[ExI] Captchas
Damien Broderick
thespike at satx.rr.com
Sat Aug 13 03:49:21 UTC 2011
On 8/12/2011 9:13 PM, john clark wrote:
> Linguist Steven Pinker wrote a amusing editorial about pointless
> grammatical rules
John, you're a highly intelligent person, so your indignation about
established grammar can't be due to your *not getting* the differences
you cite--unless you suffer from (or rejoice in) dyslexia, like my
frequent co-writer Rory. I've always assumed you were trolling on this
topic for the entertainment value, although it got old pretty fast. Or
maybe you're a devout spelling simplifier, like George Bernard Shaw, who
despite his fame and authority got nowhere in his campaign. (Do you
spell that "campain" or "campayn"? If not, why not?)
You really can't see how it micro-delays the understanding of an
educated reader when "their" is used instead of "there" or "they're," or
"its" instead of "it's," and that these delays add up to frustration and
eventually to a downgrading of the estimated worth of the ungrammatical
writer? There's a guy on the GRG Longevity list who insists of leaving
out the customary space between the end of one sentence and the start of
the next, which makes reading his posts about as much fun as grinding
sandpaper on your eyeball.
But speaking of Pinker, a most amusing guy--I've read four rather long
books by him, and quite a few essays, and I can't remember his ever
using ungrammatical English. If he means "their" he never uses one of
the alternative homophones. Why do you suppose that is? A conspiracy of
grammar Gestapo among his publishers? Probably, yes--but if Pinker
really meant to argue that it makes no difference, he should insist on
spattering his pages with confused "affects" and "effects" instead of
acting on his knowledge that the words have quite different meanings
even if sometimes they sound quite similar.
Damien Broderick
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list