I thought the English gendarme in 'Allo, 'Allo was just bad at French, as opposed to being taught to speak French with the Scottish equivalent of an RP accent; the sort of accent in which "coal sacks" is pronounced "coal sex."
"J'e m'eppelle Enne. J'ai quetorze ens." with the "ay" sound replaced by a refined clipped "eh"
(My name is Anne. I am 14)
You can end up bilingual. An elderly friend had acquired refined speech through a scholarship to a girls' school in Aberdeen, but could slip back into the Doric in an instant. She was always a quine fae the Garioch at heart.
My mother, a theatre nurse, once had to act as a translator between an old Chinese lady who only spoke Mandarin, and a young Belfast-born Chinese doctor who spoke it with such a strong Ulster accent as to be incomprehensible to her. "Nie HOI! Wo sher eeshaeng!"
I had this discussion with some younger people a while ago. They think that final punctuation is harsh and abrupt, and I think that it makes a sentence look incomplete not having it. We agreed to disagree on that and make allowances for each other.
My mother, a theatre nurse, once had to act as a translator between an old Chinese lady who only spoke Mandarin, and a young Belfast-born Chinese doctor who spoke it with such a strong Ulster accent as to be incomprehensible to her. "Nie HOI! Wo sher eeshaeng!"
I've done something like this--stood between my husband and a waitress, repeating what each said in my California accent. Didn't have to translate at all--Mr. Lamb's English has such a strong Vietnamese accent and the doctor's English had such a strong North Carolina accent that they could only understand each other when mine (well known from the media) was interposed.
Why put "Fine." when you can put a thumbs-up emoji? I mean, if periods bother you, you're of the emoji generation, right?
Because the "thumbs up" is regarded by young people as rude, abrasive, passive-aggressive and dismissive, and used by old(er) people.
Interesting. I avoid it on company communication channels, because it seems to me way too informal and potentially rude (for example, if someone says, "Melvin's just been diagnosed with incurable cancer and is taking the afternoon off to break it to his family.") And yet it's the only form of positive acknowledgement offered us, unless you actually write a whole message in words, which isn't always welcomed by those with overstuffed email boxes.
Enthusiastically agreed. I will spare you all here but I have a whole rant about how much video is taking over as the main medium for so many things where 10 years ago we had a choice of media. I find it very hard to take in information over video and I hate that often I have no choice.
Agreed, and I also prefer proper grammar and punctuation. I had a professor who taught us that good grammar and punctuation were indicative of clear thinking. I've had some people say that kind of talk is elitist, and fairly they may be right, but there's something to it for me. I use it to try to keep myself honest.
The problem comes in, for me, when people equate "good" with "standard". There's something to be said for formal communications using standard English, but it's only a convention; nowt wrong wi' some variation, as me mam learnt me as a lad. Indeed, the ability to code switch is itself an aspect of language mastery.
I agree with you there. And there's even a logic to it, using certain words reflexively or understanding when to accept or reject a particular rule. For instance, some people think that to flagrantly split an infinitive is a grotesque violation. But is it truly an abuse of logic in a language that has no proper infinitive verb form? "To insert" is two words, so to properly insert an adverb is no impropriety.
This is a prime example of the legacy of grammarians who considered Latin the epitome of a learned language, and who believed that for English to really be taken seriously it should reflect the structure of Latin. Never mind that English is a Germanic language. Those grammarians imposed rules that were foreign to the grammatical structure of English, which is why such rules have continued through the centuries to be violated with regularity; they don’t “feel” right to many if not most native speakers. (The prohibition of ending sentences with prepositions also falls in this category,)
And all of this raises the question of exactly what constitutes “standard English”? There isn’t really one standard; rather there are many standards—some cultural, some contextual. As just one example, so-called Standard British English would have me say “the team are,” which to American ears sounds decidedly non-standard. And that’s well before one gets into dialectical standards.
The amazing thing about English is it is an alive language as opposed to Latin, which some people consider a dead language. It is constantly changing, adding new words, new terms, new phrases, even new slang. Its grammar is constantly changing. What was considered verbotten--sorry, forbidden--just a few years ago is now allowed. Who knows where the language will take us in just the next ten years, let alone another hundred years.
Enthusiastically agreed. I will spare you all here but I have a whole rant about how much video is taking over as the main medium for so many things where 10 years ago we had a choice of media. I find it very hard to take in information over video and I hate that often I have no choice.
Definitely agree. I want the option to just read the instructions, Thank You Very Much.
Enthusiastically agreed. I will spare you all here but I have a whole rant about how much video is taking over as the main medium for so many things where 10 years ago we had a choice of media. I find it very hard to take in information over video and I hate that often I have no choice.
Agreed, and I also prefer proper grammar and punctuation. I had a professor who taught us that good grammar and punctuation were indicative of clear thinking. I've had some people say that kind of talk is elitist, and fairly they may be right, but there's something to it for me. I use it to try to keep myself honest.
The problem comes in, for me, when people equate "good" with "standard". There's something to be said for formal communications using standard English, but it's only a convention; nowt wrong wi' some variation, as me mam learnt me as a lad. Indeed, the ability to code switch is itself an aspect of language mastery.
To my mind the driving principle needs to be maximize understandability.
Enthusiastically agreed. I will spare you all here but I have a whole rant about how much video is taking over as the main medium for so many things where 10 years ago we had a choice of media. I find it very hard to take in information over video and I hate that often I have no choice.
Agreed, and I also prefer proper grammar and punctuation. I had a professor who taught us that good grammar and punctuation were indicative of clear thinking. I've had some people say that kind of talk is elitist, and fairly they may be right, but there's something to it for me. I use it to try to keep myself honest.
The problem comes in, for me, when people equate "good" with "standard". There's something to be said for formal communications using standard English, but it's only a convention; nowt wrong wi' some variation, as me mam learnt me as a lad. Indeed, the ability to code switch is itself an aspect of language mastery.
To my mind the driving principle needs to be maximize understandability.
Exactly. Easy writing can too often result in difficult reading. But first, try hard to clarify your own thoughts and put them in a logical sequence. And, if you can, tell a story. Make your it interesting.
Some can, some can't.
Hmmm. My kids are Gen Z, and they use the thumbs-up emojis. That article seems to be based on anecdata in the form of random quotes from Reddit users. (Granted, my reliance on my kids is anecdata too.) I’m guessing it might be true of some Gen Zers, but not of Gen Z as a whole.
I've learned a couple of really helpful procedures from YouTube videos. I'm sorry they haven't worked for you, but after I gave up beating up Google and DuckDuckGo, I turned to YouTube and learned the solution to my problems in less than 3 minutes.
Sometimes, video is helpful. Showing how some object comes apart in video is usually clearer than trying to describe it, let alone draw up some ikea-style assembly diagram. But in general, video is an awful way of conveying information. It's slow, it's not sensibly searchable, and it's difficult to refer back to.
If all you have to offer is a video of your face talking, I'd far rather you talked at a text-to-speech interface and posted the product, if you can't bring yourself to type.
Mousethief, I would prefer accuracy to understandability. There are many easy-to-understand inaccuracies.
But if your reader can't understand it, what does it matter if it's accurate? It's gobbledygook, but at least those in the know can understand it. Pity they're not the ones it's aimed at.
I've learned a couple of really helpful procedures from YouTube videos. I'm sorry they haven't worked for you, but after I gave up beating up Google and DuckDuckGo, I turned to YouTube and learned the solution to my problems in less than 3 minutes.
Sometimes, video is helpful. Showing how some object comes apart in video is usually clearer than trying to describe it, let alone draw up some ikea-style assembly diagram. But in general, video is an awful way of conveying information. It's slow, it's not sensibly searchable, and it's difficult to refer back to.
If all you have to offer is a video of your face talking, I'd far rather you talked at a text-to-speech interface and posted the product, if you can't bring yourself to type.
Agree with all of this. I far prefer written words to audio or video. But if video is the best I can get, I'll take it.
My problem is impatience. I read at roughly 800 words a minute. I watch video at the same speed as life--except when I'm lucky enough to have a platform that allows me to speed things up to Donald Duck voice speed. And how I hate those work training videos where a voice reads the printed text on the screen TO YOU and refuses to let you click to the next screen till the very slow voice finishes the last word!
My problem is impatience. I read at roughly 800 words a minute. I watch video at the same speed as life--except when I'm lucky enough to have a platform that allows me to speed things up to Donald Duck voice speed. And how I hate those work training videos where a voice reads the printed text on the screen TO YOU and refuses to let you click to the next screen till the very slow voice finishes the last word!
We get those for cyber security training. Fortunately the mute button works so I can leave the video playing in a separate window and do some work while it meanders inanely to a conclusion.
I've learned a couple of really helpful procedures from YouTube videos. I'm sorry they haven't worked for you, but after I gave up beating up Google and DuckDuckGo, I turned to YouTube and learned the solution to my problems in less than 3 minutes.
Sometimes, video is helpful. Showing how some object comes apart in video is usually clearer than trying to describe it, let alone draw up some ikea-style assembly diagram.
I suspect much of the divergence of opinion here comes down to subject matter. If I resort to youtube to figure something out it's generally fairly practical involving manipulating real world objects (or less often something on a screen).
For more involved topics - unless it's a formal lecture, interview etc. - I'd resort to text, if only because it's handier and it's easier to scan, skip, repeat etc.
My problem is impatience. I read at roughly 800 words a minute. I watch video at the same speed as life--except when I'm lucky enough to have a platform that allows me to speed things up to Donald Duck voice speed. And how I hate those work training videos where a voice reads the printed text on the screen TO YOU and refuses to let you click to the next screen till the very slow voice finishes the last word!
We get those for cyber security training. Fortunately the mute button works so I can leave the video playing in a separate window and do some work while it meanders inanely to a conclusion.
Same (though the purpose of the courses is not so much to educate you as it is for the company to be able to prove that you pressed the 'I agree' button)
I've learned a couple of really helpful procedures from YouTube videos. I'm sorry they haven't worked for you, but after I gave up beating up Google and DuckDuckGo, I turned to YouTube and learned the solution to my problems in less than 3 minutes.
Sometimes, video is helpful. Showing how some object comes apart in video is usually clearer than trying to describe it, let alone draw up some ikea-style assembly diagram.
I suspect much of the divergence of opinion here comes down to subject matter. If I resort to youtube to figure something out it's generally fairly practical involving manipulating real world objects (or less often something on a screen).
For more involved topics - unless it's a formal lecture, interview etc. - I'd resort to text, if only because it's handier and it's easier to scan, skip, repeat etc.
I think it can't be only that. A lot of people like to get their news by video instead of by newspaper or the newspapers wouldn't be struggling. And either the people who prefer video to newspapers includes people who I think of as like me* or there are almost none of us left.
*defined as having political opinions I can respect, a general interest in the world around them or parts of it, and intellectual curiosity (which does not require intelligence or education, btw).
My problem is impatience. I read at roughly 800 words a minute. I watch video at the same speed as life--except when I'm lucky enough to have a platform that allows me to speed things up to Donald Duck voice speed. And how I hate those work training videos where a voice reads the printed text on the screen TO YOU and refuses to let you click to the next screen till the very slow voice finishes the last word!
We get those for cyber security training. Fortunately the mute button works so I can leave the video playing in a separate window and do some work while it meanders inanely to a conclusion.
I'll do that too, except I can't usually work--the stuff I do requires too much concentration, and before I know it, I've been paused on that page for 30 minutes... HR would really want to know what was so enthralling about how not to sexually harass your coworkers!
I've learned a couple of really helpful procedures from YouTube videos. I'm sorry they haven't worked for you, but after I gave up beating up Google and DuckDuckGo, I turned to YouTube and learned the solution to my problems in less than 3 minutes.
Sometimes, video is helpful. Showing how some object comes apart in video is usually clearer than trying to describe it, let alone draw up some ikea-style assembly diagram.
I suspect much of the divergence of opinion here comes down to subject matter. If I resort to youtube to figure something out it's generally fairly practical involving manipulating real world objects (or less often something on a screen).
For more involved topics - unless it's a formal lecture, interview etc. - I'd resort to text, if only because it's handier and it's easier to scan, skip, repeat etc.
I think it can't be only that. A lot of people like to get their news by video instead of by newspaper or the newspapers wouldn't be struggling.
Sure, that's absolutely true, but I was thinking of people here, where no one so far in this thread has come out as an unalloyed fan of video over text (a text based forum probably self selects).
Deoends what it’s for. If it is about how to fix something practical or use something new, I like having visuals so I can check that my understanding is correct. I find paragraphs of techinical language off-putting.
I do watch various chefs on YouTube for fun but would only follow a written recipe when actually cooking.
I think it can't be only that. A lot of people like to get their news by video instead of by newspaper or the newspapers wouldn't be struggling.
Sure, that's absolutely true, but I was thinking of people here, where no one so far in this thread has come out as an unalloyed fan of video over text (a text based forum probably self selects).
Fair then. Totally valid.
I also think neurodiversities can come into play. Some neurodiversities often include finding language processing more tiring and/or very hard. Other neurodiversities involve short attention spans. I think those can lead people to different preferences, but it's another way that places that want to be accessible should remember that some of us do not have the fucking patience to watch your dense video and will find it very hard. (or vis versa re text I suspect)
Comments
"J'e m'eppelle Enne. J'ai quetorze ens." with the "ay" sound replaced by a refined clipped "eh"
(My name is Anne. I am 14)
Because the "thumbs up" is regarded by young people as rude, abrasive, passive-aggressive and dismissive, and used by old(er) people.
I've done something like this--stood between my husband and a waitress, repeating what each said in my California accent. Didn't have to translate at all--Mr. Lamb's English has such a strong Vietnamese accent and the doctor's English had such a strong North Carolina accent that they could only understand each other when mine (well known from the media) was interposed.
Interesting. I avoid it on company communication channels, because it seems to me way too informal and potentially rude (for example, if someone says, "Melvin's just been diagnosed with incurable cancer and is taking the afternoon off to break it to his family.") And yet it's the only form of positive acknowledgement offered us, unless you actually write a whole message in words, which isn't always welcomed by those with overstuffed email boxes.
That's odd, in my household we all use it as a positive acknowledgement a la "message received" and nobody has ever cast shade over it.
Maybe my kids are out of the loop?
The amazing thing about English is it is an alive language as opposed to Latin, which some people consider a dead language. It is constantly changing, adding new words, new terms, new phrases, even new slang. Its grammar is constantly changing. What was considered verbotten--sorry, forbidden--just a few years ago is now allowed. Who knows where the language will take us in just the next ten years, let alone another hundred years.
Vive l'anglais!
Definitely agree. I want the option to just read the instructions, Thank You Very Much.
What an awesome book.
To my mind the driving principle needs to be maximize understandability.
Good god, how can an old fart keep track of it all?
Exactly. Easy writing can too often result in difficult reading. But first, try hard to clarify your own thoughts and put them in a logical sequence. And, if you can, tell a story. Make your it interesting.
Some can, some can't.
I don't think we're meant to. If we started being regarded as up on the latest trends, they couldn't be cool any more.
Keep on farting. It's all we can do.
Sometimes, video is helpful. Showing how some object comes apart in video is usually clearer than trying to describe it, let alone draw up some ikea-style assembly diagram. But in general, video is an awful way of conveying information. It's slow, it's not sensibly searchable, and it's difficult to refer back to.
If all you have to offer is a video of your face talking, I'd far rather you talked at a text-to-speech interface and posted the product, if you can't bring yourself to type.
But if your reader can't understand it, what does it matter if it's accurate? It's gobbledygook, but at least those in the know can understand it. Pity they're not the ones it's aimed at.
Agree with all of this. I far prefer written words to audio or video. But if video is the best I can get, I'll take it.
We get those for cyber security training. Fortunately the mute button works so I can leave the video playing in a separate window and do some work while it meanders inanely to a conclusion.
I suspect much of the divergence of opinion here comes down to subject matter. If I resort to youtube to figure something out it's generally fairly practical involving manipulating real world objects (or less often something on a screen).
For more involved topics - unless it's a formal lecture, interview etc. - I'd resort to text, if only because it's handier and it's easier to scan, skip, repeat etc.
Same (though the purpose of the courses is not so much to educate you as it is for the company to be able to prove that you pressed the 'I agree' button)
I think it can't be only that. A lot of people like to get their news by video instead of by newspaper or the newspapers wouldn't be struggling. And either the people who prefer video to newspapers includes people who I think of as like me* or there are almost none of us left.
*defined as having political opinions I can respect, a general interest in the world around them or parts of it, and intellectual curiosity (which does not require intelligence or education, btw).
I'll do that too, except I can't usually work--the stuff I do requires too much concentration, and before I know it, I've been paused on that page for 30 minutes... HR would really want to know what was so enthralling about how not to sexually harass your coworkers!
Sure, that's absolutely true, but I was thinking of people here, where no one so far in this thread has come out as an unalloyed fan of video over text (a text based forum probably self selects).
I do watch various chefs on YouTube for fun but would only follow a written recipe when actually cooking.
I also think neurodiversities can come into play. Some neurodiversities often include finding language processing more tiring and/or very hard. Other neurodiversities involve short attention spans. I think those can lead people to different preferences, but it's another way that places that want to be accessible should remember that some of us do not have the fucking patience to watch your dense video and will find it very hard. (or vis versa re text I suspect)