Gano, Ken wrote:
>
> That's what I was trying to say by asking you which University. It may
> sound elitist and just plain ass holish, (homemade adjective for one who is
> an ass hole, i. e. ME) but grammar and spelling (etc..) do may a difference.
> You can be a smart as anything, but without the ability to communicate it's
> pretty meaningless.
>
> Sorry for the tone here, but I'm really appalled that a college junior
> (anywhere in the world) could be so obviously unprepared for the use of
> written words.
Okay, I'm going to wade into this, since we're referring, at least
tangentially, to a couple of areas I know reasonably well--English and
technical writing. Since I run a technical publications department for
an automotive manufacturer, I'm always concerned about the language in
technical publications. And, because I spent a significant portion of my
time in college studying English, I'm also concerned with correct usage.
I am of two minds regarding spelling. One part of my experience tells me
that careless spelling implies careless thinking. The other part, based
on teaching college English to people not in professional degree
programs, admits that some people, no matter how hard they apply
themselves, are never able to spell correctly. My advice to them was,
always, to find a mate or an administrative assistant who could spell
and write with some clarity. And, as a great many Europeans and Asians
know, English has very curious rules regarding spelling. It is
disturbing, admittedly, to find that Britons, keepers of the mother
tongue, do badly at their own language, but it is a fact of life there,
as here.
Grammar (and, yes, there are two "a"s in it, folks), is another matter.
Sloppy grammar and syntax do imply sloppy thinking, whether employed by
engineers, salespeople or Triumph enthusiasts. A well-written piece of
any writing illustrates a desire on the part of the writer to
communicate, to make points clear and understandable, and to organize
thoughts in a way that minimizes or eliminates confusion. Logic is
visible in good, careful writing.
However, in truth, we are living in and communicating through the
Internet, a great intellectual leveler--anyone with a computer and a
modem is heard, however painfully his sentence structure or spelling may
jar one's sensibilities.
I agree with your worries, Ken, about the gradual destruction of the
language in favor of technical education, something you seem to suggest
above. And, I think James hasn't considered a few things about written
communication. The first is obvious--if one's message is so garbled by
poor spelling and syntax, is the message getting across at all, or are
the readers so confused that the intent can't be easily understood?
Second, there is that feeling, occasionally unfounded, on the part of
the "elitist" folks who went through university systems with more
traditional and rigorous standards, that truly bad writing is an
indication of either lack of intelligence or education or both. James
might be quite bright, but perhaps does not realize that he damages his
first impression with instructors and potential employers by what could
be generally described as casual attention to the details of written
communication.
One of the hardest things for any student disinterested in written
language to understand is its eventual necessity in the world of work.
And, in that regard, I disagree with some people here that say it's okay
because James is a Triumph enthusiast. Writing here, informally, can be
seen as a training ground for a future--everything here is
written--there are no verbal cues available to aid in discerning
meaning. The mere fact that this became an issue on what is, after all,
a hobbyist list, indicates that some here were trying to put James
right, for his own good.
On a very practical level, there is something also to be considered,
with regard to James' original question regarding LBC software. That
software has to be written. In the language of software, as in English,
usage must be precise. If his usage isn't precise, James is likely to
spend an unnecessarily large amount of time weeding out badly written
code with the compiler debugger, or might, in the worst case, be unable
to produce a working program. That liability might have some
ramifications for his future employability. Listening, James? <smile>
Ex-college English instructor stepping down from the soapbox...
gingerly. <g>
Cheers.
--
My other Triumph runs, but....
|