So now people speak more like writers. Is that what you're saying?Well-developed writing has a conservative effect on language; compared to societies lacking such a literary tradition. I'm surprised you never heard this.
Adult native English speakers do not commit errors in usage
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
womblingfree
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:34 pm
44 million adult Americans are at Level 1 literacy according to the North American Literacy Society meaning they have difficullty with reading and writing. Would you class the U.S. as an illiterate society?jotham wrote:language often bears much resemblance to written structure, especially in literate societies.
All people, literate or not, can speak perfectly coherently using sentences that would be gobbledegook out of context and written down, it's just the way that spoken language works. That's the whole reason Apllied Linguistics was created in the first place, to take into account language as it is used rather than the formation of grammatically perfect written sentences.
A non-literate society. Surely you can think of some. But especially before the print culture. This link has a lot of interesting tidbits about it.metal wrote:Can you tell us some of the societies you are thinking about?
He suggests that the phonetic alphabet was the force which de-tribalized man but that, as literacy was a minority skill at this time, it could not have full affect. The invention of print, however, made literacy more and more widespread, and as such had a dramatic impact on society...
The advent of punctuation, according to McLuhan, allowed things to be expressed in print just as they can be expressed in speech, thus separating the eye from the ear. He therefore believes that the development of a print culture has greatly diminished the importance of the spoken word...
It was not until after the Education Act of 1870, which made education compulsory for all that our culture, in Britain at least, could be said to be truly dominated by print....
Both Marshall McLuhan and Neil Postman explain logical thought as a direct consequence of a print culture. McLuhan suggests that scanning lines of print silently has affected thought processes...
Last edited by jotham on Wed Aug 22, 2007 2:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I'm not disagreeing here. Remember I agreed that language often bears little resemblance to written structure. I only reminded you that we shouldn't forget that language often bears much resemblance to written structure as well. There's plenty of room for the accuracy of both statements.womblingfree wrote:All people, literate or not, can speak perfectly coherently using sentences that would be gobbledegook out of context and written down, it's just the way that spoken language works.
Indeed:jotham wrote: I'm not disagreeing here. Remember I agreed that language often bears little resemblance to written structure.
A: I’ll just take that off. Take that off.
B: All looks great.
C: [laughs]
B: Mm.
C: Mm.
B: I think your dad was amazed wasn’t he at the damage.
A: Mm.
B: It’s not so much the parts. It’s the labour charges for=
D: Oh that. For a car.
B: Have you got hold of it?
A: Yeah.
B: It was a bit erm=
A: Mm.
C: Mm.
B: A bit.
A: That’s right.
B: I mean they said they’d have to take his car in for two days. And he said all
it is is straightening a panel. And they’re like, ‘Oh no. It’s all new panel. You
can’t do this’.
C: Any erm problem.
B: As soon as they hear insurance claim. Oh. Let’s get it right.
C: Yeah. Yeah. Anything to do with+
A: Wow.
C: +coach work is er+
A: Right.
C: +fatal isn’t it.
A: Now.
-
womblingfree
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:34 pm
I was commenting on your assertion that people from 'literate' cultures speak more like written sentences than people from non-literate cultures.jotham wrote:I'm not disagreeing here. Remember I agreed that language often bears little resemblance to written structure. I only reminded you that we shouldn't forget that language often bears much resemblance to written structure as well. There's plenty of room for the accuracy of both statements.womblingfree wrote:All people, literate or not, can speak perfectly coherently using sentences that would be gobbledegook out of context and written down, it's just the way that spoken language works.
Although if a culture was truly non-literate then there would be nothing written down to speak like in the first place.
There's bound to be differences in every country and in every differing speech community within those countries. Millions of permutations.
Well, it might be more accurately phrased that you will encounter people who speak like written sentences more often in a more literate culture than a less literate one. And that's because you'll have more interactions — like in business, academic, etc. — that require polished and more logical communication. There will always be people whose every word is unlike written communication their whole life — even amongst a literate society. Most people, however, have the ability to switch back and forth as the necessity arises. (You could almost say this about dialect.) Perhaps some uberprofessionals always talk like a book. In a non-literate or less literate society, however, you may rarely, if never, find these kinds of interactions.womblingfree wrote:I was commenting on your assertion that people from 'literate' cultures speak more like written sentences than people from non-literate cultures.
Last edited by jotham on Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
I wasn't excluding now. It still works. Perhaps I shouldn't have restricted my definition to non-literate cultures. I could broaden it by saying less literate.metal56 wrote:I thought you were referring to NOW.jotham wrote:A non-literate society. Surely you can think of some. But especially before the print culture.
Last edited by jotham on Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:06 am, edited 2 times in total.
That's kinda like stating the obvious, isn't it?Well, it might be more accurately phrased that you will encounter people who speak like written sentences more often in a more literate culture than a less literate one.
What is this "more logical" communication you keep harping on about? And what the fook does "more polished" mean?And that's because you'll have more interactions — like in business, academic, etc. — that require polished and more logical communication.
?if ever.In a non-literate or less literate society, however, you may rarely, if never, find these kinds of interactions.
What kind of interactions?
Last edited by metal56 on Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:01 am, edited 2 times in total.
So now you can agree with me that the language often bears much resemblance to written structure. The more people immerse themselves in books, professionalism, and reasoning skills; the more the statement rings true.metal56 wrote:That's kinda like stating the obvious, isn't it?Well, it might be more accurately phrased that you will encounter people who speak like written sentences more often in a more literate culture than a less literate one.
if ever.jotham wrote:In a non-literate or less literate society, however, you may rarely, if never, find these kinds of interactions.
I'm being messy today. I actually meant if not never.
Business, academia, laboratory, government, etc.What kind of interactions?
I think you meant to say "spoken language" there. I think you need to give examples. To me, we have a number of possibilities:So now you can agree with me that the language often bears much resemblance to written structure.
EG
written-written language
written-spoken language
spoken-written language
spoken-spoken language
Your thoughts above probably fit with the spoken-written type.
People who immerse themselves in all kinds of groups, cliques, clubs, and text types often do end up speaking like the other members of the club. So what's new?The more people immerse themselves in books, professionalism, and reasoning skills; the more the statement rings true.