Page 2 of 4

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:33 pm
by henry quirk
If the best a body can do is 'Ure wright.' Then, if they have sumthin' worth sayin', I'm good with it.

Re:

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:54 pm
by Immanuel Can
henry quirk wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:33 pm
If the best a body can do is 'Ure wright.' Then, if they have sumthin' worth sayin', I'm good with it.
Fair enough. But then, we're going to have to keep all our thoughts simple. And probably, we're going to have to live with the fact that people will always wonder why we can't be bothered (or are not able?) to communicate normatively.

If those are prices we're happy to pay, then I guess it's fine.

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:02 pm
by commonsense
Logik wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:34 am
It shouldn't matter, but it does.

People judge you on your grammar/spelling, so it is in your best interest to not write like a retard.
In general - don't pass the cost of being understood/accommodated onto others.
If you make it easy for other people to understand you and interact with you - then you will find more people willing to listen to you.

Of course, there is the special kind of people who need to be purged from Earth. The Grammar Nazi. The linguistic prescriptivist.

If you know how to correct my spelling you sure as fuck were able to understand my meaning.
Orijunulee, I lernd inglish thru fahniks. Hah!

Your spelling is inpeccable without error or mistake. Your split infinitive is off putting, though.

i wish people would read what i post

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:08 pm
by henry quirk
i was pretty clear: 'if the best a body can do is...'

if you can write sonnets, write sonnets; if the best you can do is a grocery list, write grocery lists

never suggested folks 'ought' to write stupid or wrong, only that folks gotta go with what they got

Re: i wish people would read what i post

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:22 pm
by commonsense
henry quirk wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:08 pm
i was pretty clear: 'if the best a body can do is...'

if you can write sonnets, write sonnets; if the best you can do is a grocery list, write grocery lists

never suggested folks 'ought' to write stupid or wrong, only that folks gotta go with what they got
So, the importance of spelling is conditional. In addition to earlier posts re the difference in types and purposes of writing such as a note-to-self v. a professional document for publishing, someone who spells correctly correct spelling is important. For someone who spells incorrectly correct spelling is not important.

lord, i give up

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:27 pm
by henry quirk
:confused:

Re: i wish people would read what i post

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:42 pm
by vegetariantaxidermy
henry quirk wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 7:08 pm
i was pretty clear: 'if the best a body can do is...'

if you can write sonnets, write sonnets; if the best you can do is a grocery list, write grocery lists

never suggested folks 'ought' to write stupid or wrong, only that folks gotta go with what they got
You really do take the 'I am an island' act to annoying extremes.

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:07 pm
by Immanuel Can
Actually, I find "Henry's" persona endlessly entertaining.

Of course I don't believe it's other than put-on, but he's chosen a very clever kind of character to play. It's his own version of Johannes de Silentio, I would think (Kierkegaard). Using this gruff character, he really seems to run a cheese grater up the left side of anybody who's pretentious. That's fun. But it's also clever that he's got that "simple folk" vibe going, which he uses to cut through the claptrap of people who are trying a little too hard to sound impressive, but aren't offering much. Yet, if you listen to what the man says, it's pretty smart, really. He gets the point, gets to it fast, and blows it up nicely. A person can't do that if they're not on-the-ball. He does it consistently. Nice hand grenade lobbing, I say. Gotta admire that.

We totally differ on our own personal beliefs. I know that. Yet and I still get along with the guy just dandy. He give me endless entertainment. And I don't ever find him unfair. For all his bluster, he's an honest character.

I don't know who he is, but if I ever did meet him I'd take him out for a pint...although I suspect stump hole whiskey would be more his style.

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:10 pm
by vegetariantaxidermy
Immanuel Can wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:07 pm
Actually, I find "Henry's" persona endlessly entertaining.

Of course I don't believe it's other than put-on, but he's chosen a very clever kind of character to play. It's his own version of Johannes de Silentio, I would think (Kierkegaard). Using this gruff character, he really seems to run a cheese grater up the left side of anybody who's pretentious. That's fun. But it's also clever that he's got that "simple folk" vibe going, which he uses to cut through the claptrap of people who are trying a little too hard to sound impressive, but aren't offering much. Yet, if you listen to what the man says, it's pretty smart, really. He gets the point, gets to it fast, and blows it up nicely. A person can't do that if they're not on-the-ball. He does it consistently. Nice hand grenade lobbing, I say. Gotta admire that.

We totally differ on our own personal beliefs. I know that. Yet and I still get along with the guy just dandy. He give me endless entertainment. And I don't ever find him unfair. For all his bluster, he's an honest character.

I don't know who he is, but if I ever did meet him I'd take him out for a pint...although I suspect stump hole whiskey would be more his style.
I agree, which is why I used the word 'act'. He's a bit of a one trick pony though, always on the same theme. He's created a character and he's sticking to it. I bet he's nothing like that in 'real life'. And speaking of 'pretentious'. your sides must be hanging in bloody ribbons by now.

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:29 pm
by Immanuel Can
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:10 pm
And speaking of 'pretentious'. your sides must be hanging in bloody ribbons by now.
Or maybe I'm not pretending. :wink:

'me', a 'persona'?

Posted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 1:03 am
by henry quirk
the hell you say

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:07 am
by Ghost
There are plenty of excellent responses in this thread and I'm grateful for all of them.

I'm glad so many people have bin reeding this post :wink:

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 5:45 am
by Walker
Ghost wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:07 am
There are plenty of excellent responses in this thread and I'm grateful for all of them.

I'm glad so many people have bin reeding this post :wink:
Is that a yes to answer the question?

When your last write could be your last right or wrong, then where's the spelling choice?

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:35 am
by Walker
If your last mistake is a mis-spelled word, then you're fortunate because you didn't notice it.

For many, the last mistake is the biggest mistake.

Re: Is proper spelling important?

Posted: Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:14 am
by gaffo
Ghost wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:59 am
My greatest friend spells words phonetically. I realized if I had discarded him as easily as I have others online who can't spell properly I would have missed out on my best friend. I used to see other's spelling mistakes as their lack of intelligence just as I see 'text speak' as laziness/stupidity. Other people may see my own poor grammar or sentence structure as the same.
I have become more forgiving over many years now. I recognize that languages will change as words fall into history and new words are created or change definition. Some people will have dyslexia, some will only be able to spell words phonetically, etc. How important is proper spelling anyways?
There is a quote that is often attributed to both Mark Twain and Thomas Jefferson that is about lacking imagination if only spelling a word one way.
I have Dyslexia - mild thankfully, i loathe English because though it claims to be phonetic, it really is not.

it could! be - and i made a "System" years ago to make it phonetic, but being a no-body, its just a mental fantasy (wish) on my part. If Englsih were re-writen in my "System" English would be truly phonetic. my self made mental fantasy rules for English is quite simple.

1. no silent letters - remove all of them in words that have them.
2. remove the letter "K", it was imported by the Romans from the Greeks and is a foreign letter- identical to "C" in all ways - so remove it, all words with "k" in them shall be respelled with the letter "C"
3. no double consonents! - and so no silly rules about long sounding/short sounding prior vowel letters (the whole "vowel phonetics depends upon a LATTER letter/double letter is dumb! - it breaks "real time phonetics" - one has to see the latter letters in the word in real time in reading the damn word!
4. limit the less used letters to their sole sound - so "Y" only in words with "yu" - not in words where it is used instead of "i" (each letter should have it own sound, so all uses of "y" in cases of words where it is used instead of "i" should be respelled with "i" (etc for all letters! - no duplication allowed).
5. short form phonetics of vowels should be ONE vowel letter, long form should always be Double Vowels! (thus removing the double consonate bullshit, silent letter "e" at end of word bullcrap too.

those five rules fix all spellings.
.................
in will rewrite the above in proper phonetic English now.

I hav dislexea - mild thancfule, i louth English becus tho it claams to be funetic, it reely is not.

it cud be - and i maad a "sistem" yeers ago to maac it fonetic, but beeing a no-bodi, its just a mental fantasi (wish) on mi part. if English wur ree-ritin in my "sistem" English wud be truuli fonetic. my self maad mental fantasi ruuls for English is quiit simpl.

1. no silent letrs - reemoov al of them in words that hav them.
2. reemoov the letr "K", it wus imported bii the Romans from the Greecs and is a foren letr - indentical to "c" in al wais - so remoov it, al words with "K" in them shal bee respeled with the letr "C"
3. no dubl consunats! - and so no sili ruuls about long sounding/short sounding prior voul letrs (the hool "voul fonetics depends upon a LATR letr/dubl letr is dum! - it braacs "reel tiim fonetics" - won has to see the latr letrs in the words in reel tiim in reeding the dam word!
4. limit the les usd letrs to thair sol sound - so "Y" onli in words with "yu' - not in words whar it is usd insted of "i" (eech letr shud hav it oun sound, so al uses of "Y" in cases of words whar it is usd insted of "I" shud be respeled with "i' (ect for al letrs!) - no duplicashum aloud!
5.short form fonetics of vouls shud be WUN voul letr, long form shud alwais be Dubl Vouls! (thus remooving the dubl consonat boolshit, silent letr "e" at end of word boolcrap too.

.................

simple example of rule 5:

Kite............Ciit
Kit............Cit
Cat.............Cat

Kate...........Caat

Like...............Liic

Lick...........Lic

Sick............Sic

Bite............Biit

Blight..............Bliit

Sight..............Siit

Hate..............Haat

Hat..........Hat

Fake...........Faac

Fat............Fat

etc..........