Pedants' Corner

[Whitebeard]

I can relate, and isn't it annoying? Most of what I know about grammar and spelling is despite my education, not because of it. For someone from my generation, I think I have a fairly good grasp of both, but I'm in the minority. In fact, even among primary school teachers I think I'm in the minority, which is a bit worrying!

But you and Saxylady are both well into "self-expression", right????

[Baruch]

But you and Saxylady are both well into "self-expression", right????

Eh? Not sure I follow you.

[Whitebeard]

Also, you could just about make a case that "data" is short for "a group of information", so can be used in the singular.

How about a 'data-set' ? Invariably in discussions, treatises, etc., the subject is the conclusions which can be drawn from a data-set, not the individual pieces of information (datum) within that data-set. Thus, singular reads much more easily and colloquialically (?). I hope those mad scientists can be so persuaded and abandon their pedanticism.

[Whitebeard]

Eh? Not sure I follow you.

A bit like the pretended absence of footwork in Ceroc. Young minds, unencumberred by rules of spelling and grammar, could be creative and express themselves in their own way.

No matter that the absence of structure meant that others didn't know what on earth they were on about.

[Baruch]

A bit like the pretended absence of footwork in Ceroc. Young minds, unemcumberred by rules of spelling and grammar, could be creative and express themselves in their own way.

No matter that the absence of structure meant that others didn't know what on earth they were on about.

That never actually seemed to be the case, in my experience. Children (and adults) need to know the framework in which to express themselves in order to do so fully.

Think of it like learning Modern Jive. At first you learn the basic stuff like arm tension, leading/following and moves, moves, moves. That's like learning spelling and grammar. It's only when you've been through all those things that you eventually learn to dance expressively. True, you could just do your own thing, but with a proper grounding in the basics it looks and feels a lot better.

[Whitebeard]

That never actually seemed to be the case, in my experience. Children (and adults) need to know the framework in which to express themselves in order to do so fully.

Think of it like learning Modern Jive. At first you learn the basic stuff like arm tension, leading/following and moves, moves, moves. That's like learning spelling and grammar. It's only when you've been through all those things that you eventually learn to dance expressively. True, you could just do your own thing, but with a proper grounding in the basics it looks and feels a lot better.

I agree with you on all this. But wasn't there a period, which Saxylady alludes to, when basic learning went by the board and the emphasis was on the child's 'self-expression'. Employers are still bemoaning the lack of basic skills in many graduates. You, yourself, said, "Most of what I know about grammar and spelling is despite my education, not because of it."

Anyway, my feet have now learnt their own bad habits which no amount of 'post-training' is likely to alter.

[Baruch]

But wasn't there a period, which Saxylady alludes to, when basic learning went by the board and the emphasis was on the child's 'self-expression'.

Yes, and people my age are still paying the price for it.

Every so often in education a new fad comes in and everyone jumps onto the bandwagon, only to realise eventually, in some cases, that it's not really all that good. Either that, or it is useful, but not the "cure-all" solution that we were promised it would be.

Phonics schemes and other ideas to teach children how to read come and go all the time. The one I personally hate the most (and I'm sure many primary teachers would agree) is Letterland, in which every letter was drawn as a cartoon character with a stupid name. I still get children calling the letter K "Kicking King", and they haven't been subjected to Letterland for five years or more. Aaaargh!

[Saxylady]

Yes, and people my age are still paying the price for it.

The one I personally hate the most (and I'm sure many primary teachers would agree) is Letterland, in which every letter was drawn as a cartoon character with a stupid name. I still get children calling the letter K "Kicking King", and they haven't been subjected to Letterland for five years or more. Aaaargh!

Yes - I had to use that in my brief spell (!) as a primary teacher. Wasn't that the one that had Dippy Duck? Quarrelsome Queen?? (Oh no! It's like realising you can remember all the lyrics to a bad song.) And did it help them to read any better? No more effective than Roger Red-Hat and friends (or Peter Purple-Head as one child would insist on calling him).

Ooh - that got me in rant mode.

[David Bailey]

How about a 'data-set' ?

Technically, fine, but let's face it, the English language will go in its own sweet path despite any reservations or problems we may have with its development.

One of the hardest things to learn as a professional writer is that there are no real rules for English grammar, or even English vocabulary for that matter - just common and uncommon usage, relevant to different audiences and times. And the language evolves and changes rapidly, and you need to keep up with it if you want to communicate effectively.

colloquialically (?)

Despite my above-stated flexibility, I'm kind of hoping that one never escapes into the wild...

Think of it like learning Modern Jive. At first you learn the basic stuff like arm tension, leading/following and moves, moves, moves. That's like learning spelling and grammar. It's only when you've been through all those things that you eventually learn to dance expressively. True, you could just do your own thing, but with a proper grounding in the basics it looks and feels a lot better.

I think (and I'm sure I've stated) that dancing Modern Jive is like using English - fluid, evolving, adaptive and grabbing many of the best bits from other dances (languages).

But learning to dance with Modern Jive is like learning to communicate by talking to your friends - you'll get the basics, but it's really no substitute for a proper grounding in the key disciplines.

Boy, I knew I should have stayed clear of this thread...

[Baruch]

Yes - I had to use that in my brief spell (!) as a primary teacher. Wasn't that the one that had Dippy Duck? Quarrelsome Queen?? (Oh no! It's like realising you can remember all the lyrics to a bad song.) And did it help them to read any better? No more effective than Roger Red-Hat and friends (or Peter Purple-Head as one child would insist on calling him).

Yes, that's the one. I hate it with a fiery passion. My wife, who is a classroom assistant, still has to use it at her school. She, needless to say, isn't impressed.

Maybe we should rename some of the Letterland letters: Empty Education, Konfused Kid, Fallible Fad or Pointless Prattle, anyone?

[Saxylady]

But learning to dance with Modern Jive is like learning to communicate by talking to your friends - you'll get the basics, but it's really no substitute for a proper grounding in the key disciplines.

Boy, I knew I should have stayed clear of this thread...

Hmm, I read that grammatical rules were imposed on English at at relatively late stage, but presumably it makes it easier for mass-communication to function.

After getting quite confused about the 'correct' footwork for the First Move (let's not go there...) I find a reassuring security in the stricter footwork required for swing dancing.

[Saxylady]

Maybe we should rename some of the Letterland letters: Empty Education, Konfused Kid, Fallible Fad or Pointless Prattle, anyone?

Ready for your next OFSTED??

(Do you have Nervous-Breakdown-Week in Wales?)

[ducasi]

Hmm, I read that grammatical rules were imposed on English at at relatively late stage, but presumably it makes it easier for mass-communication to function.

Grammar is derived from any language by observation of how it works. As a child you don't learn English by learning the grammar, and you can be an expert without actually knowing all the so-called rules.

[Saxylady]

Grammar is derived from any language by observation of how it works. As a child you don't learn English by learning the grammar, and you can be an expert without actually knowing all the so-called rules.

Ar...

[Baruch]

Ready for your next OFSTED??

(Do you have Nervous-Breakdown-Week in Wales?)

We don't have OFSTED, but we do have Estyn, the Welsh equivalent. We were inspected in November last year, and came out with a very good report at the end of it.

Mind you, the inspectors ripped us apart before they told us we were good, and we felt very demoralised. They certainly didn't seem to have much of a concept of professional courtesy. Contrast that with my last inspection (in a different school) when we came out with a similarly glowing report, but the inspection team were the model of professionalism and courtesy. Attitude really does matter.

(And no, we didn't do Letterland in either school!)

[LMC]

I've seen this so many times recently that I can't take it any more.

It's "would HAVE" and "could HAVE".

NOT 'of'.

Ah, that's better.

[ducasi]

It's "would HAVE" and "could HAVE".

NOT 'of'.

Yeah, that annoys me to, though it's understandable in that they're really saying "would've" and "could've", with the "'ve" pronounced pretty much the same way as "of".

Doesn't make it any less wrong though.

[azande]

While we are at it, it is "you are" or "you're" not "your".

[doc martin]

While we are at it, it is "you are" or "you're" not "your".

You're assessment of this common error is masterful

[LMC]

Yeah, that annoys me to, ...

When it means "as well/also", it's too