Comments on: Does Web Usage Matter?

By: Stephen Thorn

Stephen Thorn — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:47:27 +0000

Let me kick the bee hive here.
One facet of this discussion that I think we’ve missed addressing is what I refer to as the “brown shoes” factor. By way of explanation, when in formal dress (like a tuxedo or tailored suit) a man’s shoes are supposed to be black — not brown, red, or glow-in-the-dark green. A man in a $5,000 designer suit looks sharp, but if he’s wearing brown shoes with that suit he comes across as a dolt who really doesn’t know what he’s doing (the lipstick on a pig expression comes to mind here).

In writing, your reader gets their image of you from your words; you’re not standing in front of them for them to judge your appearance, nor at their elbow to explain something you’ve put on the paper. Consequently, your words and the way you present them will make or break how the reader perceives you and your abilities/talent. If you use correct language and spelling, choose your words well and use them to good effect, etc., you will come across as the man in the expensive suit. But if you use malaprops and misspell words and other errors you’ll be the guy in the expensive suit and brown shoes.

Being a somewhat critical person I’ve seen in my own reading of other’s work how I judge a writer by their words. If I read a post by someone along the lines of “Dat man whut ons de sto tol me I caints has me no job dere” I immediately condemn that person’s entire post to the garbage pile. He’s obviously either a half-wit and a dullard, or has failed to stay awake during English class, or thinks so poorly of his message that he failed to take the trouble to express that message properly (and, by association, he’s indicating his lack of respect for me as his reader [customer]). Toss that drek in the rubbish and go read the work of someone who has enough brains to put his shoes on without giving himself an injury.

By: davidinark

davidinark — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:44:07 +0000

I’ve taken several classes studying the evolution (and devolution) of the English language, and the fact is – we do not speak the same way we did 200 years ago, 300 years ago, etc. Language is always changing, morphing, moving. I had never known that ‘free rein’ was the “proper” spelling, because I have always used it in the context of “the freedom to do as one wished, as is a ruler.” Thanks for the clarification, but I choose to use the ‘reign’ version because (for me anyway) it makes more sense in context. Call it part of the ever-changing world of language. You’re right, we don’t have to like it, we just have to learn to live with it.

By: AravisGirl

AravisGirl — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:06:22 +0000

I had always believed “free rein” was talking about horse reins… Tahnks for correcting that

By: Peter

Peter — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 02:15:37 +0000

I was told in Junior High that the stated goal of compulsory education, when it started, was to establish a minimum base needed for a democracy style government to function – basic arithmetic, enough English to read and hear and understand speakers, and to understand the ballot.

Is that what you were told? But go read the actual reasons stated by the people that started compulsory education…they didn’t try to hide their reasons, and what you were told is nothing at all like the truth. (In fact, it’s pretty much the opposite of the truth: the stated goal of compulsory education was the prevent democracy!)

Want your kid to learn? Teach her/him.

QFT

By: Brad K.

Brad K. — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:42:23 +0000

The onus to educate children has always been on the parents. For myself, Heinlein’s “Have Space Suit Will Travel” was an eye-opener at the beginning of the book. The kid’s Dad looked at his science books, and math, and provided what Dad considered useful level material – and made the kid learn both tracks. That was the first time I had considered that public education didn’t contain what a person needed, only what the Federal/school administration gestalt decided to *teach*. There is a fundamental difference.

Schools are not temples of education, they are more like used education dealers, pushing whatever has piled up on their desk lately. The topics picked and the level taught are determined by who wants what taught, and only very seldom is the driving force what the kids need to know.

We teach evolution or creationism or intelligent design – not based on what model is most useful to a young scholar, but on what wrangling has occurred between the contending Powers That Be.

English is taught to whatever level the teacher happens to understand – as long as it meets the standardized tests. Seldom does anything get taught in greater depth than standardized tests require, or some driving political force imposes.

Want your kid to learn? Teach her/him.