Letters to the Editor
-
Commercial Opportunity?
Amerigo, not being able to spell ALSO doesn't necessarily have anything to do with being able to READ. As an example, my daughter--who couldn't even spell well enough for a spellchecker to help her until she was probably 13 or so--read at the high school level when she was 8. She was a very late reader, though. The "switch" for her to decode written language didn't flip until after second grade.
Clearly my daughter is an n of 1. But, she's by no means alone. I did do a pretty thorough search of the literature in the years when we were trying to find help for her, and picked up all sorts of interesting info...
And, interestingly, while there are computer games for virtually every other aspect of gradeschool education, there weren't ANY in the US for spelling.
Perhaps a Salon reader could develop one? Make Garrison Keillor happy, earn a few bucks, and help American children spell better. A win-win-win!
-
evolution of language
"If that I mysspeke or seye"
Chaucer used it in the Miller's Tale (Thank you BBC News)
-
Amerigo's spelling system
And, interestingly, while there are computer games for virtually every other aspect of gradeschool education, there weren't ANY in the US for spelling.
Ma'am your daughter is a prodigy. Clearly the apple did not fall far from the tree.
No but there are lots of programs for learning typing, which is the same as learning spelling, because if the word is spelled wrong you are gonged.
I would be happy to design a computer game to assist correct spelling for kiddies. Mistakes would be rewarded with punishments of increasing intensity for refractory errors, such as writing out the word 500 times.
Three strikes and you have to hand copy Psalm 119 with no errors.
It works. I am living evidence.
-
Garrison on spelling
"Him and Greenspan could do it together"--HE and Greenspan could do it together. Was that supposed to be a joke. It is in either case.
-
That's 'Spellin be' to the current occupant
Marvelous bit of rambling on the duplicity of the chiefs of the financial fiefdom and the fault line running back to lazy language that ties the houses of the demented dollar dealers to the denizen of the decider...
Count me in as one of those who has signed up for a membership in the "Correctness Party, the party of good spellers, of people who pay attention to details." .... Would that we could send a fair number of the ’Nattering Nabobs of Negativism” back to school for remedial work as well .... for indeed my blood boils when watching what is spewed forth from the ’Telly-Belly of the Beast’ each day …
A fine line of lively loquaciousness …. And a good mid-week to all of you with the Concise Oxford close at hand!
-
Poor America
I love Garrison's wit. Used to listen to him when I had a radio. Too much noise and goop on to bother anymore.
Well, politicos don't want to deal with the real finances. Can't blame them. If I were a politician this is what I'd tell you.
"We've only given you what you've asked for, consumption on credit. If any of us proposed a real cure you would vote us out of office. Social Security will bankrupt by 2030, Medicare will require 80% of the present budget by 2030, the comptroller says we are effectively bankrupt, but any of us who tell you the truth and propose a fix, are tossed from office.
"You've asked us to bribe you for your votes and we've complied. Why are you unhappy?
We've given you the government you deserve and asked for."
-
Why it matters . . .
Garrison's essay (and the responses to it) gave me pause to critically question why spelling matters so much to me. In particular, I want to respond to the letter from "wilydigitral" (Oh? Did I misppell that? No mater, she knows hu he is, rigjt?):
"If communication is effective with X% of spelling/grammar errors, then it's a waste of time to try and reduce that %. This is as silly as people complaining that a roadway is 1.25 inches narrower than specifications say it should be. Has the road been there 20 years? Has it allowed people to travel safely and efficiently for that time period? Yes? Then leave it alone. Oh the recipe called for those cookies to have 1/4 stick of butter instead of 1/8? Do they taste good? Alright then, leave it."
This response suggests that people who care about spelling are simply elitist nitpickers with nothing better to do than make people (is Willie a Republican perchance?) feel stupid for not knowing how to spell. Not knowing the difference between "their" and "there" or "one" and "won" is not analogous to a roadway being 1.25 inches narrower than specifications or using an extra bit of butter when making a cake. The purpose of language is not simply to communicate, but to communicate as clearly as possible. Misspelled words slow down readers who are expecting correct spelling, thus creating a bump in the communication process. Butt whu kares, aniway . . .
The degree to which one cares enough to learn proper spelling reflects the degree to which one believes that details are important. If I write, "The ski is blue," you don't know whether I am talking about the "sky" (which I am too lazy to figure out how to spell correctly) or about a snow ski.
The failure to care about spelling can be interpreted as a failure to pay attention in general or to care about language as an agreed upon social system--or to even recognize it as such. True, language cannot communicate everything (was it ever intended to?), but, for better or worse, we think all of our thoughts, opinions, and even the idea of our "selves" and "the world" through this medium (note that "I" is a word that means a great deal to us). Garrison's point, I think, is that George Bush's inability to articulate ideas clearly reflects a mind unable to think clearly. This makes Bush look stupid, which he obviously is.
-
I live in Vegas...
...and this is, I imagine, the absolute rock bottom town in the country for linguistic aptitude. If you've seen Idiocracy -- or even if you haven't -- Las Vegas is leading the charge toward the world depicted therein. Having said that, probably my biggest language pet peeve is the cluelessness of most on proper apostrophe usage (or omission). In particular, nobody seems to understand anymore that "its" is possessive, while "it's" is a contraction of either "it is" or "it has." Drives me batty! Also, the placement of apostrophes in plural nouns before the "s" is rampant. It seems as if people are trying to convince themselves or others that theyr'e smart and know all about apostrophes, but in fact, they have no clue what to do with them.