- Joined
- 21 May 2008
- Posts
- 664
- Reactions
- 14
Impressive test - doubt many learned adults would pass that, even if it was in their own units of measurement.
All this is simply about accent. Not really much to do with spelling and grammar.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".
All this is simply about accent. Not really much to do with spelling and grammar.
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.
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.
Oh dear. I can't think of anything to say in response, johenmo.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 You can where the g has been replaced by a k. Luckily the "th" remains.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...
How time fly’s,...
Don't worry they don't know nothfing.
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
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/a/1895exam.htm1895 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?
I did a check on the Truth or Fiction website which tries to get to the heart of many email viral message.
Thanks basilio.
Well Calliope
OK, so its one snark to each side in the GW war.
It will now return to spelling and grammar please.
GW posts in the any of the multiple GW threads please, not elsewhere.
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.
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...(40 years ago "gay" meant "happy"!)....
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!!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?