TubeNet

For the last seven months I have taken the role of an English expert in Vietnam. Recently, I finally got a position in which I can correct students' grammar in conversation as well as when they write essays. Surprisingly, Vietnamese high school students have a better grasp of the written English language than many posters in Internet forums.

Now I can tell you that English is a very difficult language. I am going on 50 years old and I still have trouble with it. It was the first language I learned and I still am not sure of all the spellings. Sometimes I get plural and singular agreements messed up.

But there are some things I see posters who have trouble with plurals, possessives, and simple spellings. Plural nouns and pronouns DO NOT HAVE APOSTROPHES. Posessive nouns ALWAYS HAVE APOSTROPHES. Those are the two big problems.

Some of my students say they make posts on Internet forums to practice their English. You might be surprised how good some of these read.

I was not an English major in college. And, honestly, for the first 23 years of my life, my own English grammar was pretty atrocious. I had a civilian friend when I was in the Army (from England) who set me straight. He was a teacher who was doing something in Berlin, Germany, which was very similar to what I am doing in Vietnam. When he criticized the way I talked and wrote, I thought he was just kidding me about the difference between British and American English. But he said, "No, Billy Jack. That's mainly about spelling. You have some real problems with grammar and agreement." So, I took it upon myself to learn English grammar well--even pronunciations. I never had a problem with spelling but what good was good spelling when my mechanics were completely in disarray?

Remember this: The most important class you take in school is whatever language in which you communicate. If you can't master that language you will have trouble with any other course you take in school--music, math, history, science, art, and even auto mechanics (you must communicate problems with cars to people who know nothing about them!)

One aspect of our language that's slighted in current "education" (if that's what to call it) is the basics of sentence construction. Quick--what's a "cognate object"? Can you give the pluperfect subjunctive of "to lie" (as in to assume the supine position)?

At times the stumble of one whose fluency is supposedly part of his job description can be very poignant. I read an article in the local fishwrapper this past week which addressed a legislative project to publish a list. The list would itemize the fifty corporations having the largest proportion of full-time employees collecting public welfare. The reporter opined that "...because of the enormity of its operations, Wal-Mart would almost certainly would claim a place near the top of the list".

The pro-business editors of our birdcage liner completely missed the gaffe.

It was appalling to read the number of supposedly educated writers who stated that "Saddam Hussein was hung". He may have been--but he died when he was hanged.

.

Whose's rule is THAT!?

LoyalTubist wrote:But there are some things I see posters who have trouble with plurals, possessives, and simple spellings. Plural nouns and pronouns DO NOT HAVE APOSTROPHES. Posessive nouns ALWAYS HAVE APOSTROPHES. Those are the two big problems.

So why do we see written "Mind your p's and q's?" And "There are four s's in 'Mississippi'? (This usage is supported by the OED and the Chicago Book of Style.

http://apostrophe-abuse.blogspot.com/

Chuck "just being a smart-*ss" (G)

goodgigs wrote: Brian "Goodgigs"Kane
Me myself, I's gots good grammer. (notice the proper conjuntion).

What conjunction?

I don't make the mistake of confusing dyslexia with pure ignorance. I've known some very fluent people who've struggled with dyslexia who can boast of achievements far above the average. I'm in awe of them and their tenacity.

Chuck(G) wrote:
It was appalling to read the number of supposedly educated writers who stated that "Saddam Hussein was hung". He may have been--but he died when he was hanged.

I laughed out loud when I read this. Good thing no one else was around.

Language isn't static. If our thoughts are being communicated effectively, should we limit ourselves to an English grammatical structure enforced by a group of ideological nut bags? A group that can not even decide for themselves the rules of our language?


The internet is changing language a lot. Why is it so bad that it is doing so? Words are becoming simplified, shorter, and grammar is becoming simplified. OH NO! What shall we do? Simpler? Shorter?


Just like in music, strict structure has a place. There is a halfway point between this banter. I also think that loyaltubist's situation has given him a perspective on life that few will ever understand.


Wes "a former English major---who doesn't care, insisting on keeping our language conversational" pendergrass



P.S.- Along the lines of this discussion, loyaltubist, have you read "Eats, shoots, and leaves!"? It is an OUTSTANDING book that addresses these grammatical issues. Check it out.

http://www.amazon.com/Eats-Shoots-Leave ... 621&sr=1-3

Chuck(G) wrote:
It was appalling to read the number of supposedly educated writers who stated that "Saddam Hussein was hung"

Can you imagine the poor UN inspector who had to verify this?

TubaRay wrote:

Chuck(G) wrote:
It was appalling to read the number of supposedly educated writers who stated that "Saddam Hussein was hung". He may have been--but he died when he was hanged.

I laughed out loud when I read this. Good thing no one else was around.

I did, too -- at least we don't have to wonder if he was well-hanged ...

djwesp wrote:Language isn't static. If our thoughts are being communicated effectively, should we limit ourselves to an English grammatical structure enforced by a group of ideological nut bags? A group that can not even decide for themselves the rules of our language?

Does this mean that you endorse leaving such quaint devices as punctuation and capitalization by the wayside? 1_337 for all?

"Gay" has little of its former meaning of only 40 years ago. I'm sure that among the younger folks, "We'll have a gay old time" from the Flintstones theme would produce nothing but snickers.

If we drop the older formal meaning of "enormity" as "great evil" and adopt the word as a synonym for "enormousness", what are we to do when we mean the latter? Aren't we the poorer for it?

I'm aware that language changes. Queen Anne, when viewing the restoration of St. Paul's after the Great Fire of 1666, is said to have proclaimed it "awful, artificial and amusing." She meant it as a compliment.

My head hurts. I'd go lay down if that was anatomically possible, but I think I'll just take a nap.

Scooby Tuba wrote:

Chuck(G) wrote: "We'll have a gay old time" from the Flintstones theme would produce nothing but snickers.

Oh, you gotta read this...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6934878/site/newsweek/

Scooby Tuba wrote:

Chuck(G) wrote: "We'll have a gay old time" from the Flintstones theme would produce nothing but snickers.

Oh, you gotta read this...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6934878/site/newsweek/

"WILLLLLLLLLLLLMAAAAAAA!"

TubaRay wrote:

Chuck(G) wrote:
It was appalling to read the number of supposedly educated writers who stated that "Saddam Hussein was hung". He may have been--but he died when he was hanged.

I laughed out loud when I read this. Good thing no one else was around.

My current day job involves server support for a multinational (147 at last count) corporation. The phrases "Are you up yet?" and "Are you hung?" are shouted across the IT floor quite often, with the typical responses "I'm up" or "I'm hung." I guess that is to be expected when you infrastructure runs software by MicroSoft.

Yeah, that and this guy, huh?



http://www.acme.com/jef/netgems/tubby_test.html

I went to bed after I put up that post last night. After I went to church this morning I saw all these replies. I think there are many kindred spirits out there.

Wow!

LoyalTubist wrote:I think there are many kindred spirits out there

I think that there are many kindred spirits out there

I told you I still don't have it right. But I'm trying...











































Boy, am I trying!

Chuck(G) wrote: Does this mean that you endorse leaving such quaint devices as punctuation and capitalization by the wayside? 1_337 for all?

Hardly.

Everything has a place. When reading a treatise on ""Wozzeck" and "Porgy and Bess"; The Amazing Connections" I EXPECT the material to be organized and presented in a manner that is standardized by journalistic societies and grammar hounds.

When I read an internet forum, I expect the post to convey the informal input of the user. This not only helps me get to know all the posters but I relate this better to how they are in "reality".

Even Tubenet has a time and place for formality. When presenting your recital in the upcoming events, or providing a professional answer for a LEGITIMATE question, it should be presented in a manner that provides respect for what you are trying to accomplish.

Wes "thinking that article on Wozzeck and Porgy is still the oddest article I've ever read" Pendergrass

djwesp wrote:When I read an internet forum, I expect the post to convey the informal input of the user. This not only helps me get to know all the posters but I relate this better to how they are in "reality".

Wes, if you're able to determine someone's "real" personality from his TubeNet posts, you must be clairvoyant.