First level of brain damage is : replace everything with phonetics (ie. for instance in French the sound [k] can be written "c", "k", "q", "qu" etc ; replace all this with letter k) ; remove all letters that are not pronounced ; drop tenses, plurals and genders ; randomize word suffixes and abbreviate :
donc -> dc, pour -> pr, pourquoi -> pk, g = j'ai, etc
Now this isn't really SMS, this is really verbose, since the moron has a real keyboard there are still a few words left. Also he went to the trouble of capitalizing the "G", lol. (in Engrish this would be like writing "Uve got").
Then there is the next level of moronicity, like when you see the above post and kick the user he may write this :
Moi oci je sui 1 integrist kom Alexbadabou mai c pa poure ca ke les gen doit nou taper dessu koi !!
c note style, c note fasson d'essprime la vibe de note plum !! C pour ca k'on n'a un blog d'ailleurre))) Pask'on aime ekrir (et poure la preuv: j'ekri moimeme des senariauts de seri TV) !! Vive le francer !!!
Nou on vou respekt alor vou ossi vou devraie nou respekter kar la vie elle et plein de degout et des couleur pour fair le monde. Peace and love evryone !!!
Merci Bix poure ton coment sur mon blog toa o moin tu soutient les artisst en erbe
He's saying that it's his right to write gibberish, etc. It's like a plea to get banned. Usually it works.
Magura said:
This is frightening. Most Danes/Scandinavians I've had the pleasure of meeting speak English that is far more grammatically correct than the esturine drivel spouted by most "native English" speakers in the UK, certainly in my part of the world (Kent).
I may be becoming rabid in my declining years (I'm over 40 and live near Tunbridge Wells) but even though I had my South London (Saarf Lunnon) accent beaten out of me at school and replaced by Received Pronunciation (a very "correct" form of English, akin to what used to be called "Queen's" or "BBC" English), my children speak a foreign dialect that is quite appalling - whatever I and my wife (a language teacher) have tried, we've obviously failed. However, I accept it in exchange for a peaceful family life ;-)
So, if you want "correct" English, I'd speak to a native of Holland or similar!
This is entertaining, but no nukes please
If you come to the Philippines, we've bastardized Tagalog (the national language) and English then called it TagLish. No, I'm not happy with that.
Text messages contain things such as "Musta na you?" (How are you?)
I use T9! So I have complete English spelling on my text messages
Singaporeans have their own - SingLish
If you come to the Philippines, we've bastardized Tagalog (the national language) and English then called it TagLish. No, I'm not happy with that.
Text messages contain things such as "Musta na you?" (How are you?)
I use T9! So I have complete English spelling on my text messages
Singaporeans have their own - SingLish
MJL21193 said:
[...]
Doesn't American Standard make plumbing fixtures? That's where the language has gone - down the toilet.
Well I am English (not a "Brit") and I have maintained for some time that the standard of English as it appears in the better American newspapers and periodicals is superior - often very superior - to that found in the English press.
It is not just that the writing style is often so much better: grammar is too, except of course for the American love-affair with the split infinitive. I know that Fowler says it's permissible, but I have never liked it - one "to boldly avoid"!
7N7
MJL21193 said:The title of this thread:
"Spelling, capitalization, and grammar."
One too many commas.
It's debatable, and known as the "Oxford comma." I usually prefer the Oxford comma because it makes it clear that the last two entities are separate.
I will not comment on the topic of juvenile pronunciation.
7N7 said:
I have a question about English English (as opposed to American English). When does one refer to a group as plural vs. singular? For example, Elvis Costello's "Oliver's Army";
"Oliver's Army is on the way, Oliver's Army are here to stay" (or something like that). In the same sentence the Army is referred to as a singluar item ("is on the way") and then as a plural ("are here to stay").
Just curious.
Sherman said:
I have a question about English English (as opposed to American English). When does one refer to a group as plural vs. singular? For example, Elvis Costello's "Oliver's Army";
"Oliver's Army is on the way, Oliver's Army are here to stay" (or something like that). In the same sentence the Army is referred to as a singluar item ("is on the way") and then as a plural ("are here to stay").
Just curious.
Yes the collective noun is a good brain teaser. I believe that again the Americans are better at this in general. For example, a sentence might read: "The government is going to act" or say, "Rolls-Royce has taken on 100 new staff". These are entities not a number of people - an army is an "it" not a "they".
The problem arises with groups such as the Pink Floyd. Logically one should write "Pink Floyd is going on tour". This is simpler with plural names such as "The Rolling Stones"!
7N7
7N7 said:
Professional America realizes that in order to be taken seriously, you need to sound credible. Sounding credible, in speech as well as in writing involves proper sentence structure, good vocabulary, correct spelling and clear, concise meaning.
All of the above are indicators of intelligence and higher education. This is how you will be judged.
When I read something that is poorly written, my opinion of the author goes down, even if it has been written by a knowledgeable person.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.