Appalling education - and it's acceptable?

deravarra

Hi All - I work in one of the "blue chip" multinational high tech companies in Ireland. While we have some of the best and brightest people working here, it sometimes irks me quite a bit that a lot of them do not have a good command of the english language - especially when it comes to spelling!

How in god's name did these people qualify with honours degrees?

Some examples that make me have the "duh" moment at work:

Seeing people who can't differentiate between their, there or they're.
Apostrophes being placed everywhere - just in case.
And worst of all - people using BIG words, without knowing the meaning or how to spell it correctly!

Anyone else got the same experience?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Donkey Oaty

My friend, you seem to be seeing the speck in your brother's eye, without noticing the the log in your own.

deman

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

My friend, you seem to be seeing the speck in your brother's eye, without noticing the the log in your own.

I agree. The thread title is appalling indeed. :rolleyes:

deravarra

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

My friend, you seem to be seeing the speck in your brother's eye, without noticing the the log in your own.

Rumbled - although i dont buy the christian approach

deravarra

deman wrote: »

I agree. The thread title is appalling indeed. :rolleyes:

Oops ... their is a fine example where people should mind there own business - theyre theyre.

Notice the difference?

Donkey Oaty

deravarra wrote: »

Rumbled - although i dont buy the christian approach

Clearly, otherwise you'd have said "Christian" and wondered "How in God's name did these people qualify with honours degrees?"

However, homophones aside, I can't understand how they have spelling problems. Doesn't everyone use an automatic spellchecker at work these days for reports, etc?

deravarra

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Clearly, otherwise you'd have said "Christian" and wondered "How in God's name did these people qualify with honours degrees?"

However, homophones aside, I can't understand how they have spelling problems. Doesn't everyone use an automatic spellchecker at work these days for reports, etc?

Some do, others don't. But a spell check will not tackle the "there their theyre" issue ...

The Raven.

deravarra wrote: »

Some do, others don't. But a spell check will not tackle the "there their theyre" issue ...

The spell check in MS Word will correct the misuse of 'there', 'their' and 'they're' if the 'check grammar' box is checked, although it gets other things wrong. It is also important to use the UK English version.

The spell check on the message window here did correct 'theyre' (in your quote), which should be 'they're'. I don't use it very often, although it seems fairly good for spelling but doesn't appear to correct bad grammar.

deravarra

The Raven. wrote: »

The spell check in MS Word will correct the misuse of 'there', 'their' and 'they're' if the 'check grammar' box is checked, although it gets other things wrong. It is also important to use the UK English version.

The spell check on the message window here did correct 'theyre' (in your quote), which should be 'they're'. I don't use it very often, although it seems fairly good for spelling but doesn't appear to correct bad grammar.

I agree - but if the person doesnt know what they are looking out for, they will simply ignore it and continue sending their appalling acknowledgement of an inadequate education

FlutterinBantam

deravarra wrote: »

I agree - but if the person doesnt know what they are looking out for, they will simply ignore it and continue sending their appalling acknowledgement of an inadequate education

Yes, you are correct there;)

Yakuza

I thought this would be apt: (from here)

[COLOR=blue]Eye halve a spelling chequer[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]It came with my pea sea[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]It plainly marques four my revue[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.[/COLOR]
 
[COLOR=blue]Eye strike a key and type a word[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]And weight four it two say[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]Weather eye am wrong oar write[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]It shows me strait a weigh.[/COLOR]
 
[COLOR=blue]As soon as a mist ache is maid[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]It nose bee fore two long[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]And eye can put the error rite[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]Its rarely ever wrong.[/COLOR]
 
[COLOR=blue]Eye have run this poem threw it[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]I am shore your pleased two no[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]Its letter perfect in it’s weigh[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]My chequer tolled me sew.[/COLOR]

deman

Maybe the spell checker is the root of the problem. Too many people totally depend on it and a lot of them can't even tell whether it's an American spelling or British spelling.

It's like, how many people actually remember telephone numbers nowadays?

drakshug

I tend to be the spell checker for my colleagues. I'm older and learnt the mechanics.

deravarra

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Yes, you are correct there;)

I'll grant you the apostrophe isn't there in "doesn't" - BUT the spelling of acknowledgement is not wrong - according to wikipedia and a few online dictionaries it's a matter of choice

MathsManiac

On the subject of spell-checkers, I have noticed that a lot of recent documents have an incorrect comma before the word “which” when it is being used to introduce a defining relative clause. It’s mildly irritating.

I believe this arises from the fact that the grammar checker in MS Word doesn’t like the use of “which” for this purpose, because the convention in US grammar is to use “that” for defining relative clauses and “which” only for non-defining relative clauses.

As a result, people type a perfectly correct phrase like, for example, “The policy which we adopted last year has been effective.” They get a squiggly green line under this, and Mr Gates invites them to change it to either “The policy that we adopted last year has been effective,” or “The policy, which we adopted last year, has been effective. They then plump for the latter option, when the intention of the original sentence written is often the former.

Has anyone else noticed this?

Donkey Oaty

deravarra wrote: »

I'll grant you the apostrophe isn't there in "doesn't" - BUT the spelling of acknowledgement is not wrong - according to wikipedia and a few online dictionaries it's a matter of choice

I wonder if Flutt was questioning the use of the word rather than the spelling. Here's the sentence again:

I agree - but if the person doesnt know what they are looking out for, they will simply ignore it and continue sending their appalling acknowledgement of an inadequate education

They thing they are writing is not an acknowledgment of an inadequate education, is it? It is surely a result of an inadequate education.

Edit: "illustration", "example" or "demonstration" - would one of those words do you?

Donkey Oaty

MathsManiac wrote: »

As a result, people type a perfectly correct phrase like, for example, “The policy which we adopted last year has been effective.” They get a squiggly green line under this, and Mr Gates invites them to change it to either “The policy that we adopted last year has been effective,” or “The policy, which we adopted last year, has been effective. They then plump for the latter option, when the intention of the original sentence written is often the former.

Has anyone else noticed this?

If nobody else has noticed it, I'd say it is because no business or government department in Ireland has had cause to use any of those phrases for a very long time indeed.

MathsManiac

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

If nobody else has noticed it, I'd say it is because no business or government department in Ireland has had cause to use any of those phrases for a very long time indeed.

Granted!

pickarooney

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

I wonder if Flutt was questioning the use of the word rather than the spelling. Here's the sentence again:



They thing they are writing is not an acknowledgment of an inadequate education, is it? It is surely a result of an inadequate education.

Edit: "illustration", "example" or "demonstration" - would one of those words do you?

I would add that the use of 'send' without a secondary object is (at best) confusing. Specks and beams indeed - this kind of ill-conceived pendantry is cringeworthy, to be honest.

Donkey Oaty

Ill-conceived pedantry might be a good title for this entire category.

Is there an area of boards.ie that is devoted to the celebration of English and all its variants rather than a forum for people who seem to enjoy pouring scorn on anyone who doesn't speak the way they do?

pickarooney

This one is intended for the former purpose; Spell Czechs was set up for the latter.

Donkey Oaty

pickarooney wrote: »

This one is intended for the former purpose; Spell Czechs was set up for the latter.

No wonder it's private!