Rant: English - Are standards declining?

[Teh_Ephy]

Heh, I'm practically basing my theory of what 'cool' was in youth by basing it on everything I did not do

So, you admit to having no knowledge of what "cool" is, and you're scolding my interpretation of the word?

 

[Deleted member 157129]

So, you admit to having no knowledge of what "cool" is, and you're scolding my interpretation of the word?

I have as much knowledge of it as anyone who has not studied the term.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Please tell me that was Norwegian sarcasm.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Admitting to sarcasm would be defeating its purpose entirely.

 

[Devine]

Admitting to sarcasm would be defeating its purpose entirely.

You do realise you did just admit that you were being sarcastic?
RIIIIIIIIITTTTEEEE?

 

[Deleted member 157129]

No, I did not admit anything. I merely told Ephy I won't tell him right or wrong about his assumption.

 

[reason 3]

Yes, the English language is clearly declining. We have such gems as:

Time to correct your grammar sentence by sentence. I normally dislike doing this, but seeing as you're ranting about rather trivial things (different cultures have different expressions, get over it) to do with the English language—spelling, grammar, expressions, the works—you deserve it.

Your first sentence is: For those who don't own a dictionary - Kid means baby goat.

First, you use a hyphen in place of an em dash and where a comma should be employed; hyphens are used to join words, not phrases, and not even their cousin (the em dash) is used in this scenario. Second, the word "kid" is wrongly capitalized, should be quoted, and should come after the words "the word" if you do not plan to present it in dictionary format.

The correct sentence would be: For those who don't own a dictionary, the word "kid" refers to a baby goat.

Your second sentence is: When a goat has a child, it is reffered to as a kid.

This is mostly correct, but your spelling of "referred" is way off. Any browser's spell checker should pick this one up even if you can't.

The correct sentence would be: When a goat has a child, it is referred to as a kid.

However, we can make this one even better by playing with pluralization: When goats have children, they are referred to as kids.

Your third sentence is: Like the horse has a foal and a chicken has a chick, a goat has a kid.

This sentence starts off rather short and awkward—try rearranging it.

A more correct sentence would be: Similarly, a young horse is called a foal and a young chicken is called a chick.

Notice how goat is not even mentioned there; since you just mentioned it in the previous sentence there is no need to.

The following two sentences are: A human child - CHILD - isn't a kid. Its a goat.

This sentence lacks an apostrophe, and in addition you are clearly confused about what the word "it" refers to in this context.

A more correct sentence would be (yes, they should be combined): A human child isn't a kid—a goat's child is.

Your last sentence is: Kid is now used to reffer to people from 1 year olds to 15 year olds and not only is it patronising and overused, it has robbed the world child from the English dictionary.

There are too many things wrong here to even list them. Let's just fix them, shall we?

The word "kid" is now used to refer to people from one to fifteen years of age and, in addition to being both patronizing and overused, it has robbed the word "child" from the English dictionary.

--

See what I can do with even a single one of your paragraphs?

TL;DR Don't criticize others' spelling or grammar—let alone expressions—if you can't be assed to watch your own.

Yes and no. I don't feel the need to complain about minor errors, but even if someone is able to get their point across perfectly with terrible grammar, it still sounds awkward. After all, regardless of whether the point they are getting across is given with the right words in roughly the right order, the wrong conjugation (for lack of a better word) of those words as well as extra fluff added in, the occasional word removed, spelling all over the place, horrible misuse of commas and apostrophes and so on can make a perfectly understandable "sentence" torturous.

Damn...For those who don't own a dictionary, this is what HUMILIATION means!!

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Yes and no. I don't feel the need to complain about minor errors, but even if someone is able to get their point across perfectly with terrible grammar, it still sounds awkward. After all, regardless of whether the point they are getting across is given with the right words in roughly the right order, the wrong conjugation (for lack of a better word) of those words as well as extra fluff added in, the occasional word removed, spelling all over the place, horrible misuse of commas and apostrophes and so on can make a perfectly understandable "sentence" torturous.

True. As with any tool, ease of use plays a pivotal role in its quality. I still, however, have no problems with the adoption of regional dialects any more than I do with the adoption of any language at all besides English. It facilitates culture and can easily be picked up by the context and word parts.


I also don't want my double entendres ruined by boring standardizing cunts.

 

[PurplePoot]

Regional dialects are indeed fine (although you have to draw the line somewhere; for example, I wouldn't call leet-speak (or any other abbreviated internet slang) a "dialect").

Also, ruining humour is my job. I thought that was clear ever since someone discovered that I am in fact a semi-sentient bot?

 

[crawdaddy029]

Quick note; if you're going to complain about the grammar of others, it's a good idea to actually spell things correctly yourself. I've marked the more serious (ie those that alter the meaning or essence) mistakes with red, and a few general rules that aren't as important with orange.

However, I completely agree, even though I am by no means English, or British for that matter, nor American. Therefore I won't comment on the slang either - I utilize slang in my own native language, so I don't consider it wrong.

A side note:
* (the blue mark) - last time (10 years ago) I checked, Columbus discovered America on an adventure to find a route to India (which is why Native Americans are named Indians), not China. Also, the Vikings were probably the first explorers from Europe to discover America.


@Maker, those cases are often misspellings, afaik, and not intentional (as in they don't know the difference).

he was complaining about Grammer not Spelling, 2 totally different things.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

About the rant and the whole American English and British English thing - languages are evolving like other things such as music and media, and like evolution of animals, isolate one group of a languages speakers and the language starts to change. The whole idea that British English is Proper English is absurd, since the two nations are separated by an entire ocean. With no effective means of communication back and forth in old times trying to keep the language uniform is not just insane but impossible. You have to face it, words will have different meaning depending on where you are. Like some people already mentioned, this is nothing unique to English. Take Spanish and Portuguese, these two languages look nearly identical on paper yet the words have taken on very different meanings - and Spain and Portugal are two nations right next to each other. Ranting about this isn't going to make it go away, the same way Churches ranting about homosexuality, Anarchists ranting about Government and Vegans ranting about people who eat meat isn't going to make them go away either.


On "Cool" - yeah this word has some interesting context, and intelligence has definitely been taken on out of a trait found in "cool" people. "Coolness" is shaped based upon what kids see as the ideal person, and with thus anything they don't like is taken out of it. Often other students feel hatred towards people who either work harder in class or simply understand material better simply because their smarter - they see someone acting intelligent as someone acting "duechy" or some other term like it. Someone with dedication is a "show-off" while someone who's smart is a "Nerd", someone who has talent for an instrument that doesn't fit into popular music is "weird" and their talent "useless" while someone who feels ambition in life is a "jerk-off". Essentially to aim for popularity or "coolness" is to deprive yourself of originality and fit into what others want you to be.



And there is a theory that some Chinese explorers did make it to the America's though its not confirmed - China had an opportunity to become the leading nation of the world around the time that the Western Europeans were gaining power but the Confucians who controlled the buerocracy convinced the emperor that such expeditions were worthless and others had nothing to offer them.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

he was complaining about Grammer not Spelling, 2 totally different things.

Yes, perhaps you should read my post and then reconsider your remark. It's a good idea to learn how to spell, before you learn how to write.

.. and it's grammar.

 

[TwistedImage]

WherewolfTherewolf, language isn't evolving, really. It's devolving. There are too many stupid people in the word for languages to be spoken properly, and thus said stupid people break the language to make it easier for them to write/speak. Also, stop capitalizing random words. :/

In my school, ze musicians are cool. >_>

they see someone acting intelligent as someone acting "duechy" or some other term like it. Someone with dedication is a "show-off" while someone who's smart is a "Nerd", someone who has talent for an instrument that doesn't fit into popular music is "weird" and their talent "useless" while someone who feels ambition in life is a "jerk-off".

Eh, dedication = show-off? That's way out. The only part you were correct on is the nerd part. >_>

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

WherewolfTherewolf, language isn't evolving, really. It's devolving. There are too many stupid people in the word for languages to be spoken properly, and thus said stupid people break the language to make it easier for them to write/speak.

You do realize most people do see a difference between slang and normal English right?

 

[Deleted member 157129]

You do realize most people do see a difference between slang and normal English right?

Yes, but the problem is that slang gradually becomes part of normal English.

 

[Vosty]

Yes, but the problem is that slang gradually becomes part of normal English.

Yep, dat's da stuff.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Yes, but the problem is that slang gradually becomes part of normal English.

Is that a problem?

 

[Snarewave]

What's so bad about a devolved language? Other than the fact that you look like a complete jackass speaking ghetto, they are more expressional and free compared to like 16th century or something.

 

[TwistedImage]

English was good some twenty years ago, now it's devolving into an ugly pile of crap.

Same with Norwegian.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Is that a problem?

Personally, I liked the old (or rather, olde) English better than any slang they've come up with over the years, especially all these gangster words.. everything related to rap, basically (not because most of them are black, I am no racist).

.. art, dost, cometh, henceforth, nary, naught, prithee, thee, thou, thy, thine, shalt, whence, wrought .. (and a lot more I just can't remember)

 

[Teh_Ephy]

"naught" and "wrought" are still used.

 

[PurplePoot]

Henceforth shows up now and again, but I don't see why most of those words are so great.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Anything involving wreaking anything is awesome as far as "wrought".

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Henceforth shows up now and again, but I don't see why most of those words are so great.

They're not particularly great, they just don't get used enough.. I prefer "thou" over "you" any day, it resembles authority.

 

[PurplePoot]

Actually, thy implies authority. Thou implies familiarity or disrespect.

 

[Hakeem]

.. art, dost, cometh, henceforth, nary, naught, prithee, thee, thou, thy, thine, shalt, whence, wrought .. (and a lot more I just can't remember)

For each old English word like that, there are twenty that are just plain stupid.

Simplification is a positive thing for language.

 

[TwistedImage]

Yeah, some of the old words were silly, but now they're just stupid.

Simplification > dumbification.

 

[Vosty]

shiik if you talk like that, I wonder how you were raised. =D
The fact that we have de-evoluted our language is because we are getting more lazy. In fact, s fast food restraunts, you don't even have to say the food. You just say "six" and you're food is handed to you.
Pretty soon English will be replaced with leet-speek, since so many use it. I hate when people say "lol" in real life. It is sad....

 

[Deleted member 157129]

All simplification isn't positive. The moment 'you' is replaced with 'u' as the official spelling of 'you', I'm going to scrap English completely and thereafter talk and write Old Norse.

Vosty, my English has naught to do with how I was raised, seeing as my mother tongue is Norwegian. I consider my English self-educated.

As for "leet-speak" taking over, I doubt it, it's oftentimes more complicated and hard to remember rather than simplified. Heck, some "leet-speak words" are spelled the exact same was as already existing terms with entirely different meanings.

Actually, thy implies authority. Thou implies familiarity or disrespect.

I wasn't referring to that kind of authority. "You" is a weak statement, it lacks power.. "thou" dost possess power in how it is pronounced and written. It's more of a mouthful, so to speak.

 

[TwistedImage]

Leetspeak will NEVER EVER replace English. I'm more worried about, er, "gangster slang."

Also I thought "thou" meant "you" whereas "thy" or in some cases "thine" meant "your/yours" D:

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Leetspeak will NEVER EVER replace English. I'm more worried about, er, "gangster slang."

Also I thought "thou" meant "you" whereas "thy" or in some cases "thine" meant "your/yours" D:

Indeed, "Thy Highness" would be the same as "Your Highness" ..
"Thee" and "Thou" means "you" .. additionally "thine" means "your".

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Lol and OMG are the only real culprits you really see spoken out loud, I doubt Leetspeak will be able to completely replace English

Once again people do recognize the difference between Slang and English, though you may hear someone talking in extreme Slang you can pretty much count on the fact that that person most likely is not writing any books. Though the spoken language may change a bit regionally, Literature accounts for how language is taught to people getting an education and slang almost never finds it's way into what the people doing the educating think is true literature.

 

[TwistedImage]

That is, if they're being educated within a field concerning language. Few people do that nowadays, I believe.

I'll do that, definitely.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Lol and OMG are the only real culprits you really see spoken out loud, I doubt Leetspeak will be able to completely replace English

Once again people do recognize the difference between Slang and English, though you may hear someone talking in extreme Slang you can pretty much count on the fact that that person most likely is not writing any books. Though the spoken language may change a bit regionally, Literature accounts for how language is taught to people getting an education and slang almost never finds it's way into what the people doing the educating think is true literature.

When the dictionary is altered, adding 'slang', the taught language is also altered. It's a slow process, but I see it a lot in Norwegian, for instance.
As for teaching language in the first place, only if you choose to study language do you learn language from teachers in school. Your mother tongue is almost entirely built up by your family, friends and classmates, and alter also by influences such as books, TV and music. Of course, the writing society will maintain a proper written language for a much longer time than the rest of the community, simply because they read books and write books with language similar to what they (have) read themselves. Unfortunately, reading books is not really a widely used form for education (at least not here in Norway), and few teens bother with reading books on their own initiative.

 

[Vosty]

^^^
Me and my friend......
WAIT
My friend and I read books all the time, and only we do it. All the rest of my friends are like "books are stupid." and "reading is for nerds" and "I hate reading because I suck at it.'

Now all of those I have a right to be pissed off at.
1: Books are written by people much smarter than you will ever be.
2: Me and my friend both won the Xavier Math Bowl at least once. (It is a rather LARGE competition in my country. Over 300 of the smartest kids participate.) Smartness will probably make you income much higher than the guy who works at grocery store.
3:How did you learn to ride the bicycle? By sucking at it and never trying at it. I mean, I have a natural reading ability and was taught very young to read, but my thrid friend (who struggles to maintain even AVERAGE grades) is an extremely good reader, and reads very fast.

So I'm guessing by what you say shiik, is that you weren't very popular?
_{You're an ace in my book!}

 

[Hakeem]

Truthfully, I resented learning about nouns and verbs in elementary school. We pick up the language while we are babies. We don't need to learn all the intricacies of it to use it. We already know it by the natural language learning algorithms in our brain.

Of course, I learned it anyway, and acquired a taste for proper English.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Vosty, it was a little on and off; in elementary school, I was popular the first years, just like everyone else. Then in the later years I grew fond of girls, so I got popular in a different manner "Eew, he talks with girls" .. meh, and then in (junior?) high school I embraced the nature of a nerd, and ended up with vastly better grades than most of my classmates, at the dispense of social activity. For that I was very unpopular amongst students, highly valued by teachers. Afterwards, in College, I went rebellious. I skipped school, remained in the canteen during history classes and had a fucking great time. Problematically, though, my class was a bunch of nerds, so it didn't grant me much popularity either. Let's just say I tried a few different ways in the past. Now I'm studying at a University, and I'm a thing in-between all of what I've been before. I go out a lot, I get some good grades, and I have a good time.

As for how this affected my language, hardly any.. because I learned my mother tongue before we started learning anything about grammar at school, it was already established, and the grammar at school, for me, was to learn how the teacher wanted you to set up the table, and then fill in the words like you knew them. There were few words that ended up differently than I thought initially, therefore I've never been one to doubt my language, I assume that I am right, and I most likely am. Never have my essays been corrected with grammatical mistakes, they merely lack interesting content, or are too long (yes, I had trouble with writing too long essays too fast, so I was suspected of having brought full essays with me from home).

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Truthfully, I resented learning about nouns and verbs in elementary school. We pick up the language while we are babies. We don't need to learn all the intricacies of it to use it. We already know it by the natural language learning algorithms in our brain.

That's about the basis of English classes, over-analyzing the language (Probably why most kids in my High School are doing better in their Spanish/Latin/French classes then English). You don't need fancy classes like A.P. Language to know proper English - you need them to learn the more useless things that naturally occur in your sentences: whenever you get an assignment that states every sentences needs to have -insert grammar thing here- unless it's something really specific like a Gerund, you already most likely use it all the time and don't even have to worry about not having it (things like verbals). I have a lot of doubt that any author thinks like: "I'm going to put a metaphor here, and make sure to string in some alliteration here" at least in the first draft.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

What it ultimately boils down to is that the English language doesn't "decline" the way you people see it. It changes, and we, who are absolutely afraid of change and unfamiliarity, oppose it. Maybe to take a moral high ground, maybe to avoid learning a new language. I can, however, guarrantee with great confidence that it will remain as efficient a medium for conveying your state of mind as it has been before. At least through your lifetime.

Also, I'm not too worried about "lol" and "omg" as much as I am about people using the interjections "Fail" and "for the lulz", as many do at my school.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Bit of a side-not, but actually pronouncing 'lol' rather than to laugh is pretty stupid. I can accept 'omg', although I would prefer to spell it all out, but 'lol' is not very emotional compared to actually laughing. To fail is a perfectly valid verb though, so I cannot see why claiming someone to have failed would be bad - not doing such myself though.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

I'd also like to point out the irony in saying "lol" (laugh out loud) as opposed to actually laughing out loud. It's like you're lying.

Bit of a side-not, but actually pronouncing 'lol' rather than to laugh is pretty stupid. I can accept 'omg', although I would prefer to spell it all out, but 'lol' is not very emotional compared to actually laughing. To fail is a perfectly valid verb though, so I cannot see why claiming someone to have failed would be bad - not doing such myself though.

No one says someone has failed anymore. They say "That was fail", something that I would only accept from Anon, so unless you have trouble distinguishing nouns from verbs, there is definitely a problem.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

I'd also like to point out the irony in saying "lol" (laugh out loud) as opposed to actually laughing out loud. It's like you're lying.


No one says someone has failed anymore. They say "That was fail", something that I would only accept from Anon, so unless you have trouble distinguishing nouns from verbs, there is definitely a problem.

Aye, but that irony is quickly followed by awkward silence if you're not talking with people that embrace the term, to put it nicely. As for your other claim; I've never actually heard anyone use 'fail' as a noun, so I did not even consider how stupid that would be.

 

[TwistedImage]

Luckily, only the nine-year-olds around here say "lol." Seriously, I'd go crazy if I'd have to hear it a hundred times a day.

I've never heard "fail" as a noun before either. Might be because I live in Norway and the direct translation of "fail" is awkward.

 

[KelThuzad]

What the hell is this topic about?

Soccer, Football, Candy, Sweets, who gives a shit as long as people understand each other.

P.S. - If not, then THOSE people should be discussed.

 

[Vosty]

Seriously, we say "that was a fail" all the time. It is supposed to mean more like short for the word "failure" though, not "failing"

 

[KelThuzad]

Seriously, we say "that was a fail" all the time. It is supposed to mean more like short for the word "failure" though, not "failing"

Seriously, everybody uses slang now. This is the declining of English standarts, but everyone likes it.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Seriously, everybody uses slang now. This is the declining of English standarts, but everyone likes it.

Please tell me this is a joke and not your honest opinion.

 

[KelThuzad]

No, not a joke. Is that a problem?

 

[Lohengrin]

It's funny you should mention that.
Or that, it was their ability to retain to archaic English that made them successful writers?

Of course not, you are just full of shit.

1[\]|)33|).

7/-/3 4f0r3m3[\]710n3|) wr1t3rs |)1|)[\]'7 3v3n r3741[\] th3 "4rc/-/41c l4[\]guag3" of th31r 71m3 s331[\]g 4s /-/0w Sh4k3sp34r4 4l0[\]3 m4|)3 up 4b0ut 1700 [\]3w w0rds.

7h1s 1s [\]07 47 4ll u[\]c0mm0[\] f04 wr1734s 4s 7/-/3y /-/4v3 th1s /-/4b17 0f 1g[\]0r1[\]g gr4mm471c4l rul3s c0mpl374ly.

The_Reborn_Devil - The aforementioned writers didn't even retain the "archaic language" of their time seeing as how Shakespeare alone made up about 1700 new words.

This is not at all uncommon for writers as they have this habit of ignoring grammatical rules completely.

 

[manstie]

Yes, english is getting dummed down.