I write about English due to having a strong linguistic and sociolinguistic interest in it, not as someone who is all that interested in ESL/EFL. I have no interest in seeking the lowest common denominator in my writing, especially considering that it often contains rather complex ideas that would be only more difficult and awkward to express in "simpler" English, much the less the "globish" that some have spoken of here.
Why do non-native speakers overrate their English so much?
(And on that note, one ought to not use my transcriptions as examples of how to actually pronounce English, as they are specifically highly non-standard in nature; rather I post them due to their linguistic value, due to providing examples of pronunciation of a particular corner of the English-speaking, just as, say, Lazar has provided a good picture of Eastern New England English that would otherwise be unavailable.)
When I looked up the Churchill speech, I was expecting to find something that was short and punchy. People remember the section about 'fighting on the beaches' etc. It is still meaningful today; when I go for a walk on the beach or along a river bank, I will quite often come across a pill box that was built to withstand an invasion.
Coming back to Churchill's famous speech, when I saw the actual transcript, I was absolutely amazed at how long it is. Also, when listening to the recording, it starts off like a church sermon, exceedingly dull. I know church sermons are more exciting in other parts of the world. (I have seen "Borat", so I know all about the Cultural Leanings of America.)
What more can I say?
Sir Winston Churchill Speech - We shall fight them on the beaches
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6llT2ZYg-4E
I realise now what Politicians mean when they talk about 'sound bite' politics.
Coming back to Churchill's famous speech, when I saw the actual transcript, I was absolutely amazed at how long it is. Also, when listening to the recording, it starts off like a church sermon, exceedingly dull. I know church sermons are more exciting in other parts of the world. (I have seen "Borat", so I know all about the Cultural Leanings of America.)
What more can I say?
Sir Winston Churchill Speech - We shall fight them on the beaches
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6llT2ZYg-4E
I realise now what Politicians mean when they talk about 'sound bite' politics.
“rather complex ideas that would be only more difficult and awkward to express in "simpler" English”
A good writer can do it. If you can't put something into “short” and “simple” sentences, it indicates that you don't know much about what you are writing.
A good writer can do it. If you can't put something into “short” and “simple” sentences, it indicates that you don't know much about what you are writing.
<<A good writer can do it. If you can't put something into “short” and “simple” sentences, it indicates that you don't know much about what you are writing. >>
If you're speaking to people as a teacher, then maybe, but it seems to me Travis' intent is exchanging information with people on an equal footing with him (people who are knowledgeable in linguistics). He is not aiming to be understood by newbies to the field (if so, then why would he write in IPA?). There's nothing wrong with that. Just accept that you're not his target audience and move on, or brush up your reading skills. For people who actually do have a good understanding of the things he is talking about it is much better if he expounds his ideas in an efficient manner as he tends to do.
Come to think of it, it's not like what he said is actually that complicated anyway. Anyone with half a brain should get the overall gist of what he's saying, minus a linguistic term here and there....
If you're speaking to people as a teacher, then maybe, but it seems to me Travis' intent is exchanging information with people on an equal footing with him (people who are knowledgeable in linguistics). He is not aiming to be understood by newbies to the field (if so, then why would he write in IPA?). There's nothing wrong with that. Just accept that you're not his target audience and move on, or brush up your reading skills. For people who actually do have a good understanding of the things he is talking about it is much better if he expounds his ideas in an efficient manner as he tends to do.
Come to think of it, it's not like what he said is actually that complicated anyway. Anyone with half a brain should get the overall gist of what he's saying, minus a linguistic term here and there....
I have half a brain and I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
skdhflshdg9o: «If you can't put something into “short” and “simple” sentences, it indicates that you don't know much about what you are writing. »
Does it? If Travis didn't know much about what he were writing, then his posts would be difficult to understand and we would be left with uncertainty about just what it was that he meant to say. Your seemingly ease to quote and reply to his text seems evidence to the contrary.
I agree with Travis's (implied) statement that the complexity of an assertion should be similar in proportion to that of the idea being asserted.
To illustrate this, I wonder how you would rephrase the following abstract in simpler English while retaining all the information and without sounding awkward:
“In this report based on census data, we highlight substantially greater mortality observed among the mentally ill than among the general population during famines in India in the 19th century. A possible selection against the most severe forms of schizophrenia could account for greater occurrence of better-outcome phenotypes.”
Does it? If Travis didn't know much about what he were writing, then his posts would be difficult to understand and we would be left with uncertainty about just what it was that he meant to say. Your seemingly ease to quote and reply to his text seems evidence to the contrary.
I agree with Travis's (implied) statement that the complexity of an assertion should be similar in proportion to that of the idea being asserted.
To illustrate this, I wonder how you would rephrase the following abstract in simpler English while retaining all the information and without sounding awkward:
“In this report based on census data, we highlight substantially greater mortality observed among the mentally ill than among the general population during famines in India in the 19th century. A possible selection against the most severe forms of schizophrenia could account for greater occurrence of better-outcome phenotypes.”
Robin Michael Wed May 27, 2009 10:55 am GMT
I have half a brain and I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I have half a brain BUT I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
I have half a brain and I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I have half a brain BUT I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
This discussion is preposterous.
One R.M.; a certified fool and the pariah of this forum, out of sheer malice caused by frustration decides to attack one Travis, well respected long-time member and linguistics authority figure as well as moral institution of this forum; and suddenly there's a discussion ABOUT TRAVIS!!!
I find it obscene.
One R.M.; a certified fool and the pariah of this forum, out of sheer malice caused by frustration decides to attack one Travis, well respected long-time member and linguistics authority figure as well as moral institution of this forum; and suddenly there's a discussion ABOUT TRAVIS!!!
I find it obscene.
I would not call myself an "authority", mind you - heh. I would reserve that kind of thing for real linguists, not a complete amateur like myself. (Seriously - my day job is as a computer programmer, not a linguist.)
Okay, but I have a crush on you, remember?
Anyway, you rise naturally as an authority amongst all the trolls and morons around here. And it is obscene.
Anyway, you rise naturally as an authority amongst all the trolls and morons around here. And it is obscene.
Oh Travis, you're just being modest. I bet you know a lot more that the so-called "real linguists". I've met several of these so-called real linguists, and they didn't seem to know as much about language as you.
Robin Michael Wed May 27, 2009 10:55 am GMT
I have half a brain and I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Half a brain? This explains much.
I have half a brain and I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Half a brain? This explains much.
Believe me Travis, I did not write this:
I have half a brain and I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
I might 'troll' occasionally, but not to this extent!
I have half a brain and I don't understand a word of what Travis writes.
I might 'troll' occasionally, but not to this extent!
I think a certain 'guest' has been stirring things up. Not in a particularly pleasant way.
"Thick Skinned"
thin skinned
sensitive
insensitive
arrogant
touchy
edgy
neurotic
flies off the handle
That is an interesting expression. Is this taking about insects?
Bye for now
Robin Michael
"Thick Skinned"
thin skinned
sensitive
insensitive
arrogant
touchy
edgy
neurotic
flies off the handle
That is an interesting expression. Is this taking about insects?
Bye for now
Robin Michael