When is poor spelling/grammar ok? Discuss literacy...

[kandyraverchick]

I dont mean to be rude and I certainly dont want to start anything, but I can assure you that I am in fact 100% correct.

Spelling and IQ have nothing to do with each other whatsoever.

In fact most of the silly tests that you find on the net or in fact the national IQ test on tv are also not in any way a measure of IQ.

Some are in part but at best sketchy...........but thats a whole other debate.

Actually, I'm fairly confident in what I said first time round - a 30 second internet search returned this:

Spelling

The ability to spell can indicate general intelligence. Remembering a set sequence of letters indicates the mind's ability to retrieve remembered facts. Learning how to spell and use the words of a language is almost a complete IQ test in itself. Although poor spellers with high IQ scores can be found it is rare and in general--everything else being equal--the better spellers have higher IQ scores.

http://www.iqtest.com/profilesample.html

 

[Aishas Star]

lostpunk5545 i totally agree with you, i never usually use 'u' 'r' and stuff like that when i sms.
but sometimes when your inviting 100 people to your place for a party, giving them 3 messages each can end up $$

 

[Shnouzerpuff]

^^ it can end up what?


Look it does annoy me but people you have to remember that English as a language is constantly evolving.

What we classify as good spelling and grammar today would have been an absolute abomination on the English language around the time of my good pal Bill Shakespeare.

Maybe convenience is the next step in the evolution of the written word?

:D
----------------------------------

Lol!
Tomoz!
UR a BAd SPELLA

----------------------------------
^^ just to annoy the grammar nazi's here



[spellcheck post... excellent... submit reply. Marvellous.]

 

[preacha]

What difference does it make, so long as the intended reader understands what is being said????

this is a weird attitude to have. it screams 'half-arsed' to me.

why don't we replace the sign language gesture for 'angry' as a fist in the face? people will still understand its meaning.

why don't we draw maps completely out scale? we'll still understand where we'll need to go.

instead of peaceful negotiations with countries in order to come to a mutually beneficial resolution, why don't we just bomb the crap out of them? i'm sure they will get the point that we do not appreciate their actions then.

there's a reason why we have standardised rules for english grammar. without them, we may as well be interpreting grunts (sound out the word, soooooound itttttt outttttttt). also, if intellect has no bearing on your spelling ability, think back to your schooling years. which members of the class got the highest marks? the ones with a natural gift of preparing a combination of the correct syllables in order to form a word?

(and yes, i type without capitals, i know this. obviously it doesn't matter since everyone understands what i say )

^^ just to annoy the grammar nazi's here

there is no apostrophe in nazis, since nothing in that sentence suggests a possession, merely a plural.

 

[Strawberry_lovemuffin]

Does anyone else think the ability to spell has almost direct correlation with the amount you read ?

There are those of us to whom spelling and grammar comes 'naturally' and 'instinctively'; I believe reading has a lot to do with that. It's no mystery.

 

[Duckboy]

^^agreed. But then i wonder if people to whom language comes easily, are more likely to read to start with???

 

[Strawberry_lovemuffin]

Ooooh.... chicken and egg.

Are language skills innate though?

 

[Duckboy]

^ My belief - probably has a lot to do with your education. And i mean right back to your formative years... for instance your parents putting in the time early on to teach you the alphabet, to learn to read and write. It's a HUGE head start for those in pre-primary/year one who can have some basic skills under their belt.
I wonder, despite what the education system will tell you, whether people really ever catch up.

I only come at this from personal experience - those that were ahead at the start stayed ahead, and stayed "enthused", if you will, with language, books, media.

Do you need a high IQ to be skilled in this area? Who knows??
As Moe stated - people can have English as their second language and still command it better than most. but I'd guess that those people were also superior in their native tongue.

 

[Raving Loony]

I read my entire primary school library (even if it was small) by the time I got to grade 3. After then, reading never really interested me. I was far more interested in other things like sport, maths, science, geography, etc. The novelty of reading novels has all but been lost on me ever since. I would much rather sit down and read a newspaper on real world events or solve a challenging puzzle of sorts than read about a fantasy of someone else. Admittedly my IQ of around 130 is hardly amazing, let alone great. But it is good enough to suggest that great spelling or grammar ability isn't necessarily essential to get ahead.

 

[BloSs0m]

Actually, you're right about that to an extent - the most highly intelligent person I know is dyslexic. This guy is like a walking book of knowledge and wisdom...

Albert Einstein was dyslexic, as were many many many other 'great thinkers'.

My sister has dyslexia really badly, but, she has the most incredible brain and ideas. She thinks differently - yet brilliantly - to basicaly everyone i have ever met. SHe thinks outside the square all the time. It's incredile to talk to her sometimes, she brilliant. That being said, i would never wish dyslexia on anyone, watching her stuggle so hard as she grew up... i would never want anyone to have to deal with it.

Bad spelling and grammar however, i don't like the new fandagled "4ever"/"4eva", "2moro" or even worse "2moz", i like SLM cringe when i read "ur" or even worse [/b]"urs"[/b] i mean, i you said that it's like errs - think a english person, with a strong cockney accent, saying "hers" but dropping the "h".

Whilst we're on the topic of the letter "h" can i please scream that it is aich not haich.

back to annoying grammar - Its and It's. We all make mistakes though, and i know i do sometimes, but generally, i try to remember, and let my little finger hit that " button.

As for the reading spelling debate, i think reading has an incredible amount to do with your grasp of language, and in particular your grasp of spelling and grammar. Reading is like anything the more you are exposed to something, the more likely you are to comprehend that thing better.

I could go on for hours in this thread, and in this post.
And yes, i capitalize, punctuate and use semi colons in my text messages.

On the topic of semi colons, last year in my year twelve english class of 24, there were 3 people who knew how to use a semi colon correctly.

 

[xcidium]

kandyraverchick & MazDan
"Due to the fact that IQ and spelling do not correlate perfectly, a child with an IQ of 130 cannot be expected to have a corresponding percentile rank in a spelling test."

From here... Quite an interesting read.

 

[kandyraverchick]

^^ Typical psychology text - bit like Frued, you have to read it 2-3 times before it makes sense!
Anyhow:

Individual deficits on a high level (above average IQ and spelling significantly below IQ) is another scenario that is often disregarded for a diagnosis of dyslexia. According to the discrepancy model a child with IQ 130 and a spelling percentile rank of 50 has an individual deficit in spelling. However, children with a spelling percentile rank in the normal range (>16) are most often not considered in need of spelling training, regardless of their IQ.

So basically what it's saying, is that so long as the spelling is in the normal range, even if their IQ is above average - this is considered healthy. That's pretty much what I've been saying all along:

Although poor spellers with high IQ scores can be found it is rare and in general--everything else being equal--the better spellers have higher IQ scores.

It also says:

This can be explained by the medium correlation between spelling or reading and intelligence.

 

[KemicalBurn]

Albert Einstein was dyslexic, as were many many many other 'great thinkers'.

Thats debatable. anyways while grammar has an extremely important part to play in mathematics; its not comparable to english.

dyslexia is a disease (disorder?) that relates to english skills and doesnt cross over to the stuff that really matters (ie: science ). The one relates to numbers has a different name, which he did not suffer from (obviously).

That having been said, most of the scientists i know are very well spoken, particularly the theoretical kind.

 

[iamtha1]

Originally posted by Shnouzerpuff

^^ just to annoy the grammar nazi's here

there is no apostrophe in nazis, since nothing in that sentence suggests a possession, merely a plural.

Hahahahahahahaha. *ahem*

Just my thoughts. My belief is that good spelling and grammar do go hand in hand with intelligence. As other people have said, it's all about the facade, the image you portray and if you have a good grasp on language, yes I believe you appear smarter.

Kudos to SLM, I agree exposure to reading whilst young certainly makes a difference, I literally remember reading books when I was younger and practicing spelling looooong difficult words like 'precarious'. Some of my friends still can't spell that word. Or 'cautious'. I think spelling and grammar need to be re-hashed somewhere around Year 12...

With words, it's not about people understanding what you've said, it's about portrayal! It's language for God's sake! I'd prefer it to be perfect then just legible. :D

Besides, SMS messages like: 'wat u doin u cumin round 2nite or wat' are sore on the eyes. And they remind me of guys who might add in a 'fully sik mate'. And yeah I admit, I shorten msn messages - but only to save going onto another message. I like my 25c (sorry, cents)

And while we're on this topic, the thing that gets me the most is bad speech articulation...

 

[Munchee]

First of all... let's just be reminded of the difference between 'then' and 'than'. I'll use them in a sentence.

Then she said then rather than saying than.

Alright, I was doing some stuff and I thought we'd look at how much incorrect spellling I'd be able to get away with and still get this message across:

PET is a functional imaging procedure where a radiolabelled biocompound is injected into a patient and it’s biodistribution is measured as a function of time to determine the physiologic quantities associated with the biocompound (Votaw, 1995, p.1179).

I could type it:

PET iza funkshonal imagin procedya wear a radiolabld biocompound iz injcted in2 a patnt n its biodistribushn iz mezured az f funkshon ov time 2 determin da fizzologic kwantities assoc wif da biocompound (Sumdude, '95).

Somehow I think I'd have one hell of a lot of trouble interpreting that and could end up with completely the wrong idea (and then people might die).



Read books young, but more importantly, continue to read. I think people have also forgotten that by reading other people's poor english on the internet their own english is going to be affected. Your recall of correct spelling and grammar will be affected by what you have recently read. So not only the outgoing communication is causing problems, but the incoming communication is leading to confusion.

For communicating simple messages degrading the spelling and grammar is fine (maybe), but as the message gets more complex it leads to ambiguity. At a lower level we might be able to get away with it, but what about in legislation, journals, law and texts?

This leads to more crazy thoughts... clearly people who are going to be communicating complex messages will need a clear and concise language, yet others *may* not. The ones who will need to use the more concise language will probably need to be able to understand the simple language as well, but not vice versa. Could this lead to a greater class divide?

 

[doofqueen]

There is no excuse for poor spelling or grammar. Offenders need to be shot on sight.

wow you must be proud.

 

[Raz]

Language always has and always will continue to evolve.

This is a really excellent point. I used to read and write like a crazy man when I was a wee child, and as a result I have excellent spelling skills. Don't ask me about grammar, I think I'm okay but that's just an assumption.

However...to steal a quote...language has and always will continue to evolve. LOL is an accepted part of written language for anybody who is internet-savvy. Even if you don't use it, you know what it means. And even if you don't know that it literally means "laugh out loud", you get that it's a favourable response to something funny. Like NASA and ATM, it's stopped being an easy shorthand and has now become a word with its own identity.

Whether we like it or not, language will change with time, it's inevitable. It seems horribly elitist to me to dis someone because they have poor spelling skills. I can't cook for shit, and that's a way more important life skill than being able to make your words look pretty, but nobody looks down on me because of that failing. I also can't drive a car, and this isn't a big deal either. Both of these skills would serve me way better when it comes to modern survival though.

I think discriminating against people who can't spell (or who choose not to spell correctly) is a kind of last bastion of classism. It's like the final reminder of the days when only the socially elite were literate, and they got to look down their noses at everybody else. After all, like MazDan's been saying...as long as you can understand the message, why does it matter so much if the delivery isn't 100% perfect?

 

[Munchee]

Hmm Raz, I'm not sure if you read all of my last post, but I thought that I made the same point about classism. I also tried to make a point of the fact that poor spelling could be considered suitable for some people, but if language is going to evolve that way and simplify, it will cause problems for others or will simply be deemed not suitable for them.

Sorry, I'm tired. I should try to make this point more clearly, but meh...


Yeah, that's right, I said MEH.

 

[Raz]

^^^I did read it, but only after I posted mine. Great minds think alike, or fools rarely differ; one of the two...

I will respond in more greatitude later, but I am indulging in some drunkeness as we speak so it will have to be later.

 

[doofqueen]

It seems horribly elitist to me to dis someone because they have poor spelling skills. I can't cook for shit, and that's a way more important life skill than being able to make your words look pretty, but nobody looks down on me because of that failing. I also can't drive a car, and this isn't a big deal either. Both of these skills would serve me way better when it comes to modern survival though.

I think discriminating against people who can't spell (or who choose not to spell correctly) is a kind of last bastion of classism. It's like the final reminder of the days when only the socially elite were literate, and they got to look down their noses at everybody else. After all, like MazDan's been saying...as long as you can understand the message, why does it matter so much if the delivery isn't 100% perfect?

here here!!! pack of elitist snobs the lot of ya! (you... whatever) who gives a fuck...