You can have the last word on "your" list, and
> won't have to spend any time telling me what my business is.
> You, by the way, are the person who started the thread on
> spelling.
Correct. It's "my" list, and I have some simple rules. Your post was objectionable to me.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hans
Date: 2002-09-11 20:39
I do not understand what is the use of people pointing out spelling errors on the BBoard. It is a discussion group about clarinets, not about spelling. Let's just focuss on clarinetting and let us all be friends!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Hans
Date: 2002-09-11 20:40
By the way, sorry if I made any spelling mistakes, I am Dutch.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: d dow
Date: 2002-09-11 22:03
My spelling is horrific, and to add to this here in Canada we use traditional English spelling for example "colour" instead of the more familiar American "color." So when on this board I sometimes note that I am spelling things maybe not as uniformly as I should.....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Pegel
Date: 2002-09-11 23:03
What about typing errors, "finger dyslexia"? I've often been typing for so long that I tend to switch letters. We could go on ofr ages.
FOR ages. Sorry. But that's my point.
I still got what I wanted across, didn't I?
Half the people I know couldn't spell things correctly first try anyway!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw
Date: 2002-09-12 17:25
drc -
Well, you asked for it.
I'm a graduate of UTK, where I was an English major. I have been a copy editor for Random House (college texts), Appleton-Century-Crofts (college texts), Macmillan (trade books), Schirmer Books (music texts) and Chappell (music). I'm also a lawyer and have taught legal writing.
Since you're fussy about usage, I suggest that the comma after the word "English" in the first sentence of your posting should not be there. Perhaps you initially left it out, but recognized that a comma was required after "years." Then you went back to surround the phrase with commas. However, the second phrase not an appositive but part of a compound subject, and the first comma is unnecessary and incorrect.
Preferred usage is to spell out numbers under 10 and use numerals for 10 and above. Thus, write "30 years," not "thirty years."
You begin your second sentence with "And," although prescriptive usage condemns this. Would you question it on a student's paper? My editorial sense is to allow it, since it matches your formal tone, but a careful writer would probably omit it.
You end your third sentence with a preposition. While the rule against this is not well founded, my own preference is to avoid even the appearance of bad usage, and you could easily have left "in" out.
In the third sentence of paragraph two, the comma after "list" is grammatically incorrect, since the following phrase has no subject. A compound sentence takes a comma, but a compound predicate does not.
When you say "most dictionaries don't intend to be," you commit the intentional fallacy. A dictionary has no intentions. Only dictionary makers do.
I'm sure you use Strunk and White, yet you frequently violate Rule 13, "Omit needless words":
>>As the holder of a Ph.D. in English, and a professor of English at a major state university for [almost] [thirty] 30 years, I [will] assure you that I [indeed] know what the OED is. [And] I [will] [also] tell you[, again,] that many dictionaries do not [in fact] recognize the spelling you use. Even a source as banal as Microsoft Word will recognize that and [attempt to] correct you if you type it [in]. The OED, as I'm sure you know because, after all, you play the clarinet, [simply] records and documents usage. It is not prescriptive, and most dictionaries don't intend to be. Usage is not a matter of being "right"; it's a matter of knowing what is preferred. If you want to go through life spelling the word your way, do so.
>>I'm not certain why this issue provokes [so much] rancor. [In any case,] I'm gone. You [can] have the last word on "your" list, and won't have to spend [any] time telling me [what] my business [is]. You[, by the way,] [are the person who] started the thread on spelling.
You contradict yourself twice. If the OED is both authoritative and descriptive, and most other dictionaries are the same, you can't condemn an alternative spelling recognized by those dictionaries. And if the Microsoft Word proofreader is banal, it's scarcely an authoritative source of prescriptive advice.
If I taught a composition course and got a student effort that read "I will also tell you, again," I would point out that "also" and "again" are redundant and that one, or preferably both, should come out. Wouldn't you do the same?
Finally, I suggest that as a rhetorician and stylist, your ear is not as acute as it might be.
-- "Holder" is a weak noun. The important words are "Ph.D." and "English." Why not say "I have a Ph.D. in English."
-- "[M]ajor state university" is vague. Why leave us guessing? Say "the University of Tennessee." Or are you afraid we might think UTK is more "football" than "major"?
-- Look again at your opening sentence: "As the holder of a Ph.D. in English, and a professor of English at a major state university for almost thirty years, I will assure you that I indeed know what the OED is." I think that like a wounded snake it drags its slow length along. (That's a quote, by the way.) You're (I suppose) a clarinetist. Where's your rhythm? You want your opening sentence to end with a bang. This is more of a whimper.
-- Worse, it's unsufferably pompous. Condescension earns no respect, even if you're right. And even if someone knows less than you, instruction is more likely to be effective if the learner is not treated like a Strasbourg goose.
-- In the second paragraph, you shift abruptly from formal to informal diction. Phrases such as "I will assure you" clash with "In any case, I'm gone." You surely intended the shift, but I suggest that it lurches.
Judging your work by Ph.D. standards, I give it a B-. When you submit a composition for public scrutiny, you need to be more careful.
P.S., You're not exactly out of here. You can run, but you can't hide. Your name is Don R. Cox, and you teach at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville. You've apparently been kicked upstairs to Associate Dean, perhaps because your publications are skimpy. As far as I can tell, you've written an annotated bibliography for Edwin Drood, collected a book of essays for the UT press on sexuality in Victorian literature, co-authored a book on crafting prose and co-authored book on "emblems of reality," all of which appear to be out of print.
P.P.S., When I was at UT, I subbed in the Knoxville Symphony. Do you? I think I could take you on as a clarinetist, too.
Best regards.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2002-09-12 20:18
...and for you folks scoring at home, they final score is:
Ken Shaw: 1
Don R Cox: 0 ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-09-12 21:46
To Mr. Shaw: As a general pedant who despite himself occasionally throws Strunk and White (is there a better reference on writing in English? I think not) out the window -- as you may have observed -- I do feel obligated to advise that the the term *post scriptum*, abbreviated "P. S.," means "after writing" and may be used at the foot of a completed document. The use of "P. S." within an editable document is both unwarranted and mildly preposterous, as you need not be finished with an electronic communication until it has been transmitted. Beyond that, usage of the term "P. S." presupposes utter completion of your thoughts prior to their being reduced to writing, thus "P. S." in proper usage may only follow the signature.
This should be in no way considered a denigration of your exciting epistle addressed to drc. It's just that... well... Geez, Ken, it's so much fun to scathe someone.
By the way, could someone tell me if "emblems of reality" might be a reference to semiotics, or did the writer have something other than that in mind?
Other than that, I am in awe of those who have posted comments relative to the contents of "most dictionaries." It's amazing to be in company of such lexicographers! Speaking for myself, likely would I be unable to consult "most dictionaries" over my entire lifetime. Why, I'd wager large sums that I've hardly scratched the surface, perhaps having some familiarity with no more than eight to ten percent of all the dictionaries of the English language. Hence, I am humbled.
I close with the observation that it seems a sad sign of our group that a simple request by Markthat we not criticize the spelling of others should draw so many responses. It would be far more practical to simply do it (or, more properly, *not* do it).
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: RonD
Date: 2002-09-12 23:29
How about starting a new b. board on the subject of grammar?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2002-09-12 23:57
Personally, I agree with Ken when he says "I agree with Mark that messages that are easily understood should be criticized." ;^)
Best regards,
jnk
who takes great relief in learning that he can go back to using "since" to refer to causality as well as chronology
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mary Vinquist
Date: 2002-09-13 01:19
...But you guys don't have to live with Ken. He does this to my writing all the time!
My favorite "axe" to grind is using "it's" to mean possessive rather than as the correct meaning of "it is".
Regards,
Mary Vinquist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2002-09-13 01:23
Mary - yes, that is plain bad English - in Australia, it is popular for the masses to say "yous" - failing to realise that you is both singular and plural. Also, my other pet peeve, linguistically, is when the word "were" is used about a company's acitvities: Boosey and Hawkes "were" asked to review ... hello? Boosey and Hawkes "was" is correct as there is only one Boosey and Hawkes.
Hops off his soap box.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-09-13 02:15
Mary Vinquist wrote:
>
> ...But you guys don't have to live with Ken. He does
> this to my writing all the time!
You "have" to live with Ken? I thought you wanted to!
;^)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joe
Date: 2002-09-13 17:56
......wad some power the giftie gie us to see ourselfs as others see us ...........
Joe.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-09-13 18:26
diz: in the southeastern United States, it was customary for a very great number of years to use "you" as singular and "you all" as plural. However, this quaint mannerism has become so corrupted over the last fifty years or so, I'm sure it is possible to hear someone saying "you all" in speaking to a single armadillo.
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken
Date: 2002-09-13 18:49
JMcAuley Wrote: "I'm sure it is possible to hear someone saying "you all" in speaking to a single armadillo."
--In Virginia, "you all" is a rolling silver box one rents to transport their rocking chairs, washing machines and Labradors across town....<;-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Todd Wees
Date: 2002-09-13 20:18
Mary V. --
Next time Ken is practicing (He does practice, doesn't he?), just say, "Honey [I'm assuming a certain relationship here.], I think you need to support your throat tones more." Or stuff a swab up the bell of his clarinet when he's not looking.
Todd W. :+))
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw
Date: 2002-09-13 22:17
To Mark and Todd -
Mary and I are kind of stuck on (and to) each other. We listen to each other's rants and think each other's thoughts. We met and knew within a week that we belonged together.
I stuff the swab up my bell by myself quite nicely.
Since this thread has scrolled off the first page, I'll add a final note to John, and then I'm out of here. Word processors don't make the P.S. obsolete. It's a separate section of a letter, with its own function -- adding a comment that's outside the ambit of the letter body. The P.S. to my epistle to Dr. drc was about him, not his message, and the P.P.S. was about me vs. him.
Anyway, Mark deserves great credit for putting up with all the show-offs. This thread is his richly deserved (and rarely taken) opportunity to say what's on his mind.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David
Date: 2002-09-14 00:57
Pretty unimportant, if you ask me (and why should you?) A spelling error is the author's own business, and is not the end of the world.
Who knows, it may not even be a linguistic problem, just being a little too quick with the left moose button?
Damn...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: spf
Date: 2002-09-19 03:26
John,
I am quite sure that "y'all" is singular in all cases.
In Texas EVERYBODY knows the plural is....
"all y'all".
spf
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
