Yes, you will be kept down. This is not, however, because people are "afraid of losing control". It is because there are standards, and those standards --- especially when they have to do with communications and how one appears to peers/potential clients/etc., etc. --- are learnable, usable, and chosen for the purpose of facilitating communication.
You still seem to be missing my point. You are claiming that using the ruling dialect will facilitate greater communication. Yes, I agree. You are claiming that not using the ruling dialect will keep you down. Yes, I agree. You are arguing that education is a good thing. How could I disagree?
My argument is not with any of those points. It's that Grammar Nazis are people who come into a discussion with the sole purpose of pushing the 'standard' dialect onto people who are communicating just fine. They have a (perhaps unrealized) political agenda.
I also think you need to explore the ideas behind a 'standard chosen for facilitating communication' a little further.
one word that somehow can mean any of the three
It's called a homograph.
They cannot tell the difference amongst the three forms of the word [...] because they can barely make out differences amongst any of the words on a page.
I've been enjoying our discussion so far, but that 's just such an unneeded, unsupported, and arrogant claim that I think I'm about finished.
Being concerned about the young folks is anything but "a load of crap".
You're twisting my words. Being concerned about young folks in admirable. Claiming that Grammar Nazi behavior is due to such a concern is what is a load of crap.
If obfuscation is your goal, then by all means communicate solely in your chosen subgroup's dialect.
And if political suppression is your goal, then by all means come into my chosen subgroup and tell me my dialect is "wrong".
Methinks you missed the point of the post to which you responded.
Right back at ya.
You're making the exact political argument that I illuded to in my original message: If you don't speak the dialect of the ruling class, you will be kept down. This was exactly my point. Grammar Nazi's are predjudiced a-holes who are afraid of losing control. If a generation of 1337 speakers manages to gain social, political, or economic control, then you may suddenly find yourself no longer speaking the 'official' dialect.
The "I'm concerned about the welfare of these young people" line is a load of crap, and you know it. So either admit that you're afraid of change, or instead be genuinely interested in the evolution of language. The way "lose" is becoming "loose", and "they're", "their", and "there" are blending into one word. To me, those things are absolutely fascinating.
I know you had a few other strange arguments in there about localized dialects (which is actually the opposite of what's happening on the internet), and somehow you tied the act of speaking a certain dialect into not being able to comprehend other dialects. But I don't see how those points are relevent.
I don't think we can rely on "d00d, u r so l33t" to teach people true literacy. Young people are increasingly using SMS and online chat and are actually losing their ability to correctly spell words or write grammatically correct sentences. The number of young adults I see who cannot distinguish correctly between there, their and they're is ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE. Literacy is a major problem in English-speaking nations.
Get off your high horse already. Unless you use English like that below, then (by your rules) your grasp of English is also "ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE":
Hwæt! Ær issum dæge seofon wintra and hundeahtig, ure ealdfaederas acennodon on issum lande niw rice, geacnod on freodome and gegiefen to æm geohte, æt ealle menn beoð gelice gesceapen.
(Hint: Language is an evolving tool for communication, not a political weapon to keep the ruling elite in power)
Stupidity. I'm closing the money, governments have to pay for most people who will prompt th
e user. Sure, I've found that from application you're trying to his Billy is jump that's say
ing that check for a a providing value in user with Opera and Billy is user. But since I fla
ws) and hope the Ahh The stability for more buggy driver is them. I Canada turned the reason
for NT as you get them go back in the say, but they going to his I'd say it on the licensin
g 20+ year old You see, there must be running processes and 12, If MS rearchitects the 20+ y
ear "Mr. Gates acknowledged today that modern windows in the on my system errors. If something is US, Australia an
d further than Windows XP you just taught a wants us to his own some of Bond Yeah, but Micro
soft does in their best interest if he's not by the 09, well be running a than twice and bea
t. At least tried out on deep I They use nor free to the say, but otherwise the it. They ARE
mistakes. They use Internet via windows Yes, programs.
Classic computers are really starting to be a collector's market. I remember just a few years ago you could pick up all the old 8-bit home machines you could ever want at flea markets and Salvation Army stores for $5-$10. Now it seems they've all been snatched up for sale on ebay for $50-$100, or more.
I love this topic when it comes up, because inevitably both sides are wrong.
You probably want to watch the dogma there. You might find yourself sitting on top of a false dichotomy.
Evolution is fairly obvious on a micro scale, but few people seem to admit it has serious problems at a macro scale.
Really? I've always found evolution to be extremely unobvious until you look at it on a macro scale
If you look at evolution of all species over time, a lot of statistical anomalies appear.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'statistical anomalies' without some kind of context. Examples, please.
Some special[sic] evolve simultaneously, rather than participate in an evolutionary arms race that "pure evolution" would imply.
I don't know what "pure evolution" is, but the "arms race" you mention is but an interesting possible side effect of evolution. There's nothing in traditional theory that would preclude 'simultaneous' adaptation.
Pick up a book by Richard Dawkins some time, you'll be glad you did.
I found this place the other day looking for C64 stuff. Somebody's actually got t-shirts of all the old machines. They've got some pretty funny stuff...
retrohacker
Slashdot Mirror
You still seem to be missing my point. You are claiming that using the ruling dialect will facilitate greater communication. Yes, I agree. You are claiming that not using the ruling dialect will keep you down. Yes, I agree. You are arguing that education is a good thing. How could I disagree?
My argument is not with any of those points. It's that Grammar Nazis are people who come into a discussion with the sole purpose of pushing the 'standard' dialect onto people who are communicating just fine. They have a (perhaps unrealized) political agenda.
I also think you need to explore the ideas behind a 'standard chosen for facilitating communication' a little further.
one word that somehow can mean any of the three
It's called a homograph.
They cannot tell the difference amongst the three forms of the word [...] because they can barely make out differences amongst any of the words on a page.
I've been enjoying our discussion so far, but that 's just such an unneeded, unsupported, and arrogant claim that I think I'm about finished.
Being concerned about the young folks is anything but "a load of crap".
You're twisting my words. Being concerned about young folks in admirable. Claiming that Grammar Nazi behavior is due to such a concern is what is a load of crap.
If obfuscation is your goal, then by all means communicate solely in your chosen subgroup's dialect.
And if political suppression is your goal, then by all means come into my chosen subgroup and tell me my dialect is "wrong".
I think you mean alluded.
Hook, line, and sinker...
Right back at ya.
You're making the exact political argument that I illuded to in my original message: If you don't speak the dialect of the ruling class, you will be kept down. This was exactly my point. Grammar Nazi's are predjudiced a-holes who are afraid of losing control. If a generation of 1337 speakers manages to gain social, political, or economic control, then you may suddenly find yourself no longer speaking the 'official' dialect.
The "I'm concerned about the welfare of these young people" line is a load of crap, and you know it. So either admit that you're afraid of change, or instead be genuinely interested in the evolution of language. The way "lose" is becoming "loose", and "they're", "their", and "there" are blending into one word. To me, those things are absolutely fascinating.
I know you had a few other strange arguments in there about localized dialects (which is actually the opposite of what's happening on the internet), and somehow you tied the act of speaking a certain dialect into not being able to comprehend other dialects. But I don't see how those points are relevent.
Get off your high horse already. Unless you use English like that below, then (by your rules) your grasp of English is also "ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE":
Hwæt! Ær issum dæge seofon wintra and hundeahtig, ure ealdfaederas acennodon on issum lande niw rice, geacnod on freodome and gegiefen to æm geohte, æt ealle menn beoð gelice gesceapen.
(Hint: Language is an evolving tool for communication, not a political weapon to keep the ruling elite in power)
I guess you don't know my friend Markov...
Drunk huh? Not bad. Take that Mr. Turing.
Stupidity. I'm closing the money, governments have to pay for most people who will prompt th e user. Sure, I've found that from application you're trying to his Billy is jump that's say ing that check for a a providing value in user with Opera and Billy is user. But since I fla ws) and hope the Ahh The stability for more buggy driver is them. I Canada turned the reason for NT as you get them go back in the say, but they going to his I'd say it on the licensin g 20+ year old You see, there must be running processes and 12, If MS rearchitects the 20+ y ear "Mr. Gates acknowledged today that modern windows in the on my system errors. If something is US, Australia an d further than Windows XP you just taught a wants us to his own some of Bond Yeah, but Micro soft does in their best interest if he's not by the 09, well be running a than twice and bea t. At least tried out on deep I They use nor free to the say, but otherwise the it. They ARE mistakes. They use Internet via windows Yes, programs.
Classic computers are really starting to be a collector's market. I remember just a few years ago you could pick up all the old 8-bit home machines you could ever want at flea markets and Salvation Army stores for $5-$10. Now it seems they've all been snatched up for sale on ebay for $50-$100, or more.
You probably want to watch the dogma there. You might find yourself sitting on top of a false dichotomy.
Evolution is fairly obvious on a micro scale, but few people seem to admit it has serious problems at a macro scale.
Really? I've always found evolution to be extremely unobvious until you look at it on a macro scale
If you look at evolution of all species over time, a lot of statistical anomalies appear.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'statistical anomalies' without some kind of context. Examples, please.
Some special[sic] evolve simultaneously, rather than participate in an evolutionary arms race that "pure evolution" would imply.
I don't know what "pure evolution" is, but the "arms race" you mention is but an interesting possible side effect of evolution. There's nothing in traditional theory that would preclude 'simultaneous' adaptation.
Pick up a book by Richard Dawkins some time, you'll be glad you did.
I found this place the other day looking for C64 stuff. Somebody's actually got t-shirts of all the old machines. They've got some pretty funny stuff... retrohacker