Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

ASF spelling and grammar lessons

Jump to new
white_crane said:
I'm not sure if this mistake was picked up, but it is incorrect to put a period after 'Mr'. A period is not used to signify an abbreviation if that abbreviation uses the last letter of the whole word.

Wow! I must be bored.
Click to expand...
ah touche - thanks white crane
;)
still I like the trend of leaving off all such stuff, i.e.

Mr S Tan
200 Broadway Av
WEST BEACH SA 5024

PS as for "when to dot" and "when not to dot" abbreviations, - you'd agree I suspect that English must be a fun language to learn in your mid years - maybe easier than written Mandarin lol - but not much :2twocents
 
I've heard that the English language is one of the hardest to learn. I would have to agree.

PS - I prefer impressionism, it's the big picture that counts.
 
white_crane said:
I've heard that the English language is one of the hardest to learn. I would have to agree.
Click to expand...
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=211658&highlight=fox#post211658

Sounds and Letters
A poem for English students

When in English class we speak,
Why is break nor rhymed with freak?
Will you tell me why it's true
That we say sew, but also few?

When a poet writes a verse
Why is horse not rhymed with worse?
Beard sounds not the same as heard
Lord sounds not the same as word

Cow is cow, but low is low
Shoe is never rhymed with toe.
Think of nose and dose and lose
Think of goose, but then of choose.

Confuse not comb with tomb or bomb,
Doll with roll, or home with some.
We have blood and food and good.
Mould is not pronounced like could.

There's pay and say, but paid and said.
"I will read", but "I have read".
Why say done, but gone and lone -
Is there any reason known?

To summarise, it seems to me
Sounds and letters disagree.
Click to expand...

Double Trouble
A poem for English students
by Mark Chandler

Please spare me a thought
For the cause of my frowns
My teacher's just taught
Me the plurals of nouns

So let's start with a fox
Well, the plural is foxes
But change it to ox
We have oxen, not "oxes"

He becomes they:
Man becomes men
So I think I can say
Humans are "humen"!

Explain to me please:
On my plate are pink prawns
The green things are peas
Make the yellow ones "corns"!

So foot becomes feet?
There's no logic at all ...
Because boots are not "beet"
... And you say 'six foot tall'

A pair of trousers - OK?
But I see only one.
Can you please say
Where the other has gone?
Click to expand...
 
white_crane said:
I've heard that the English language is one of the hardest to learn. I would have to agree.

P
Click to expand...
Because I don't speak any other languages, I can't really make the comparison, but as a tutor of adult literacy I'd endorse the suggestion that English is very difficult. To those of us who have been literate from early childhood, language is completely automatic, but to adults who haven't learned to read and write for whatever reason, it's exceptionally difficult.

I've had several people (all male) who were orally very articulate but who could not even write their own name and address. Could never fill out a form, or even read a newspaper or magazine. Libraries are places they will never go. Such illiteracy affects every aspect of their lives and they are socially completely displaced.

The school system doesn't help. They will push people up into the next grade even when they have failed dismally.
 
Having fairly poor sight which was discovered fairly late in my school years, and being a typical young male and refusing to wear glasses at school, I did most of my reading by recognizing the word's shape.

In that way, it was like learning to read and write in oriental pictographs, rather than analyzing the actual spelling. Consequently, phonetic spelling (or lack thereof) has never been a difficulty for me.

I suspect many learn the same way, sans poor eyesight, without really realizing it.

Maybe written English can be taught this way?

Just a thought.
 
Julia, where does that distinction between flammable and inflammable come from? If it's an Australian source I think it might be a post-facto justification; it's certainly not a widely understood distinction. I remember the change from "inflammable" to "flammable" on warning labels in NSW, though I don't remember when it happened. At the time I thought "flammable" was a government invention, but it appeared in the language some time in the 19th century. "inflammable" dates from around 1600. The mandated change was not because of the real meaning, but because these days warnings in English need to make sense to people who aren't familiar with Latin. Using "flammable" reduces the opportunity for confusion.

I still don't like it, but for a life-saving message I guess I can live with it.

Ghoti
 
Have we mentioned "outside of" yet? Australia seems to have adopted this from America in less than 10 years. It's everywhere now. Still sounds odd to me: if the athletes wait outside of the stadium, why don't they walk through of the tunnel and stand on of the podium? Or maybe they do???

Ghoti
 
Ghoti, don't now remember where it came from, sorry.
I agree that it's less than helpful.

Re "outside of", I haven't heard this, but I've always been puzzled by the way Americans say "off of". i.e. 'Smith Street runs off of Jones Street'.
 
Julia said:
I've always been puzzled by the way Americans say "off of". i.e. 'Smith Street runs off of Jones Street'.
Click to expand...

Julia, I've always been puzzled the way Americans (and Canuks) say 'bring' where we say 'take'.

e.g. when you come visit, I'll bring you to a new restaurant... it's so fun.
 
LOL

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...sco-revises-grammar-manages-make-blunder.html
English lesson: Tesco revises its grammar, but still manages to make a blunder

By Lucy Ballinger
Last updated at 12:11 PM on 01st September 2008

* commentsComments (64)
* Add to My Stories Add to My Stories

article-1051157-027A9C7A00000578-314_233x247.jpg


Ever queued at the 'ten items or less' checkout at Tesco and found yourself muttering about the appalling grammar in the sign above your head?

Probably not. But if you have, then salvation could be on its way.

After a long-running and heated debate over whether the signs are linguistically correct, they will now be altered to say: 'Up to ten items'.

Tesco has agreed to change the wording following criticism from supporters of good English who had argued that the signs should say 'ten items or fewer' rather than 'ten items or less'.

The solution was suggested by the Plain English Campaign, and Tesco bosses hope it will please everyone.

A Plain English Campaign spokesman said: 'There is a debate about whether the word should be "less" or "fewer".

'Saying "Up to ten items" is easy to understand and avoids any debate.'

That may prove to be wishful thinking, as some would argue 'Up to ten items' could be taken to mean 'ten items and no more' or 'nine items or fewer'....
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • article-1051157-027A9C7A00000578-314_233x247.jpg
    article-1051157-027A9C7A00000578-314_233x247.jpg
    18.6 KB · Views: 11
Just been reminded.

When you are standing in a line for something (like the checkout at the supermarket, or to see a teller at a bank) you are standing in a queue, not a cue.
 
I am beginning to doubt the credibility of Ross Garnaut. For somebody who can't make the effort to check on how to pronounce Copenhagen, you would wonder if he has checked his sums.

It is not -hargen, unless you are a German.
 
Calliope said:
I am beginning to doubt the credibility of Ross Garnaut. For somebody who can't make the effort to check on how to pronounce Copenhagen, you would wonder if he has checked his sums.

It is not -hargen, unless you are a German.
Click to expand...

jees Calliope - lol

"C'est la vie"

PS pronounced
"cesst lar vee"
 
ghotib said:
Julia, where does that distinction between flammable and inflammable come from? At the time I thought "flammable" was a government invention, but it appeared in the language some time in the 19th century. "inflammable" dates from around 1600.
Ghoti
Click to expand...

Hi Guys

The comment from ghotib regarding "inflammable" dating back to 1600 was timely for me as I'm currently reading Bill Bryson's biography on William Shakespeare.

According to the author, Shakespeare is directly responsible for bringing to the English language approximately 650 words (and unofficially many hundreds more). That is to say, words first used by Shakepeare that up until that time in history had not been recorded. Words such as "unmask" and "inflammable". He has been credited with "inventing" a staggeringly high percentage of the words in usage at that time.

When you consider that the vocabulary of the English was much smaller back then, you can begin to appreciate what an extraordinary effort it was.

Just another couple of pieces of trivum - it is remarkable but very little is actually known about Shakespeare. We are unsure of the correct spelling of his name, as it was done several different ways. There are only two days in history when his whereabouts can be confirmed (court documents where he was witness to a crime). Even the portrait of Shakespeare cannot be authenticated.

Duckman
 
This one infuriates me, too, Snake. As does "each other" when it should be "one another" and vice versa. Grr!

And don't expect it to get better. Today's teachers are some of the worst offenders. My neighbour is a high school teacher. She says "we should of went there."
 
Julia said:
This one infuriates me, too, Snake. As does "each other" when it should be "one another" and vice versa. Grr!

And don't expect it to get better. Today's teachers are some of the worst offenders. My neighbour is a high school teacher. She says "we should of went there."
Click to expand...

I can back that up with the fact that in my field there is a culture of "dumb-down" developing.From supervisors to layperson there is poor communication, misleading directions, bad practices and incorrect terminology being perpetuated.

For what reason I do not know and more to the point which social structure has set the "dumb-down" process in motion?

Without straying off topic too much are there any reasons not seen?
 
Dumbing down happens when policy and process become codified to the point when individual self-reliance and initiative become unnecessary. Organisations then run around with tick box and criteria sheets which become and end in themselves (reified) e.g., performance appraisal processes, rubrics, ISO documents etc.
Anyway, something you might all like for the kids is my way of teaching a very basic grammar. I put this together in the mid-eighties when I was teaching in Colorado on exchange. Post-modernists won't like it but but they can play with their indexical signifiers while we get on with it. I use nine parts of speech. I tell kids every word you'll say, hear or see is one of these. I use the mnemonic CANVAPPIA (think of an pizza). Conjunction, Adverb, Noun, Verb, Adjective,Pronoun,Preposition, Interjection,Article. In order: C:Joining word, A:adds meaning to verbs, adjectives and other adverbs (very,very hot), N:naming word, V:doing word, A:describing word, P:takes the place of nouns, P;shows the relationship between objects, I:what you shout when you hit your thumb with a hammer ... you know, gosh, golly or whoops!, A:article, of which there are only three; a, an and the (indefinite and definite, sometimes also called indicaticative adjectives).
If you're keen, you can "rap" these with the kids. I don't know how to express the timing but I put the words of CANVAPPIA together in such a way that you can clap your hands as you're saying the words and it makes a sort of spoken song. (The word interjection may need some syncopation to squeeze it in.) That way they get to remember them. Then there's all the fun of unpacking the types of words and going deeper as you drill down into the many classifications of adverbs, adjectives and nouns.

May I indulge in a language joke? A professor of language is harumpphing on in a lecture about the possibility of a negative and a positive forming a negative in Urdu and a positive and a negative possibly forming a positive in Pashtan but "nowhere is there an example where two posiives make a negative" ... from up the back a broad Australian accent interjects, "Yeah, right!"

Outside Bungendore I saw a sign the other day which said "Bargains. Up to half price off!" It unsettled me.

Bill Bryson's books on English are worth a read especially The Mother Tongue.

Sometime I have small daydreams about using CANVAPPIA as part of teaching grammar privately so I'd like to keep some sense of ownership of it if that's OK. Very happy if it's useful for kids and grandkids though.

PS Ghotib .... is this "fishb"?
 
Top