I realised, after writing many reports in my final year at uni, that my grammar is not what I want it to be, i.e., what it SHOULD be.
By having poor grammar, and claiming those who criticize it (whether constructively or not) are grammar Nazi's, is tantamount to saying "my valuation (or lack thereof) of grammar is more important than you critict!". This is arrogant.
My personal opinion is that there are more people who value good grammar, or find poor grammar a hinderance, than those who do not. And what's more, not by a small margin.
Also, realise that grammar and spelling are different. I think that those who have medical conditions such as dyslexia (I think I have a very mild form of this) should be treated more leniantly in spelling cases but not grammar. Anyone with a medical knowledge capable of backing this up?
Isnt this exactly the philosophy behind DOS (except the GUI part). Essentially you just copied and ran in DOS.
I think this is a good idea, but it may be at teh expense of efficiency. That is, parts of a program which could be abstracted out into other packages to be used by other programs may be less likely to occur.
Efficiency or Ease? I choose efficiency! but if you can do that and slap a nice interface on it then im cool with it.
Slashdot Mirror
I realised, after writing many reports in my final year at uni, that my grammar is not what I want it to be, i.e., what it SHOULD be.
By having poor grammar, and claiming those who criticize it (whether constructively or not) are grammar Nazi's, is tantamount to saying "my valuation (or lack thereof) of grammar is more important than you critict!". This is arrogant.
My personal opinion is that there are more people who value good grammar, or find poor grammar a hinderance, than those who do not. And what's more, not by a small margin.
Also, realise that grammar and spelling are different. I think that those who have medical conditions such as dyslexia (I think I have a very mild form of this) should be treated more leniantly in spelling cases but not grammar. Anyone with a medical knowledge capable of backing this up?
P.S., read "Eats, shoots, and leaves".
Isnt this exactly the philosophy behind DOS (except the GUI part).
Essentially you just copied and ran in DOS.
I think this is a good idea, but it may be at teh expense of efficiency. That is, parts of a program which could be abstracted out into other packages to be used by other programs may be less likely to occur.
Efficiency or Ease? I choose efficiency! but if you can do that and slap a nice interface on it then im cool with it.