Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

ASF spelling and grammar lessons

Jump to new
Impressive test - doubt many learned adults would pass that, even if it was in their own units of measurement.
 
johenmo said:
Well, doubt no more. Two of us heard it and we both heard the same thing. The only time I'be heard such a thing so it's a one-off. Kiwis are more "bill" - a becomes e, e becomes i and i becomes u is a rough rule. That's why they hear (or is that here or hare or hair!!) Aussies say the number "sex".
Click to expand...
All this is simply about accent. Not really much to do with spelling and grammar.
 
Julia said:
All this is simply about accent. Not really much to do with spelling and grammar.
Click to expand...

re the bell comment - yes.

Consider accent leading to different pronunciation over time - why couldn't it impact spelling & possibly grammar? As it becomes mainstream or normal. Look at US spelling - English origins for a fair part of it yet it has been changing.
 
johenmo said:
Many of these changes are learned. A couple of particular items is the replacement of "-ing" with "-ink" and "th" with "ff" (assuming it's double f). So nothing becomes nuffink and thing becomes fink. This occurs to the extent that a couple of generations later it's written as "fink", though the sentence obviously implies it is "think". This example is something I have observed first-hand.

I'm quoting from a card written by my nephew's son, & my sister says it too - so that's 3 generations & it was that the word was written by a 9 year old that really surprised me. My speech path daughter said it's more common than people think & it's learned, not pathological/medical in nature. Essentially if that's what they are exposed to most of the time then that's what they learn. And this is sort of how new dialects spring up i.e. it becomes the local patois, as you say. It's also spoken by her daughters & some of their kids - whereas the rest of us siblings & our kids don't use the ff or ink sounds.
Click to expand...

Julia said:
I wouldn't dispute that you have observed this, but I do dispute that it's something that's progressive which is what you're implying with the suggestion that 'a couple of generations later' it is written as such.

I have only ever heard these variations used by people who have had limited education and commonly those from some regions in the UK where it represents the local patois.
I've never actually known anyone who used either of these pretty ghastly pronunciations.
Click to expand...

Julia - this is from today's facebook page of the same family (person is in high school): "Comment for somethink i have all ways wanted to tell u". You can where the g has been replaced by a k. Luckily the "th" remains. Makes me shudder...
 
johenmo said:
Julia - this is from today's facebook page of the same family (person is in high school): "Comment for somethink i have all ways wanted to tell u". You can where the g has been replaced by a k. Luckily the "th" remains. Makes me shudder...
Click to expand...
Oh dear. I can't think of anything to say in response, johenmo.
 
Oh dear - I was just reading the local school's newsletter and found this written by one of the staff (not teaching staff), but you would think the person typing it would have a spell checker or at least be able to spell correctly:

How time fly’s,...
Click to expand...
 
Just bin watchun the F!
... "gridded up" ...?
... "pitted" ...?
Wat's with these dudes?
 
Standards have dropped. Gives the saying 'he only had an 8th grade education' a whole new meaning.

This is the eighth-grade final exam from 1895 in Salina , Kansas , USA . It was taken from the original document on file at the Smokey Valley Genealogical Society
and Library in Salina , and reprinted by the Salina Journal. Calliope
Click to expand...

That was an interesting blast from the past Calliope. And it certainly has been passed around the internet on many sites.

I think however it might not have been the actual exam for Grade 8 students. I did a check on the Truth or Fiction website which tries to get to the heart of many email viral message.
1895 Salina, Kansas Eighth Grade Graduation Exam-Unproven!
Summary of eRumor
The email lists questions from what it says is an exam required for eighth grade graduation in 1895 in Salina, Kansas. It is described as an example of how much more educated an eighth grader was a hundred years ago than today.


The Truth
TruthOrFiction.com has listed this eRumor as unproven, even though there is a source for it and we have obtained an actual copy of the exam. There has not been sufficient proof given, in our view, that the exam is what is claimed.

Rather than being for eighth graders, there are several aspects of the exam that raise the question as to whether it was intended for adults, perhaps newly graduated teachers or teacher applicants.

The eRumor says the exam is from the Smokey Valley Genealogical Society in Salina, Kansas, and was published in the Salina Journal newspaper. That is true. Shirley Tower, the volunteer librarian for the Smokey Valley Genealogical Society, found the exam and posted it on their website in 1996 and the Salina Journal's article appeared the same year. The exam started circulating on the Internet and became the subject of numerous newspaper articles including in the Washington Post and the Boston Globe.

There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the exam, but there are questions about for whom it was intended (If the graphics are difficult to read, place your pointing device arrow over the graphic for details).

First, the original exam doesn't mention the eighth grade. Here is an actual photograph of the title of the document:


Second, the document describes itself as being administered orally and for "applicants." Unless eight graders were described as "applicants," it makes one wonder if the exam was actually for newly graduated teachers:

The examination will be oral, and the Penmanship of Applicants will be graded from the manuscripts.

Third, some of the questions don't seem to be oriented toward students, but rather toward a teacher or a teacher applicant, for example:
District No. 33 has a valuation of $35,000. What is the necessary levy to carry on a school seven months at $50 per month, and have $104 for incidentals?
Click to expand...
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/a/1895exam.htm
 
basilio said:
I did a check on the Truth or Fiction website which tries to get to the heart of many email viral message.
Click to expand...

Thanks basilio. Your conversion to a seeker of the truth in such a trivial matter is refreshing. Let's hope it is reflected in your GW posts.
 
Well Calliope when you and the rest of the CC deniers decide to recognise some climate science that is measured, peer reviewed and real instead of the fanciful BS that you don't even bother to quote anymore we might have a discussion.

But otherwise it really is a waste of time isn't it ? :)

_____________________________________________________________________________________

And it wasn't that trivial to understand that a very widely quoted email was in fact probably misleading. I wasn't having a go at you in any way. The update was just to put everyone on the same page.
 
Moderator said:
GW posts in the any of the multiple GW threads please, not elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Good luck hunting Snarks:

snark5.jpg
 
Winston Churchill was once asked about his position on whisky.
Here's how he answered:

"If you mean whisky, the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody
monster that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home,
creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the
mouths of little children; if you mean that evil drink that topples
men and women from the pinnacles of righteous and gracious living into
the bottomless pit of degradation, shame, despair, helplessness, and
hopelessness, then, my friend, I am opposed to it with every fiber of
my being."

"However, if by whisky you mean the oil of conversation, the
philosophic wine, the elixir of life, the ale that is consumed when
good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and the
warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean good cheer, the
stimulating sip that puts a little spring in the step of an elderly
gentleman on a frosty morning; if you mean that drink that enables man
to magnify his joy, and to forget life's great tragedies and
heartbreaks and sorrow; if you mean that drink the sale of which pours
into our treasuries untold millions of pounds each year, that provides
tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our
dumb , our pitifully aged and infirm, to build the finest highways,
hospitals, universities, and community colleges in this nation, then
my friend, I am absolutely, unequivocally in favor of it.
 
johenmo said:
Linguists see language as evolving. English has done that - look at texts written in the 1600's or 1700's......


Many of these changes are learned. A couple of particular items is the replacement of "-ing" with "-ink" and "th" with "ff" (assuming it's double f). So nothing becomes nuffink and thing becomes fink. This occurs to the extent that a couple of generations later it's written as "fink", though the sentence obviously implies it is "think". This example is something I have observed first-hand.
Click to expand...

I know this reply is a bit belated, but.........

To suggest that the deplorable practices of replacing the suffix "ing" with "ink" and replacing "th" with "f" are examples of the evolution of our language is quite erroneous. They are examples of ignorance and lack of education. When I was young it was considered extremely common to say "somethink" or "nuffink", and I still consider it so. Neither examples are new - London cockneys said "nuffink" and "anyfink" more than 100 years ago.

Language evolves as new words are added to the lexicon ("computer", "telephone", "internet", "movie" or "cinema" were not around in the 18th century!), old words disappear (we no longer use "thou", "oft" or "hath "), or words change their usage (40 years ago "gay" meant "happy"!). Pronunciation changes (as in the great vowel shift of the 14th and 15th Centuries, and even just in different localities), and we adopt and adapt words and phrases from other languages.

This is language evolution, and there is a huge difference between the two!!
 
Ruby said:
..(40 years ago "gay" meant "happy"!)....
Click to expand...
Hi Ruby, that's the one thing I hold against gays, they've pinched a perfectly good adjective and made it an exclusive-usage noun.

On another subject, the evolution of compound words has been interesting. Printout, logoff, kickoff, flowchart, backup, website, roadmap, pricetag, healthcare, cellphone.
 
Ruby said:
I know this reply is a bit belated, but.........

To suggest that the deplorable practices of replacing the suffix "ing" with "ink" and replacing "th" with "f" are examples of the evolution of our language is quite erroneous. They are examples of ignorance and lack of education. When I was young it was considered extremely common to say "somethink" or "nuffink", and I still consider it so. Neither examples are new - London cockneys said "nuffink" and "anyfink" more than 100 years ago.

Language evolves as new words are added to the lexicon ("computer", "telephone", "internet", "movie" or "cinema" were not around in the 18th century!), old words disappear (we no longer use "thou", "oft" or "hath "), or words change their usage (40 years ago "gay" meant "happy"!). Pronunciation changes (as in the great vowel shift of the 14th and 15th Centuries, and even just in different localities), and we adopt and adapt words and phrases from other languages.

This is language evolution, and there is a huge difference between the two!!
Click to expand...

Agree with the last two paragraphs, and share your dislike of the first. When the deplorable practices become so widespread that they become the norm (amongst the majority) then the language has been proven to have evolved. Before that it is evolving - the example given becoming more widespread. Saying "haitch" is another which is more than mainstream - teachers are teaching it by saying it, TV reinforces it by saying it. A newcomer is the introduction of the invisible "h" into the spoken word "Australia", giving an "sh" (ess-aitch) sound. Another is the growing popularity of preformance instead of performance.

I am aware of the London cockney dialect - a dialect being a regional or social class speech pattern as opposed to, in it's other common usage, a separate language within a region or country that is considered inferior to the mainstream (as you find in France and other European countries). Because they are considered wrong by us at our time doesn't mean they won't be or haven't become part of changes to language. Your statement "...it was considered extremely common to say "somethink" or "nuffink", and I still consider it so." would be considered by some as an example of social classification which further supports it as a regional dialect.

So you consider the US as spelling and saying things incorrectly, rather than having evolved into into a different accent and dialect? I notice they put seem to put the em-PHA-sis on the wrong syl-LA-ble. :)
 
Top