Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 316 posts

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#251

Post by gbacon »

bitwize wrote: post #204
bluepeter wrote: post #22

British aristocracy has been pronouncing their own surnames wrong for centuries on purpose. Cholmondeley is "Chumley" Featherstonehaugh is "Fanshaw." If you read it phonetically you mark yourself as an outsider. The misstake is the membership card. (Heck, even in Portland we locals hear about misprouncing Couch St probably every year in local press as some bar for membership to our own locals only vibe.)

In New Orleans, protesters against outsiders acquiring and developing real estate hold up signs that read "Say Tchoupitoulas" (/ˌtʃɑp ə ˈtuː ləs/). I give my wife lots of hassle about the pronunciations of Louisiana place names like Tchoupitoulas, Natchitoches (/ˈnæk ə ˌdɪʃ/, really!), etc. especially when she complains about northeastern place names like "Leominster".

Nackadish!

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#252

Post by gbacon »

janalsncm wrote: post #152

> But in another instance, Epstein was critical of misspelling. A contact forwarded the sex offender his daughter’s college application in 2013. “I wish you had let me review before sending…the grammatical errors and spelling mistakes will make it at least harder for early admission,” Epstein wrote. It is funny that spelling and grammar matter more when writing to an admissions officer than to a potential business pa…

The difference is the formality of the setting, not necessarily the recipient. Sending a quick note via email or text is one, and a pitch deck is another.

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#253

Post by xnyan »

hax0ron3 wrote: post #38
ryandrake wrote: post #15

I think a more likely reason, that for some reason, a lot of people don't want to talk about, is that these "Global Elite" aren't really that smart, creative, or articulate. That they've gotten to where they are despite, not because of their communication skills. They're not being "typical unconventional / quirky entrepreneurs." They're simply C students who knew the right people.

That may be the case. Also, a man's intelligence is usually not evenly distributed among all of his different psychological facets. One can be extremely smart in some ways and extremely incompetent in other ways. So some of the global elite might actually be extremely smart when it comes to a few key things and total morons in other ways. If your theory is correct and the global elite really isn't significantly smart…

> how are they maintaining their spots against smarter competitors?

I recommend you read "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" (Piketty) for the full argument, but tldr version: capitalism naturally tends toward extreme inequality because the rate of return on capital exceeds the rate of economic growth.

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#254

Post by beedeebeedee »

ryandrake wrote: post #68
stackghost wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The people who rule us can't be this mid, otherwise the very concept of meritocracy is bunk. It is bunk. Nobody who has even a modicum of critical thinking ability thinks that Donald Trump or Elon Musk are geniuses. Luck and circumstance are an immense part of success.

I truly believe this is it. People don't want to openly admit how dumb these Global Elite actually are, because it totally shatters the illusion that there's even a tiny shred of meritocracy in the world.

Yup. I used to work at an academic research center that held a yearly conference that attracted CEOs and other ‘elite.’ It was shocking to witness them unable to get coffee, find the bathroom, or accomplish any number of basic tasks, without a small gaggle of assistants to lead them.

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#255

Post by falcor84 »

ninalanyon wrote: post #242
falcor84 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the wide definition of grammar, everyone uses some grammar, but nevertheless it's not a category error to say "*this sentence got grammar mistake". When we speak about the grammar for a language/dialect we imply a prescribed "correct" grammar for a particular community of speakers.

> speak about the grammar for a language/dialect we imply a prescribed "correct" grammar Not prescribed, rather observed. At least in English where there is no language authority and dictionaries present usage. The situation is even stranger in Norway where there is a prescribed form but where dialects have essentially equal rights so that the prescription really applies only to formal written Norwegian.

From what I experienced, "proper" English grammar is absolutely prescribed at schools, and "poor grammar" will consistently and very predictably get you point deductions, regardless of whether linguists would accept your grammar as valid.

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#256

Post by xnyan »

ryandrake wrote: post #65
RamblingCTO wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or efficiency is more important because you have a high load of people you need to interact with. I was a grammer nazi back in the day but stopped caring because the ROI is minimal and I've got shit to do that's more important. so maybe it's the same for them

I've never understood the "efficiency / ROI" argument. What is the "Investment"? What's the time delta between using the shift key and not using the shift key? Does it even add up to one second per year? What's the accumulated time loss from spelling "grammar" properly? If the delta is simply "cognitive load" then we're back to the theory I already posted.

I'm not certain about shift deltas, but one typically can type faster at the cost of increased errors. I type quite a bit, so even small percentage decreases in total time spent typing is significant. Humins ar rpretty gdood att standing under even very mxed and grbled txt.

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#258

Post by tsoukase »

layer8 wrote: post #148
lab14 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my point wasn't about using the "original rules", on the contrary it was about discarding uneeded ones. totally missed the point, but hey thanks for your contribution.

I’m not sure why you’re using commas and double quotes and dots, they’re so unneeded!

And the last letter of each word is (mostly) unneeded. Only please leave a contact info if someone doesn't understand something.

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#259

Post by bluepeter »

philiplu wrote: post #223
toast0 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

augh is not as common as ough, but either one can make any sound in the whole syllabary. How about Sequim, WA. Guess how to pronounciate that.

Or Puyallup, WA. Those two are definite shibboleth tests in the PNW.

Pend Oreille is the eastern WA test for western WA.

Re: Why the global elite gave up on spelling and grammar

#260

Post by klondike_klive »

teachrdan wrote: post #30
bluepeter wrote: post #22

British aristocracy has been pronouncing their own surnames wrong for centuries on purpose. Cholmondeley is "Chumley" Featherstonehaugh is "Fanshaw." If you read it phonetically you mark yourself as an outsider. The misstake is the membership card. (Heck, even in Portland we locals hear about misprouncing Couch St probably every year in local press as some bar for membership to our own locals only vibe.)

There's also the British penchant for deliberately mispronouncing French words. I have heard "renaissance" pronounced "reh-NAY-sance", "fillet" pronounced "fill-it", "valet" as "val-it" and so on. I think it's a national point of pride to pronounce the words of their neighbor incorrectly.

Surely the American way of saying "REN-uh-saunce" is further from the French than the British pronunciation?
Post reply on HN