“This person has no credibility, they can not construct a
sentence and their spelling is atrocious”
“If you want people to take you seriously, get an editor”
“You might want to learn how to spell before you sit down to
write”
Over the past few months I have witnessed all of the above
statements as part of online discourse. These statements intentionally ignore
the intended content of published material opting instead for the opportunity
to express what appears to be educational privilege and judgment.
17% percent of Americans still do not finish high school.
Among minorities these numbers are well over 20%. By arguing that correct English
is a pre requisite to credibility of opinion are we not establishing and
reinforcing the idea that those with out the privilege of educational accomplishment
deserve less consideration of their views? Further, there are many individuals
that suffer form perceptual handicaps, myself included, add to this the
thousands of Americans who suffer from dyslexia and we can see that exclusion
based on mastery of language is an insidious concept to say the least.
My argument here is not that those who are highly proficient
in language use don’t deserve respect, but that those who have no such skills
are more likely to be marginalized by society and have their voices given
little credence. How, as a community, can we disregard the voices of those most marginalized
by the broader society? Are not their voices the very ones that should be
amplified when calling for social justice, educational opportunity or equality?
While I do believe that we each, according to our skills,
should to be clear in communication, I do not support the idea that poor grammar
or spelling lessons the validity of a viewpoint. I choose instead to actively seek to understand the message with compassion and an open heart.
So you decide my friends, as for me I am tired of the ‘Grammar
Nazi’ approach to community discourse!
17 comments:
I think it depends on the context of the message. If the message is "Im better than here becuz she ain't got no dipolma to get a jobbb wit", then I think the Grammar Nazi behavior is warranted. In most cases, however, the content of the message is more important; correcting grammar at that point derails the conversation at hand.
Poor grammar, incorrect sentence structure and misspelled words tend to distract from the point the writer is trying to make and can confuse the reader. If a post is poorly written, I cannot be sure what the writer is taking about and tend to stop reading and move on. Also, I most likely will not read anything else the writer has written. As a writer, I would think that it is important to not only get your point across but to engage the reader enough that they will want to read more. If that is difficult for someone to do, I would suggest a Vlog rather than a Blog...
4 Novels 2 more out in 2013 included in 4 anthologies. Collage graduate, enough part time courses in addition to earn at least one additional certificat. Has taught at the collage level. Dyxletic. Let anyone tell me my view is invalid because I misspell the occasional word. Spelling wasn't even standerdised in english before about 200 years ago. As was said on I Claudious "I have always felt that what a man had to say was more inportant than how he said it." Grammer Nazis in my experience are just trying to hide their lack of thought consideration and wit by nit picking on the inconsequencial. I deliberatly didn't waist the time spell checking this entry to make a point.
Thank you for writing this. I am so very tired of this behavior online. I appreciate grammar and, as someone who is an ESL user, I also know how challenging that grammar is to acquire. I also appreciate that systemic issues contribute much to some people's poor spelling and syntax. Grammar should only be targeted when a relevant part of the argument, which it rarely is. Thanks again!
I completely agree with this article. To reject an idea or argument out of hand only because of how the person speaks or writes suggests a very narrow point of view, as well as a lack of critical thinking. There are many reasons why a person might speak or write poorly, including a lack of education in that area (which does not necessarily suggest a lack of knowledge in any other area), having English as a second language, or being intentionally colloquial. None of these really have anything to do with what they are saying, only how they are saying it. To say that no one whose English is less than perfect could ever have a valid point or something important to say is rather like saying that no one who uses an accent other than the Received Pronunciation could ever be credible. Or for that matter, it is rather like saying that someone who is young, or old, or not sexually attractive, or too sexually attractive, or fat, or dressed in a fashion you don't approve of could never have anything valuable to say either -and we see all of these regularly in online comments as well. It is better to look at what is being said, rather who is saying it or how they speak -you can learn a lot that way.
I agree with this blog entirely!
If a reader can't understand a writers point because of a few typos or spelling errors, then it says more about the writers inability to realize that the creative work is more valuable than a perfectly polished finished product. When we hold art (and writing is an art) to standards of perfection, then we lose much of the beauty in it.
Saying that one could not take a writer seriously ever again due to some incorrect grammar is an unfortunate outcome of privilege and pomp.
F. Scott Fitzgerald was notoriously bad at grammar and spelling, but that didn't stop The Great Gatsby from becoming known by many as "the greatest American novel."
A real member of the scribal class, caught in a typo, says "thanks for the catch" and fixes it. Happened to me today.
It is very Romantic-American to assert that truth and goodness shine through a poor written presentation. Not always.
But he had editors. It's always nice when someone cleans up after you, isn't it.
One of the pleasures I have had in this life is conversation with global voices; and rural voices; geek voices, gamer voices, software voices, child voices, old people voices, handicapped voices, educated voices, illiterate voices, English as a second language voices, alternative voices, fringe voices..... all them voices.
The list goes on. It is scary. It is work. It takes compassion (being in the Other's skin.)
Be cautious of deciding the wells from which you will not drink. Other's thirst. One day, you may too.
I crave more.
(And the voices, of the deaf, speech impaired, and blind.
All them voices ain't like the others.)
I agree to a point. But this is one of those situations where there -is- a line, and although we might not know exactly where it lies, we know when it's been crossed. I don't think anyone can deny that there is a difference between expressing your views in writing, with a demonstrable effort to be clear and sincere, and "ppl typin like dis, u kno?" For example, your own grammar isn't perfect in this post, but I didn't have to spend time deciphering the meaning of your words. If I can't read the opinion, I don't take that opinion into consideration.
But I'll also just add on (sorry for comment spam), that it's not necessary to insult a person who doesn't type in a way that's easy to understand. I might ask someone who does this to rephrase what they're attempting to communicate, but I don't have any time for people who derail the arguments in which they're involved just to point out [perceived] poor language skills. They're no better.
And an add on to my comments; though I set some standards for myself, because I like to be sure I am saying what I mean in the way I want, and kick myself for my errors; that is between me, myself and I.
It is a daily quest for me to learn to treat people better; always better; and in that, learn to treat myself better. What else is there?
I would say truth and goodness seldom, if ever, shine through a poorly written presentation. I will say flat out that I have never read a badly written online post that had a good idea, or anything useful to offer, at its center.
Accusing people who write well of "privilege," is just another way of shaming people into being less than their best and brightest selves.
Happy Dog,
You don't seem to understand the concept of privilege. Everyone who has clean drinking water has a measure of privilege. Those with an education do also. There is no accusation in the statement, privilege is not a "bad" thing to be accused of, it just is and needs to be viewed and understood, it helps us with developing empathy for others.
People of all ages can have a variety of written expressive disorders that can affect writing, grammar, spelling and punctuation. To assume someone who writes poorly is ignorant or uneducated - or worse, has nothing meaningful to add to a conversation - is to exclude a large part of the population.
Post a Comment
Please use your name in posting comments. Postings by "Anonymous" will be deleted.