I spent a good portion of my working life as an adult literacy tutor. I would, in the odd lesson, declare a spelling amnesty. It was amazing, and sometimes heart-breaking, to see the wonderful writing produced when the student didn't feel embarrassed by their poor spelling. I have always believed that so long as the meaning is clear, the way the letters are assembled to produce the required sound shouldn't matter. Unfortunately, it does. So I taught spelling.
Spelling is important as is grammar but the most important thing is to communicate thoughts, needs, feelings etc clearly and be understood. I do, however, find it worrying how many basic mistakes are made by all sorts of people including news reporters and readers, announcers, authors (where's their editor??) and people on assorted media including this forum.
Knowing how a language works is key to understanding how to use it and English, when well spoken or written, is a beautiful and engaging language that equals, if not surpasses French, for example.
Vendée - 20kms from Atlantic coast.
"The price good men (and women) pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men (and women)."
Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef,
but the wrod as a wlohe...
Odd - does spelling matter? Isn't writing just communication - if the communication is understood, isn't that what matters? If I say 'I taut physics' ..is that wrong if you understand? And isn't spelling 'correctly' a relatively new thing - didn't people write phonetically up until a formal dictionary became the standard - and that was about the 18th century wasn't it?
My wife teaches English, to foreigners, and French, to the British. I get bombarded with her amusing anecdotes - normally about the foreigners learning English.
Of late, it has been about the Japanese, the Italians, the Bulgarians, the Moldovans and the Russian.
However, hearing the mistakes that the British make about speaking their own language, is worrying.
Do you think that people then were less capable of communication pre formalisation of rules? Are the words in Shakespeare (is that how you spell his name?) spelt as they are now - but can they still be understood? Isn't it more of a problem that languages morph in use and irrespective of grammar and spelling can become more difficult to understand? But their isn't a clean brake and you cant tell as things are changing - languages live.
If you want a laugh at the real linguistic c*ck ups, put on subtitles during the news. Instead of a person listening and typing what is being said, it is now done by Artificial Intelligence. Definitely artificial but, I would suggest, lacking in intelligence.
They give me a laugh too. Before the age of computer generated subtitles, you could often work out the accent of the perpetrator by their errors. I wish they would use text speak instead of full words when trying to keep up with live speech. They get so far behind, it's not worth trying to use the subtitles.
A classic subtitles cock up was a few years ago at the Chelsea Flower Show as the Queen walked under an archway of roses, admiring them. The commentator remarked that the Queen was fascinated by them, on the subtitles she was assassinated.
@steveTu, yes that is the accepted spelling of Shakespeare but interestingly there are six, maybe seven, surviving signatures in his hand. All are spelled differently and none is spelled as we would today.
Not so much a spelling error as a typo but I do remember the furore and embarrassment that followed a travel agent’s advertisement for exotic holidays by the sea but with an r instead of an x. Or there was the blunder when 2000 mugs were ordered for the testimonial year of the Warwickshire bowler Ashley Giles. Underneath his photo was the epithet King of Spin. When they cam back from the printers he had been elevated to King of Spain.
.....Are the words in Shakespeare (is that how you spell his name?) spelt as they are now - but can they still be understood? ....
@steveTu Spelled as they are now or spelled as they were then, makes no difference to me 'cos I can make neither head nor tail of most of it I have tried, honestly, but without the aid of Brodie's Notes and similar I would not have had a clue what he was on about.
I'd venture that the reason why some bits of his plays are well known and some expressions have entered everyday parlance is because those are the only ones anyone actually understands. And even they're often misquoted .... 'gild a lilly' ! Really ?
Some people rave about Chaucer and the beauty of his language. Try reading Chaucer's middle-English prose and tell me that's true ... can't understand a word of it !
When there's always biscuits in the tin, where's the fun in biscuits ?
Posts
Knowing how a language works is key to understanding how to use it and English, when well spoken or written, is a beautiful and engaging language that equals, if not surpasses French, for example.
Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe...
Of late, it has been about the Japanese, the Italians, the Bulgarians, the Moldovans and the Russian.
However, hearing the mistakes that the British make about speaking their own language, is worrying.
I wish they would use text speak instead of full words when trying to keep up with live speech. They get so far behind, it's not worth trying to use the subtitles.
@steveTu, yes that is the accepted spelling of Shakespeare but interestingly there are six, maybe seven, surviving signatures in his hand. All are spelled differently and none is spelled as we would today.
Not so much a spelling error as a typo but I do remember the furore and embarrassment that followed a travel agent’s advertisement for exotic holidays by the sea but with an r instead of an x. Or there was the blunder when 2000 mugs were ordered for the testimonial year of the Warwickshire bowler Ashley Giles. Underneath his photo was the epithet King of Spin. When they cam back from the printers he had been elevated to King of Spain.