grammar.....
yes.....while correct use of grammar should be a major concern, i dont think using incorrect grammar should be punishable. honestly i dont think think the majority of the population is so dumb that it doesnt know the difference between "you're" and "your". that is a matter of haste. and besides creating a law against the use of incorrect grammar would only be a pain in the derriere as mistakes are common among the general public. so deal with it. :wink:
I am sad to inform of this, but the majority of the population DOESN'T know it's grammar. Years of viewing adverts, commercial signs and poor english on Tv have left the majority of North America sadly, hopelessly grammerless. Take a simple example such as "Every day". If you follow most advertisments, it should be joined to form "everyday". This is incorrect. When I've edited papers, I cannot count the number of times I have had to correct people on this, even on third or fouth drafts. The case of "your" and "you're" is a classic grammar problem that most people laugh about, but no one puts an effort towards to fix. Second and third year university students still get those two wrong. "They're", "Their", and "There" are continously misspelt and misused. And don't get me started on "nite"...
My point is that the concerns about bad grammer on the internet, and this board in particular, are valid. How feasable is it to expect everyone to write perfectly all the time? Not particularly so. Punishing bad grammer would simply be elitist, especially considering the number of international play this game and board both receive. But never doubt for a second that people are unable to write the langauge they are speaking. Just check your local high school and you'll see what I mean.
- A Miffed Canadian. ("It's spelt COLOUR dammit!")
EDITED: for my terrible spelling.... stupid tiny laptop keyboard... =P
I've even seen people confuse throw with through.. now these words even don't sound alike.. i'm dumbfounded. But punishment seems a bit too much, or as we say in Holland, don't make an elephant out of a mosquito.
It seems to me that maybe the people voting yes on the UN resolution against bad grammar are over reacting a little bit, but this is besides the more important issue at hand. How long is it before someone tries to take advantadge of someone else's poor grammar, spelling, etc...? It might be harsh to punish those people playing who are of International origin: but last time I checked English is the language of the Internet, this place is an English language based site, it should therefore not be that stringent a requirement to require atleast a modicum of linguistic ability from those nations making a proposal.
I believe that the main point behind the resolution is professionalism. As an international body, we need to strive to uphold the highest levels of professionalism. For this reason, I am in support of the resolution.
Caffeinneburg
13-02-2003, 03:29
While I support the grammar resolution in theory, I have to agree with those who fear that it would unfairly punish those who do not speak English as their primary language. Consequently, I have an alternative proposal, which I may propose as a resolution myself; in any case, I would certainly support similar proposals made by other concerned nations.
In effect, before a proposal goes to the vote in the General Assembly, I would like to see a designated nation (or group of nations) take responsibility for editing it so it has correct grammar and spelling. This way, unscrupulous grammar police such as myself couldn't use mistakes or typos as excuses to punish other nations or shoot down unwanted resolutions; at the same time, the U.N. would be able to maintain its commitment to universal education and clear dialogue without being hampered by poorly-worded resolutions rife with mistakes and errors.
Are there any comments or suggestions anyone has to offer regarding this idea?
imported_Blacklake
13-02-2003, 04:06
While I do belive this is a problem in UN proposals, how exactally do you plan to punish these grammar evil-doers? It has been stated numerous times in most of the forums that UN resolutions CANNOT CHANGE GAME MECHANICS :evil: ! Proposals like this just end up being annoying to nations in the UN who don't want to increase their democratic freedoms, such as dictatorships! If you want to change the level of grammar freedom, make a post in the technical forum.
- A Miffed Canadian. ("It's spelt COLOUR dammit!")In the US it is spelled color for some reason :? .
GET A FREAKIN' LIFE !! Every1 uses shortcuts in their spelling, so get over it !
8)
imported_Cantaloupia
13-02-2003, 07:23
GET A FREAKIN' LIFE !! Every1 uses shortcuts in their spelling, so get over it !
I do not use shortcuts. Shortcuts and contractions are for bad people.
How many threads do we need to discuss one proposal?
The growing use of shortcuts in spelling has gotten bad enough that my university has put out a primer for the english department to distribute stating that contractions such as "Every1", "U", and most generalized l33t speak is not acceptable form on essays, exams and assignments.
I am sad to say some students are fighting this. Not very well, but some noise is being made.
OOC: I don't even bother reading the resolution text any more. I simply look at the category (in this case, "the furtherment of democracy") and the strength, and base my nation's vote on those two factors. This policy helps me to ignore the fact that, despite numerous administrative posts to the effect that game mechanics will not be changed by UN resolutions, many proposals still target the game mechanics. :roll:
IC:
Our scholars wholeheartedly support this resolution to improve grammar and spelling among UN member states. However, some of our more irreverent pundits do mildly object to the statement in this resolution that there is no such word as "Vaticant." While "Vatican" (in usages such as "the Vatican" or "Vatican City") is correct, our pundits do reserve the right deliberately to use the term "Vatican't" (note the apostrophe) when poking fun at progress-retarding aspects of Catholic doctrine (as perceived by said commentators, of course). Thus, in the following two example sentences, the first contains a simple misspelling, while the second employs a deliberate misspelling to emphasize a rhetorical point:
1. "The Vaticant is opposed to birth control."
2. "The 'Vatican't' seems to delight in listing all the things the Catholic faithful can't do, from eating meat on Fridays to using artificial contraception."
We do not propose a formal amendment to the resolution. Our columnists and sages merely wish to ensure that the right deliberately to misspell words for literary effect is sanctioned in the legislative history of this resolution.
Whimsically,
Andrew van Sleich
Commentator Extraordinare
We need as many threads as it takes for some people to realize the facts. The proposals are largely unreadable as it is because of poor grammer and ridiculous misspellings. It is about time that this has come to everybody's attention!
How many threads do we need to discuss one proposal?
Sorry. I started a thread ("Resolution 245A") before I saw this one.
Mea culpa.
My vote as member of the UN?
YES!!!
MUAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
I mean, people should be dealt with and punished.......like in my sultanate!!!!
The Hypocrisy is staggering, why should other nations have change to suit your needs? Have you no idea that they have the same problem? Yet you insist on imposing harsh policies on them because of Why?!!! And then you claim this new resolution will help expodite democracy!!! Hah!!! how this be considered fair, equitable and democratic!?
The Hypocrisy is staggering, why should other nations have change to suit your needs? Have you no idea that they have the same problem? Yet you insist on imposing harsh policies on them because of Why?!!! And then you claim this new resolution will help expodite democracy!!! Hah!!! how this be considered fair, equitable and democratic!?
The proposals are largely unreadable as it is because of poor grammer and ridiculous misspellings.
We, the people of Kn-Yan, will pass over your strange notion of grammar, and will instead focus on your ridiculous misspelling ("grammer"). Nyar-freakin'-lathotep al-freakin'-mighty, we find this kind of hypocrisy intolerable. For the last time: get a dictionary, all you supporters of this ridiculous resolution, and stop badgering the rest of us about the quality of our writing...or the supposed lack thereof!
"A slavish concern for the composition of words is the sign of a bankrupt intellect!"
--The Humbug, from The Phantom Tollbooth
Respectfully,
Lobon, Minister of Education, Dominion of Kn-Yan
The Hypocrisy is staggering, why should other nations have change to suit your needs? Have you no idea that they have the same problem? Yet you insist on imposing harsh policies on them because of Why?!!! And then you claim this new resolution will help expodite democracy!!! Hah!!! how can this be considered fair, equitable and democratic!?
The Hypocrisy is staggering, why should other nations have change to suit your needs? Have you no idea that they have the same problem? Yet you insist on imposing harsh policies on them because of Why?!!! And then you claim this new resolution will help expodite democracy!!! Hah!!! how can this be considered fair, equitable and democratic?!
OK here's an idea. I don't like cancer. I think we can all agree cancer is bad. So let's all make sock puppets, put them on, go out in our back yards, and jump on one leg while singing "Yellow Rose of Texas" at midnight.
Doesn't make any sense you say? Wouldn't do anything about cancer?
Why it's almost like passing a resolution banning bad grammar. It doesn't do anything aside from potentially annoying your neighbors.
OK here's an idea. I don't like cancer. I think we can all agree cancer is bad. So let's all make sock puppets, put them on, go out in our back yards, and jump on one leg while singing "Yellow Rose of Texas" at midnight.
OOC: LMFAO!
but last time I checked English is the language of the Internet
This is not true. Really! Please check your facts besides your spelling.
I'ts just that the pages you visit are predominantly english. As most of those pages are witten by english-speaking people who do not speak a second language, they will link only to other pages they understand. As a result these will be ... uh... english?
german: http://www.heute.t-online.de/ZDFheute
french: http://fr.yahoo.com/
japanese: http://www.yahoo.co.jp/
spanish: http://es.yahoo.com/
russian: http://www.pravda.ru/
chinese: http://chinese.yahoo.com/
dutch: http://www.nu.nl/
or even: frysian: http://www.lineone.nl/frysk_com/
If we go by statistics. 1/4th of the world is chinese. perhaps we should limit ourselves to that? Although it is true that chinese incorporates over 300 languages, they use one 1 written language. and the internet is predominantly in a written format.
Not acceptable?
1/5th of the world is indian (as in the Country india)
not native english speakers either.
of the remaining 55% of the world. most people speak:
1. Spanish, 2. Rusian. 3.French
Only then english.
Please stop this stupid proposal. It will do nothing to increase democratic freedoms what it will do is stop good proposals with bad spelling, and give greater prominence to ridiculous proposals with good spelling.
Also please clarify which 'flavour' of english you would like to see?
Queen's english, american english, pidgin-english, or japlish are all options just to name a few.
with kind regards
Duchess Rebeccah
Grand Duchy of Vaticant
OK here's an idea. I don't like cancer. I think we can all agree cancer is bad. So let's all make sock puppets, put them on, go out in our back yards, and jump on one leg while singing "Yellow Rose of Texas" at midnight.
Doesn't make any sense you say? Wouldn't do anything about cancer?
It won't?? Oh. :oops: Oh, my. That means that the entire medical establishment on Notrouble Atoll is....
*calls Notrouble General Hospital to break the bad news*
However, some of our more irreverent pundits do mildly object to the statement in this resolution that there is no such word as "Vaticant."Hear Hear!!!
1. "The Vaticant is opposed to birth control."
2. "The 'Vatican't' seems to delight in listing all the things the Catholic faithful can't do, from eating meat on Fridays to using artificial contraception."
No we don't!
We in the vaticant sincerely believe that the 'vati' can't rule your life.
I have no problem with birth control.
and feel free to eat whatever you wan't
If it hurt none, do as you wish.
Duchess Rebeccah
Grand Duchy of Vaticant
I think there should be stronger controls on language. Not to oppose the natural change over time, but to prevent ourselves from becoming lazy in our linguistics. I fully support the Orwellian belief that our language dictates our thoughts. If the language becomes lazy...
but last time I checked English is the language of the Internet
This is not true. Really! Please check your facts besides your spelling.
I'ts just that the pages you visit are predominantly english. As most of those pages are witten by english-speaking people who do not speak a second language, they will link only to other pages they understand. As a result these will be ... uh... english?
german: http://www.heute.t-online.de/ZDFheute
french: http://fr.yahoo.com/
japanese: http://www.yahoo.co.jp/
spanish: http://es.yahoo.com/
russian: http://www.pravda.ru/
chinese: http://chinese.yahoo.com/
dutch: http://www.nu.nl/
or even: frysian: http://www.lineone.nl/frysk_com/
If we go by statistics. 1/4th of the world is chinese. perhaps we should limit ourselves to that? Although it is true that chinese incorporates over 300 languages, they use one 1 written language. and the internet is predominantly in a written format.
Not acceptable?
1/5th of the world is indian (as in the Country india)
not native english speakers either.
of the remaining 55% of the world. most people speak:
1. Spanish, 2. Rusian. 3.French
Only then english.
Please stop this stupid proposal. It will do nothing to increase democratic freedoms what it will do is stop good proposals with bad spelling, and give greater prominence to ridiculous proposals with good spelling.
Also please clarify which 'flavour' of english you would like to see?
Queen's english, american english, pidgin-english, or japlish are all options just to name a few.
with kind regards
Duchess Rebeccah
Grand Duchy of Vaticant
But, I also give exception to people that are not natural English speakers, or other forms of English that use slight variations.
While misspellings piss me off, I tolerate them as many other languages do not follow the same rules as English... and since English has so many freakin' exceptions to the rule, much more so than other languages, I don't know where we get off getting all bent about misspellings.
I think we should all be forced to write chinese for a day and see how you feel when the chinese, who have several hundred "letters" in their alphabet look down on you for not knowing how to spell something correctly.
Get a life and come up with some real issues.
OK here's an idea. I don't like cancer. I think we can all agree cancer is bad. So let's all make sock puppets, put them on, go out in our back yards, and jump on one leg while singing "Yellow Rose of Texas" at midnight.
Doesn't make any sense you say? Wouldn't do anything about cancer?
Why it's almost like passing a resolution banning bad grammar. It doesn't do anything aside from potentially annoying your neighbors.
Your example is fundamentally flawed. A proper example using cancer as the evil would be to take action to limit the causes of cancer, i.e. outlawing cigarettes and other carcinogen-containing materials.
Poor grammar is directly related to reducing the level of intelligence involved in the UN forums, as carcinogens are directly related to causing cancer. Those who do not have a mastery over basic grammar have no place in deciding world politics.
While misspellings piss me off, I tolerate them as many other languages do not follow the same rules as English... and since English has so many freakin' exceptions to the rule, much more so than other languages, I don't know where we get off getting all bent about misspellings.
I think we should all be forced to write chinese for a day and see how you feel when the chinese, who have several hundred "letters" in their alphabet look down on you for not knowing how to spell something correctly.
Get a life and come up with some real issues.
Dutch and German have just as much and likely more exceptions than english does. And Chinese people don't have to know several hundreds, but several thousands of characters to be considered litterate. if i'm not mistaken the average to know is 5000
Anyway, vote no on the proposal. It is discriminating and pure lunacy.
http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6477&highlight=amendment
Your example is fundamentally flawed. A proper example using cancer as the evil would be to take action to limit the causes of cancer, i.e. outlawing cigarettes and other carcinogen-containing materials.
Poor grammar is directly related to reducing the level of intelligence involved in the UN forums, as carcinogens are directly related to causing cancer. Those who do not have a mastery over basic grammar have no place in deciding world politics.
Bad grammar causes low intelligence? I think not.
In any case this resolution won't do anything about grammar. OK? All it will do is screw up people who've choosen to play as dictators. Now it might gladden the hearts of real life control freaks to know that they've scored one for the proper use of the the third-person pluperfect indicative, but it won't do much else.
this is just another reason i wont join the u.n. ive been a nation for a week or so now and all it seem to have is a bunch of whiney ass people who just take their own personal life pet peaves and try to pass them on to the rest of the world this through this GAME....as many other posters(gee is that a word, oh no punish me master!!) have said already GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
someone said this before, but a bunch of you are real f*cking dumbasses. rambling about improper grammar, when you spell it grammer. "i'm a teacher and i hate grading dumb-ass kids who write your instead of you're!" spell some f*cking words right, retard.
Cremerica
17-09-2003, 06:34
bump
Oppressed Possums
17-09-2003, 14:44
- A Miffed Canadian. ("It's spelt COLOUR dammit!")
In Latin, it is spelt color. That's what it is supposed to be.
- A Miffed Canadian. ("It's spelt COLOUR dammit!")
In Latin, it is spelt color. That's what it is supposed to be.
English is not Latin.
And why was this thread dug up?