1 Topic by transient (edited by CortexVortex 2006-06-05 17:33:19)

  • From: the mine
  • Registered: 2005-11-15

Topic: Lost in Translation

A messy lexicon keeps getting messier....

I am seeing alot more evidence in recent years the fruition of 'newspeak'.

I am used to seeing common mistakes, like confusing to, too, and two..... there, their and they're, etc.

'would of' when they mean 'would have'.

'more then' when they mean 'more than'

But we are now at the point where
larger, more important words will
have as many definitions as the number of people you ask.

Almost as if some of us need someone to translate for us, english to english.

The "dumbing down" has worked quite well, and it's a natural cascade after awhile.
Cognitive ability is bound to fall off sharply.

It's not just the glazed look in the eyes.

I am amazed that some of the younger generation can function at all.

They must think in sign language.

Orwell, you must have been clairvoyant- but thank you for the warning........                   J

PS- This is not a slam on the youth.
Those of you who can think, you know who you are, and you need not defend yourselves.

Observations, that's all.

"I hate dreaming. because when you want to sleep, you want to sleep. Dreaming is work. Next thing you know I have to build a go-kart with my ex landlord"
-The late Mitch Hedberg
  • zenden
  • zenden
  • Synthesizing Analyst Proclaimed Barbarian
  • Offline
  • From: The Athanor
  • Registered: 2005-01-20

Re: Lost in Translation

no shit cortex!!!  man, u r spot on!  this has been bugging me for sometime.  its because of TIME i think.  always in a hurry.  we speak in "terms"  and symbols now, constant shortcuts.  rush rush rush.  we speak in slang and now write in slang.  the whole email thing reeks of it too (2, to, two!!!????%$#)... thats why i type like this, without real manners; no caps, leaving out the correct punctuation, in a frickin hurry.  i said in another post how i type crumby and slow.  the prob is its not slow typing, its RAPID typing but hating to be accurate and to go back and make corrections.  want to get it out there, produce, produce.

have u noticed the very poor grammar on TV with reporters CONTINUALLY using the wrong (god, it sounds so dumb) sentence structure?  it drives me crazy but all of them do it practically... the man, he    the woman, she
me and them   me and my friend (not my friend and I)  the band, they....i told my sister back in the 60's when everybody was smoking dope "its gonna be hard, but were gonna have (!!half!!) to start talking dumb like everybody else or nobody's gonna be able to understand us"  i was talking about dumbing down even then.

now with all the youth watching TV and living in front of the tube for EVERYTHING theres no hope, as its the role model for EVERYTHING.  kids copy what they hear and without appropriate grammar (do they still teach it?!! in elementary school?) i dont see it getting better.

yes, orwell was right.  i also must say, i feel really stupid myself alot of the time when im going on in here with my own postings, fearing ill sound like a rube or something when i used to write professional scholarly papers 50-70+ page papers at a crack.  shit changes doesnt it>and im defending myself anyway.  do u remember that comedian, Norm Crosby from the old days?  (ur probably too young) but he may have exemplified (sorta) what ur talking about  too.  he used to use similar but the wrong (it was actually brilliant) term to describe something, using all kinds of inappropriate adjectives and nouns in these comic pieces.  it was great.

ive been thinking the same thing u have, interesting.  i share ur observations.

GNOTHI SEAUTON "Know Thyself!"

3 Reply by limukala (edited by limukala 2006-06-05 18:49:34)

  • From: O'ahu
  • Registered: 2006-05-26

Re: Lost in Translation

There is imprecise and confusing language, and then there is evolving language.  Remember, nothing is static.  Why do you think we spell knight like that, I'll give you a hint, it used to be pronounced like its spelled.  Grammar and usage evolve too, and I don't see anything wrong with slang.  It is an artifact of our totalitarian, smothering culture that gives you the idea that everyone should speak in uniform, schoolbook English.  A perfect example would be pidgin or patois languages.  Good god is that some horrible grammar when seen from an English teachers perspective, but when you realize what it really is, an evolving language that is appropriate to the specific local culture, than it is a good thing.  Diversity is great, and one of the most sickening things about our culture is the current trend of global homogenization, producing pastuerized, sterile and tasteless world of walmart, mcdonalds and their human equivalents.

That being said, there is a difference between an evolving new dialect and confused and imprecise speech.  There is something to be said for the arabic system, where local dialects are diverse and almost mutually unintelligible (to the point where some linguists consider it to be several distinct languages), but most arabs also speak "common" arabic, understandable to all. 
As long as all parties involved in communication understand eachother, than the specific words don't really matter, which is why I think your examples of "would have" vs. "would of" etc, are pretty inane.  These kind of things used to bother me (like when people say "myriad of....", instead of "myriad....."), but when you realize this is all a silly ego game programmed into you during your mandatory indoctrination period, it seems kind of silly (I'm better than these people because I know the "right" way to speak).

I definitely think there is something to be said for learning good communication skills, however.  For instance, confusing the words obsolete and useless is a more problematic error (heard that one recently, so it is the most salient example for me).

Shoots cuz, I going beach for cruise.  You like get one bag pakas? (I love pidgin)

seeker of truth

follow no path
all paths lead where

truth is here

E.E. Cummings

4 Reply by Xenopope (edited by Xenopope 2006-06-05 19:36:51)

  • From: NOTHING
  • Registered: 2004-09-03

Re: Lost in Translation

A while back I attended a sort of spiritual awareness gathering planned by a couple here in town in their own home. My friend who invited me said it was to be about 'bio-holographic repatterning' but the speaker started off by talking about 'babble' - the things people say without actually intending it to be so. He mentioned 'sarc' as being the root of 'sarcasm' and that it means 'the tearing of flesh'. The main idea behind what he was saying was that by participating in 'babble', a person is actually _changing_ the direction of their own will towards something other than what they originally wanted.

Does this seem likely to anyone? I would tend to hope that the will power of the individual would be strong enough to not be swayed by any power of a 'backwards-engineered' language to control it.

limukala wrote:

when you realize this is all a silly ego game programmed into you during your mandatory indoctrination period, it seems kind of silly (I'm better than these people because I know the "right" way to speak).

In the case of a language, the more intricate and effective manner of speaking can be called 'right' or 'better' than a less detailed or less effective manner for the reason that it better serves the very purpose of language itself and not necessarily for the reason that it may 'boost' one's ego.

I am as is Void.
  • From: the mine
  • Registered: 2005-11-15

Re: Lost in Translation

I forgot to mention, it does not help matters when certain high profile politicians cannot stick a few words together to form a coherent thought!

Certain people will have no idea what bad examples they have.......scary.

Being rushed is a factor indeed.

I'll have 20 thoughts and want to get them all down, or expressed, and I'll forget quite a few along the way- veer a little off the original track I had.

I don't think that's what is going on in these minds though... it's like they never had a train of thought in the first place, I don't know.

I have no problems with slang, or the evolution of language, what I have noticed is a full-on "misundereducation" and I see the results more daily.

It did not seem that the disconnect was so wide between generations in the past, then again, maybe I was never coherent in the eyes of older generations.

I see more than slang and evolution, I see the butchering of communication.
I hope I am wrong!

"I hate dreaming. because when you want to sleep, you want to sleep. Dreaming is work. Next thing you know I have to build a go-kart with my ex landlord"
-The late Mitch Hedberg

6 Reply by Postitivone (edited by Postitivone 2006-06-05 20:29:33)

  • Postitivone
  • Thinker Actor Imaginator AKA Notonething
  • Offline
  • From: In The Heart
  • Registered: 2005-12-04

Re: Lost in Translation

WOW lol dis iz liek teh fin truth.

Jk. It's not even just the younger generation now. Teachers younger and older pick it up I think the former do it by accident unlike the younger who want to relate to the class.

I have a teacher who wont "what" "where" or "when". Hell say "who" to replace them all.
Example
Student : Can you do problem #3?
Teacher: Number whooo?

I don't know what to say about it but I believe if I wanted I would know how.
I scared for my generation because there is no tradition anymore most of us will work for corporations instead of nice "mom and pop" stores.

If the human mind was simple enough to understand, we'd be too simple to understand it.
Emerson Pugh

Postitivone's Website

  • From: O'ahu
  • Registered: 2006-05-26

Re: Lost in Translation

Xenopope wrote:

In the case of a language, the more intricate and effective manner of speaking can be called 'right' or 'better' than a less detailed or less effective manner for the reason that it better serves the very purpose of language itself and not necessarily for the reason that it may 'boost' one's ego.

I was speaking specifically about little errors that have absolutely no effect on the intended meaning, ie "could of" vs. "could have" or "more then" vs "more than" (or "a myriad of" vs "myriad").  When people get on their english teacher high horse about this kind of thing it serves no purpose. 

I don't know, I guess I took the comments a little personally because I am young (25) and, though I consider my grasp of grammar to be better than most, (even if that isn't always reflected in my hasty writing) I have some friends with poor communication skills that nonetheless have great insight, compassion, courage, and any other admirable quality you care to mention.  To a large degree I think verbal fluency is a natural ability, and proper education can only develop what is there to begin with.  Real communication goes far deeper than words, and words often get in the way, especially for people who are obsessed with them.  Ultimate truth cannot be expressed in words, and in my experience, there is absolutely no correlation between speaking ability and wisdom (or insight, perception, understanding, whatever you choose to call it).  You probably thought the wisest person you ever met in your life was an idiot, only because you haven't realized that the mind can only take you further from the truth, and word games are ultimately intellectual masturbation.

This isn't to say there aren't brain-dead monkeys out there, but sorry to break it to you old farts, I've met far more young people with a decent grasp of reality than middle-aged or old people.  It seems that most older people have been beaten into submission by the system (and most younger people have been seduced as well, but the fraction of aware individuals seems greater).

seeker of truth

follow no path
all paths lead where

truth is here

E.E. Cummings