Good spelling still matters

[ApK]

Originally Posted by piperclassique

Says the Oxford English Dictionary.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/defini...us&q=hopefully

Yes, I got the joke. Was I supposed to laugh?

Well, I was hoping for a smiley that conveys a groan, at least.

[pidgeon92]

The pertinent portion begins at approx 4:08 in the video:

Colbert Report -- Romney iPhone app

[Fluribus]

Originally Posted by ApK

http://oxforddictionaries.com/defini...us&q=hopefully


Well, I was hoping for a smiley that conveys a groan, at least.

I enjoyed it. I do not, however, use smilies. Not for you, nor Mr. Magoo. Not even for the monkeys down at the zoo.

The definition that you posted is the same as the one in my Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 6th edition. The Oxford dictionaries, as with the vast majority of current dictionaries, have a descriptive philosophy. The language is defined by how it's used, not how a minority thinks it ought to be used.

With great hope and much fortitude, I arrogate the authority to ignore the dictionaries when I disagree with them.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Fluribus

I enjoyed it. I do not, however, use smilies. Not for you, nor Mr. Magoo. Not even for the monkeys down at the zoo.

Aww. That makes me .

The definition that you posted is the same as the one in my Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 6th edition. The Oxford dictionaries, as with the vast majority of current dictionaries, have a descriptive philosophy. The language is defined by how it's used, not how a minority thinks it ought to be used.

With great hope and much fortitude, I arrogate the authority to ignore the dictionaries when I disagree with them.

Ok...but then by what standard does anyone claim to know "what a word means?" What informs your disagreement?

I'm all for resisting letting blatant misuses become standard, but Oxford cites that usage back to the early 1700's. How much more time does a living language need?

[Kumabjorn]

Soo, when will the first bestseller arrive that is written entirely in texting?
20 years from now when the texting generation has reached middle age?

[FizzyWater]

Originally Posted by ApK

Well, I was hoping for a smiley that conveys a groan, at least.

Well, I didn't post a smilie, but you definitely got a groan from me.

[xg4bx]

i'm so anal about my spelling that i will look up words i'm unsure about even for a relatively casual forum like a message board. i also check my spelling and use full words in texts. i simply don't want to look ignorant. it would embarrass me to present myself to the public using shorthand and (noticeably) dodgy grammar.

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I recently heard that youths with keyboard-equipped smartphones like to show them off by typing correctly-spelled and punctuated texts and emails on them... even they understand how to impress by doing it right.

Most of the younger people that I've met use good grammar and spelling while communicating via electronic devices. Many of the older people who I've met will leave errors uncorrected or use faddish shorthands. I've also found that people of all ages take care with their grammar and spelling on the forums that I frequent. I'm not saying that these people are using formal English, but I don't expect people to use formal English in the context of conversation. So please let that stereotype die!

The errors creeping into formal writing is a different story, and it reflects the fast pace, corner-cutting mentality of modern society. While computers may support that mentality, they are certainly not the cause of it. Take the maligned spell-checker. Spell-checkers are a wonderful tool to learn how to spell words properly. After all, it catches errors and provides feedback that you may learn from (and even learn new words in the process). The problem is that people equate spell checking with proof reading, which it isn't. But that misinterpretation is a human fault, rather than a fault with the technology.

Originally Posted by xg4bx

i'm so anal about my spelling that i will look up words i'm unsure about even for a relatively casual forum like a message board. i also check my spelling and use full words in texts. i simply don't want to look ignorant. it would embarrass me to present myself to the public using shorthand and (noticeably) dodgy grammar.

Would you please use proper capitalization. Also, the use of contractions is considered casual.

[applesauce]

I need to be sent to the naughty corner. When at my computer no problems. Nut at my laptop I can be shocking. It is because I am not typing with all fingers on the keyboard. But I would never sink to the r u rubbish I want to strangle people for that.

applesauce

[Rob Lister]

Originally Posted by Catlady

It's become acceptable in colloquial speech to use hopefully to mean exactly that. We all know what the person using it means. I think that fight has been lost.

The shibboleth of the usage panels continues. They have drawn the line. It is their final adverb straw. Hopefully, they'll soon come to grips with it.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Soo, when will the first bestseller arrive that is written entirely in texting?
20 years from now when the texting generation has reached middle age?

I can wait.

I mean, seriously. I'll be glad to wait a long, long time.

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Soo, when will the first bestseller arrive that is written entirely in texting?
20 years from now when the texting generation has reached middle age?

I have problem reading texting. And i definitively can't write it.

[BeccaPrice]

my kids, bless them, say that txt-speak is for poseurs. Their texts to me are short, but well spelled and even punctuated properly.

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by ApK

Aww. That makes me .



Ok...but then by what standard does anyone claim to know "what a word means?" What informs your disagreement?

I'm all for resisting letting blatant misuses become standard, but Oxford cites that usage back to the early 1700's. How much more time does a living language need?

A dictionary is just a useful tool, and it becomes a lot less useful if the meanings of words have shifted to the point where the dictionary meaning isn't in sync with the way the word is commonly used. I doubt there's any hard science behind it beyond just noting the number of people that roll their eyes whenever someone points out that someone else has misused the word "ironic".

The fine scholars at Cracked.com stated it thusly:

There is a massive percentage of the population, somewhere north of 99 percent, that struggles with telling the difference between nouns and verbs. With no use for the rules of grammar, they simply talk like their friends and neighbors talk. That this will lead to slowly drifting definitions and grammatical structures is inevitable, because these people don't know the rules in the first place, and could not fucking care less if they did.

This puts writers, who are generally concerned with verbin' etiquette, in a tricky position. By choosing not to use newly minted grammatical rules and words, they impede their ability to communicate with the rest of the population. They cut themselves off from the creative options that new words and grammar open up, and if they hew too closely to the old, unchanging rules, they can make their writing sound stuffy and formal.