|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Paul Butler
Sergeant
Username: Paul
Post Number: 48
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 11:53 am: | 
|
"No, actually, it's the other way around. The Casebook site is the only place where the Diary is being discussed and unfortunately is given way more attention than it deserves."
How do you know this Glenn?
I don't wish to be rude, its so polite here compared to the Maybrick boards on a good day, but this is probably the last place of choice to discuss the diary and its origins by those who still find it worth their effort to unmask the real author, whoever that may be.
Perhaps those of us that still want to, might come up with the supposed hoaxer's name some day soon, and then it wil be bye bye diary for good.
On the other hand.......!
Regards
Paul
(Still looking and in good company) 
|
Kelly Robinson
Police Constable
Username: Kelly
Post Number: 10
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 12:17 pm: |
|
The opinion of a new person (for what it's worth}. I'm sure some arguments seem to be stalemates for you long-timers, but I'd like to point out that they're all new to me. One of the things that attracted me to this board was the detailed specificity of some of the arguments. I was impressed!
It makes me a bit sad to hear about the "golden days" as if the future is guaranteed to suck. I hope I get to be a part of a message board that has a future , and some posts might be rehashes-SHOULD be rehashes, because there will always be some folks to whom the ideas are new.
I hope that's a fresh perspective and I hope to learn lots here. I already have.
Kelly |
Michael Raney
Inspector
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 247
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 12:56 pm: |
|
Kelly,
Bravo! Very well said. That's the way it should be. Yes, there will be a little infighting and petty arguments (i've been part of that too), but overall it's a fantastic sharing of information!!
Mikey |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1465
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 3:15 pm: |
|
Paul Butler wrote:
"How do you know this Glenn?"
Well, I think it's clearly obvious, looking at the tendencies of Ripperology in general. The Diary does not really attract much interest anywhere but here.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden
|
Paul Butler
Sergeant
Username: Paul
Post Number: 49
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 9:08 am: |
|
Hi Glenn
Well I'm glad you cleared that one up for me. If it's "clearly obvious," then I must be talking to myself. Oh well, somebody's got to do it!
Hi Kelly
Well done. I couldn't agree more. I've been told once or twice that things have been discussed before and there's no need to bring them up again. How will we ever learn anything if we don't?
Regards
Paul |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1471
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 7:55 pm: |
|
"Well I'm glad you cleared that one up for me."
Glad to be of service, Paul. We aim to please.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on April 07, 2004)
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden
|
Cludgy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 10:50 am: |
|
Well said A.P. Wolf
I'll second the elitist and snobbery motion.
As you say, there are, good honest people (who wouldn’t normally even contemplate picking a pen up, or resorting to a keyboard,) contributing to this site with a genuine interest in attempting to solve the case.
They bring to this site their good old common sense, although I must admit that I and others sometimes stray from this ideal,
They also bring one other important factor to the message boards, and that is their life experience of living and intermingling with other members of the human race, i.e. observing and taking on board all the little idiosyncrasies and traits of their fellow humans, because believe me, we all people watch, it’s part of being Human.
And then there are also the Crime Historians and Authors, and would be authors, who seem to have a point to prove( they’ll not sway in the least to criticism). Mr Fido is the exception to the rule, he in my opinion has always talked sense on these boards.
I myself, for the past 35 years until I sent my first message to this site, have written nothing more than a betting slip in the local bookies. When I think about it, it is a terrible neglect, of the written word of my forbearers, on my part.
But I must say it does seems to me that I and other people with only a slim understanding of the written word, seem to be overlooked by certain people on these message boards.
Certain contributors to this site are elitist yes, but not the sites directors, Mr Ryder and his team have never failed to put up a post that I have submitted, so good on them.
I left school at 15, and went down the local mine, which brings me on to another one of the elitist traits of these message boards the use of what I call highbrow English.
One of the contributors to these boards has mentioned the fact that certain other contributors were guilty of immature posts, so he is fair game here.
In one of his posts the word “Paradigm” came to light, well I was stumped by this word, we digged coal down the mine not paras.
Why he used this word I’m not sure, was it to show how intelligent he was? Or does he go about speaking like this in his everyday life? (Which is fair enough if this is the case.)
If he talked like that around where I live, he wouldn’t get very far. And speaking of the English language, around these parts, there is the highest concentration of Anglo Saxon place names, and actual Anglo Saxon dialect words spoken in everyday use, in the world. The language grew up where I live.
He has also been known to use the word ”Holistic”. On reading this word I didn’t even bother to reach for the dictionary.
But he’s not the only one, surely it’s not a competition to write the most obscure English words on these boards. Come on, speak plain English.
Getting back to JTR Despite all that was wrote in the media in 1888 about JTR being a monster, a fiend, a devil, it is beyond dispute that he was a member of the Human Race, albeit a most spiteful and evil one.
And he did, in my opinion, fit into a certain pigeonhole. Surely one doesn’t need to be a university professor of English, to try and fathom out his character, or try to make sense of the scant facts we have surrounding the case.
No, the common touch, in my opinion, have just as much to contribute on these boards, as the so called Crime Historians and Authors.
Cludgy
|
Kelly Robinson
Sergeant
Username: Kelly
Post Number: 11
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 10:16 am: |
|
While I agree that "the common touch" is an important aspect of these boards, I have to disagree about the use of vocabulary. If a word is a part of a person's vocabulary (paradigm} it doesn't make them a snob if they use it. And it likewise doesn't make you stupid if you don't know it. We all have different ways of speaking. If you don't want to be judged for feeling less educated , you should not toss out insults to someone else based on their vocabulary. A vocabulary is nothing to be ashamed of. |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 628
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 11:39 am: |
|
Well I know what Cludgy is saying which is just that some people never use a short word where a long word would do!I know I sometimes use a "long" one when a short one is better.I think its when I want something to be taken seriously.It doesnt usually work mind!
Natalie |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1013
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 2:18 pm: |
|
Thanks Cludgy
I agree with everything you have said.
We should all speak and write where we come from.
I came from the gutters, but managed to polish them up a bit on my way.
Straight and honest talking is far more effective than the clever use of words.
The ability to give in to sound and solid argument - with grace and understanding - is the greatest form of grammar.
To be humble when beaten is often victory.
Personally I love it when someone gives me a thrashing on these sites. I enjoy the wider experience of their superior knowledge.
That's a pleasure.
I really don't understand the resentment that sometimes comes out on this site when ideas are truthfully and logically flushed down the toilet.
Enjoyed your post. |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 204
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 2:30 pm: |
|
Cludgy,
Good post and I have to admit I have been guilty myself at times. But, anybody who still uses paradigm (except in its strict linguistic sense) or holistic (except to identify a certain form of medical practice) in conversation or in writing is hopelessly out of date. Both had their academic buzz-word vogue a quarter century ago or more.
We might all learn a lesson from one of the great prose masters of the past century, Winston Churchill, who once explained that when he really wanted to make his point he always searched for words with Anglo-Saxon roots because they are terse and easily understood. And I think a desire to be understood when making our points in a post is what we all want.
Don. |
Cludgy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 10:45 am: |
|
Thanks for that AP and Don.
Forgot where I'd made that post.
Old age and what the doctor didn't order(in a bottle though)to blame, only stumbled back here by chance,like a drunken prostitute wandering in the night.
They were easy meat for Jack you know. |
Ignoramus
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, April 23, 2005 - 8:48 pm: |
|
Whew...I feel such relief knowing now that paradigm and holistic are out of date. I shall strike them from my dictionary. I wholeheartedly agree with the current trend of dumbing down all writing: this is the only way we will ever stamp out literacy, which, of course, leads to smoking, liberalism, and post-marital sex. |
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 533
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 1:05 pm: |
|
Hmmm, the penultimate post here was more than a year ago. It would seem that certain words are not the only things behind the times on this thread.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
R.J. Palmer
Chief Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 599
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 1:26 pm: |
|
"Plato thought nature but a spume that plays
Upon a ghostly paradigm of things;
Solider Aristotle played the taws
Upon the bottom of a king of kings;
World-famous golden-thighed Pythagoras
Fingered upon a fiddle-stick or strings
What a star sang and careless Muses heard:
Old clothes upon old sticks to scare a bird."
W.B. Yeats Among School Children.
i like the word. social scientists be damned. |
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 534
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 2:30 pm: |
|
RJ,
To each his own and as far as I'm concerned brother, you can paradigm.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 380
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 5:30 pm: |
|
If one wants to be understood one must, of course write in a way that is clear and intelligible to the audience you address.
By and large simple words, plain English, is most effective.
On boards like Casebook, one has to remember that some readers, and writers, may have English as a first language but not be British. Nothing wrong in that, but English is used in different ways in different parts of the globe. Irony, for instance, seems to go over the head of many.
I am all for clarity and simplicity, but I am totally against "dumbing down" because people are too lazy or have neglected their educational opportunities and lack a basic vocabulary.
English is a language particularly rich in specific and useful words which used properly add accuracy and focus to meaning. It is the language of Shakespeare, Milton, the Bible (well not originally, of course!!) and Shaw.
Are we not to use words like homogenous, indigenous, indefatigable or Egyptology, because they have more than one syllable and are impenetrable (there I go again) to ignorant and spotty adolescents who mispent their pubescent years??
So I will continue to use long words when i think them applicable and appropriate.
I am very much against (while having a rage) txt spk, non-capitalisation and non-punctuation, which seems to be a trend among the young and educationally resistant.
If they want to share the riches I have to offer, they'll have to raise their literary standards or go without.
Everyone clear?
Irony, over (tongue out of cheek)
Phil |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1832
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 5:54 pm: |
|
I"m just off now to think of all the rude words I know starting with the "F" words which I may need to post---its that post of Phil"s that done it it was.
} |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 381
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 1:19 am: |
|
I'm so pleased natalie - glad my post stimulated you to increasing your vocabulary.
Exactly in which way did I offend THIS time?? |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1835
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 3:06 am: |
|
I just adored the phrase "educationally resistant"
Phil.
But when the subject matter taught in no way matches the pupils life experience at home or in the catchment area in which they live then they often have little incentive to access this alien curriculum-wouldnt you admit?
Far better to build up your street cred which will at least get you some admiring friends.
Natalie
I wasnt offended Phil-only joking truly! |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 382
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:45 am: |
|
Natalie - I can see your point, but I also take the view that one needs to attract people and encourage them to want to go higher.
If we keep dumbing down then no book will be more challenging that a "Janet and John" Reader or a Noddy story. It's not just about understanding words either - it is being able to follow sometimes quite subtle or complex arguments. If thought is to go beyond the banal, then writing has to be lucid and right, but if technical terms or the "mot juste" is required, we should not shy away from this.
I agree, entirely, that long words should not be used just because the writer wants to appear clever or show off. Appropriateness is the key.
I am all for signalling the level of a piece of writing too - "For Beginners"/"Advanced Level" or whatever. and allow the reader to decide if it is for him.
When I was a kid, I know I learned a lot and increased my reading power and confidence because as I grew interested in a subject I turned to adult books. Some were challenging, but I wanted to know what they said, so my vocabulary (and knowledge) expanded quickly.
I agree that people's circumstances can be unfortunate and that they lack encouragement to read - that reading may even be regarded as unacceptable in certain circles. But we cannot forever cater for such people or (in pursuit of some fanciful and unachievable vision of equality) make everything intelligible to everyone. For one thing, even if the words were simple, the subject matter, the logic or the reasoning might be complex. Simple words alone would not help.
And as I have said, I would strongly resist dumbing down ideas, or breaking down subjects into "bite-sized" chunks. That way lies cultural melt-down and regression. I don't think I am being elitist, therefore, in saying that there should a a range of styles and detail and expertise that cater for the new student, the educationally challenged or a variety of levels of "expert". That way, everyone should be happy and no one excluded.
Casebook is surely big enough for such an approach.
Phil |
John Ruffels
Inspector
Username: Johnr
Post Number: 372
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 8:54 am: |
|
Speaking of words a lot of us don't understand, what does " Cludgy" mean?
For me, big words are the things I use until a
thought or a swearword comes to mind. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 785
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 12:13 pm: |
|
Phil wrote:
On boards like Casebook, one has to remember that some readers, and writers, may have English as a first language but not be British. Nothing wrong in that...
Gee, I'm terribly glad there's nothing wrong with the way we Americans use English.  Does that mean we can stay? By the way, may I become an "honorary Brit" for Casebook purposes? I promise to write "lift" instead of "elevator." 
It is the language of Shakespeare, Milton, the Bible (well not originally, of course!!) and Shaw
Also Herman Melville, Mark Twain, Walt Whitman, and Tennessee Williams. But I'm afraid the Bible was around in its original Greek and Hebrew (with a touch of Aramaic in a bit of Daniel) as well as in translation in many other languages before the Lindesfarne Gospels made their debut.
A little anti-Americanism before lunch may be a good thing. (This is just a joke, folks. I'm not really serious).
Andy S. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1839
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 12:27 pm: |
|
Its a big subject Phil.
If there is a constant mismatch between the home culture[including language] and the school"s culture[and language] the pupil will start to feel outside it all.From there there are but a few small steps to feeling ill at ease in a learning culture that has little meaning in their lives and the next stage is when the pupil is given tasks that dont match their level of achievement .Failure usually results and with it a fall in self worth and even more crucially
in self confidence----a critical factor in learning to read for example[according to the strictest academic research!!!].
Then the trouble starts and you get the drop outs and the bad behaviour.
So its chicken and egg.
I couldnt agree more that pupils are entitled to have access to "a rich and varied curriculum" throughout their statutary schooling.
But first teachers have to accurately assess the child"s achievements and where the pupil is in terms of familiarity with the language and culture of the school.Second,is this different from the values and expectations of the home?
After this comes an individual education plan which pin points need ,sets targets for learning and matches or adjusts tasks so that the pupil will achieve some measure of success-at least. With success will come an increase in self confidence and a desire to go on achieving.........etc etc etc [or so the theory goes]
Natalie
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1840
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Hey-what exactly drew me into this-----sorry Folks for the heavy,heavy brew!
..Andrew..
...and you didnt mention Allen Ginsberg,Elizabeth Bishop,TS Eliot,Ezra Pound,Emily Dickinson,Charles Buckowski,Jack Kerrouac,Ai[Florence Ogawa],Scott Fitzgerald,
Sylvia Plath?????
But wasnt Phil also talking about the right children have to an education that will connect them to the world and help them to understand it
and progress within it?
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 786
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 3:28 pm: |
|
Nats,
I almost did mention F. Scott Fitzgerald, but I can't bring myself to recognize a relative of the Kennedys. How about Steven King?
Andy S.
PS -- I was just havin' a bit of a giggle now, ducky! |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1844
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:31 pm: |
|
Andrew,
sorry to be so ignorant-F.Scott Fitzgerald related to the Kennedy family?You are joking?
Natalie |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 787
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:44 pm: |
|
I don't remember exactly what the relation was but it most have been through JFK's mother. That's why the Kennedy sons all have the middle name "Fitzgerald." I try to know as little about the Kennedys as possible.
Andy S. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1845
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:57 pm: |
|
Same here Andrew.Disappointed about dear old Scott
-he is nearly my favourite writer-especially The Great Gatsby. A beautiful writer.
Natalie |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 383
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:12 am: |
|
One could write endless lists of great writers in English - my list reflected my recall of professor higgins' lines in Pygmalion/My Fair Lady - hence my inclusion of G B Shaw.
I realise your post was tongue in cheek Andy, but I have found (not so much on Casebook as on another similar Tolkien-focused website I used) that those who learn English in different parts of the world do have differences in idiom, syntax, use of language and words etc that means that they can interpret phrases differently to the way I intended them to come across.
As I have tried to make plain above, if communication is one's aim, then clarity and writing for your audience - not for one's self - must be paramount.
As an amateur historian, I admire the "Horrible History" series of books which are very popular with kids in the UK. They break down topics and periods into cartoons, jokes and bite-sized pieces with a humourous edge, but remain quite (amazingly) accurate in terms of the detail. Kids can be entertained and learn. I welcome it.
But I do not expect the Oxford University Press to insist that all doctoral theses they publish must be adapted to the same style before they appear in print so that they are accessible.
The "milk" given to youngesters (to use a biblical idiom) must surely prepare them for the "meat" of words and ideas they may encounter in later life.
For surely, this discussion is about getting across ideas and concepts (some of them complicated) and goes beyond words?
Would one, if this case revolved around mathematics, propose that certain advanced theories or formulae should be ruled out of order because not everyone could understand them? If they have their place surely they should be used - and this is not because anyone is or wants to be elitist or superior, just because they have their use and their place.
Personally, my experience has been that if you give people things and don't make them work for them/find them for themselves; or spoonfeed, or make it too easy - whatever is on offer is not appreciated. If people aspire to something they will work for it.
Let me be controversial (actually not) but it'll give some of you something to bite on - equality has it's place (though its over-rated and seems to mean different things on either side of the Atlantic), but equality - as in dumbing down and bringing all things to the lowest common denominator so no one feels excluded ever - be d**ned.
In conclusion, I come back again to my statement that Casebook is big enough for all levels of literacy and education. Sometimes we all have to work hard/strive to understand what is being said.
But we also have to strive to appreciate the many differences between the world of 1888 and that of 2005. Money was different (pounds shillings and pence rather than a decimal system), attitudes to many issues - women, sex, social class, inequality(!!), child labour, race etc etc - were such as to be alien to most people today.
For those not born in the UK, many aspects of social life are subtley different, and it is clear from posts I have read, not always understood. Are we to sweep away all these problems because not everyone can understand everything at a glance, or because it takes effort and a leap of imagination to understand. Are concepts ruled elitist because they cannot be reduced to text speak.
As I say, to me this discussion is about concepts and ideas as much as about long words. the art, IMHO, is to seek to explain the most complex ideas in the simplest of language, something that a Ripper-expert, Colin Wilson is brilliant at doing.
Just my views of course, to try to take the discussion along. By all means feel free to flame me, I am not a delicate flower!!
Phil
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1846
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 4:56 am: |
|
It is arguably very important indeed for capitalism to have well educated masses in the Western markets in particular.As PC produce expands its goodies and increases in popularity globally
it requires a population skilled as readers and interpreters of technical information at the very least.Its not interested in questions of "equality" or "superiority" but profits and returns.
The new "buyers" HAVE to be computer literate
equality is irrelevant. |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 386
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 6:33 am: |
|
The implication being, Natalie? I'm not sure I understand the point you are making.
Phil |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1847
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 8:56 am: |
|
Phil
above you state "equality be damned!"
but if you dont find ways to educate and inspire any future workforce
then that workforce will be condemned to illiteracy and the economy will decline and fall
---so educating everybody to achieve their potential is in everybody"s interest-its counter productive to pick and choose who deserves to be educated from a moral/elitist/---you name it--whatever point of view!
And this would apply to todays markets even more than yesterdays because of the advances in technology.
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 389
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 9:05 am: |
|
I think you miss my point, Natalie.
Equality be ******!! only if the levelling is DOWNWARDS. I have no problem with everyone having the same opportunity to better themselves.
education is also something that should be available to all, but in my view the increase in literact (in the UK) was more marked in the 20s-60s than it has been since. When people had to work hard to get on, there was a spur and a motive to do so. Today, I see things coming to kids and some adults so easily, that they no longer care about it, or take the opportunities offered. Their choice, of course. But if you give water to the horse, I do not see it as the business of others to MAKE it drink, one inch beyond what is necessary for our own interests.
Much of modern higher education, it seems to me, serves no purpose other than to keep bodies out of the employment stats.
Phil |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1850
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 9:40 am: |
|
Well I am pointing out that many developments in todays world including those in education happen because global economic need dictates it rather than the leisurely traditional hotch potch British 1870"s-1970"s approach to how to educate/who to educate and to what level.If we dont watch out we"ll be overtaken by countries with faster developing economies. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3417
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 11:32 am: |
|
Phil,
"Much of modern higher education, it seems to me, serves no purpose other than to keep bodies out of the employment stats."
Exactly. Which is how it is in Sweden.
I do not want to come out as an elitist, but here practically everybody under 35 have a university degree of some sort; a reform brought on by the politicians in order to hide the high unemployment statistics. With the result that a university degree is worth NOTHING in Sweden, because you are no longer unique. The result from inflation can only be one -- everybody takes the fall. Sweden is probably number one country in the world with the largest number of unemployed academics -- there are only jobs to 5% of them.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 391
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 11:37 am: |
|
But what if they are on the wrong track?
Following them like lemmings isn't necessarily sensible.
I see falling educational standards, syllabi that are more restrictive and less stretching than in the past, kids who are ignorant and illiterate (and I blame things like the initial teaching alphabet and literary teaching methods of the 70s for that).
I find kids that have no attention span and are pandered too, violent, undisciplined children that are practically unteachable in many ways; I see emphasis on exams and tesst and stats rather than an learning and understanding.
So I don't see the educational reforms of the last 20 years as having been at all effective - quite the reverse.
I agree, however, that the syllabi do need looking at, to be less academic and more practical. But I also think the division I recall from the 60s between the grammar schools and the secondary moderns as not having done that badly. It focused kids in the main on what they needed.
But this thread/debate is not really about education, it is about the use of language.
Phil |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 788
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 11:40 am: |
|
Phil wrote:
I realise your post was tongue in cheek Andy, but I have found (not so much on Casebook as on another similar Tolkien-focused website I used) that those who learn English in different parts of the world do have differences in idiom, syntax, use of language and words etc that means that they can interpret phrases differently to the way I intended them to come across.
Yes, I delight in the different "brands" of English. In fact, every time I take a trip to London (which have been rather frequent lately) I first "practice" my British English. I don't try to imitate a London accent, but I work on idioms and inflection. For example in standard American English the voice rises in pitch at the end of a question and ends the question at a higher pitch. In British English the voice rises in pitch toward the end of a question and then drops back down again for the last word. Graphically:
America: ___-
Britain: ___-_
Think of the question: "Are you alright?" An American would raise his voice in pitch on the syllable "right." A Londoner would raise his voice in pitch on "al" and drop it back down on "right."
THe point is that neither American English nor British English (nor Canadian, nor Australian, etc.) is right and the other wrong. Enough classic literature has been produced in both dialects the merit their individual acceptance.
Andy S.
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1852
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 12:47 pm: |
|
Quite right Andrew-regarding the different dialects and accents of English there is no difference in terms of intrinsic value between one and the other.Received pronunciation[ or Queen"s English as it was once called] and Standard English are nothing more than one of the many dialects of English and are quite simply the dialect of Kent-no better and no worse than any other.
Natalie |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 393
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 1:27 pm: |
|
I certainly hope no one thought I was seeking to suggest that one "brand" of English was "better" or worse than any other.
My point was that, if not recognised, the differences in usage can lead to misunderstanding.
English, in world terms, these days is undoubtedly "American"-English, through Hollywood, TV and advertising. Is not "Coke" (as in Coca-Cola) the best known word in the world?
Or is it "OK"?
On accentuation, an American will say Leicester Square. While an English person will say Leicester Square. the American will also probably pronounce Leicester (Lester in English) as LY-sester. Something similar happens with Lieutenant - LEFTenant in England, Li-u-tenent, in the US. Am I right?
Phil |
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 394
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 1:35 pm: |
|
Talking of regional accents, Shakespeare probably spoke with a broad Midlands accent, judging by the rhymns and rythmns of his writings. Queen Elizabeth and her court also probably spoke with what we would now consider a VERY broad regional accent (their spelling gives it away if you read it aloud).
Certainly Shakespeare's plays were not originally performed using the tones of olivier, Gielguid, or Guinness or even Kenneth Branagh!!
I love regional accents so long as they are not too harsh (as is my own native Lincolnshire), but I must say that received pronounciation often has the benefit of clarity, especially on tannoys and station announcement systems.
Phil |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 368
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 1:36 pm: |
|
Yes, Phil, it's LOO-tennent and I've always wondered how you get LEFT tennent out of that!
Seriously, it'a a mistake to say that all usages are equally tolerable, as our (US) recent debacle with "Ebonics" hilariously demonstrates.If you don't know what I'am talking about,don't bother. The story will make you crazy.
Mags
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 396
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 1:46 pm: |
|
Now you have me fascinated, Mags!! What on earth are/were "Ebonics"?
Phil |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 789
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:29 pm: |
|
Phil,
You've taught me something! Although I learned the "correct" pronunciation of Leicester long ago, I have tended to say Leicester Square, with equal emphasis on both words. Come to think of it, a Londoner would say Leicester Square. I must practice this next time!
I, too, can't figure out how you Brits come up with LEF-tenant. The word is of French origin and one would think should be pronounced loo-tenant (actually with a shortened loo-). But then, I don't know where you get Lester out of Leicester (perhaps from saying it fast). But then, how do we get Arkansaw out of Arkansas?
Ebonics was a failed effort to recognize Black American English as a legitimate dialect. It failed because "Black American English" is still a collection of slang rather than a true dialect.
Seriously, while I find differences between American and British English fascinating, I have almost never experienced these differences as a real impediment to communication.
Andy S. |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 369
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:48 pm: |
|
Oh,god...
A few years ago an enlightened and foresightful group of educators in -where else?- California decided that it just wasn't fair that the poor(as in pitiful) African American students couldn't turn in papers and take tests and otherwise participate in the public education system while using their "street" language.Eventually this patois was called "Ebonics" and was declared to be just as legitimate as any other. The Ebon refers to the word Ebony, by the way. Linguistically speaking that's perfectly right of course but in terms of school children doing homework it's so ridiculously politically correct that I almost wept.
Fortunately, after a large number of pundits were killed accidently falling out of their chairs laughing the movement tucked its tail under and skulked away but the spector is still raised from time to time.
I believe that this kind of thing comes from an excess of democracy. Perhaps I should say a misunderstanding of what democracy is. I don't believe our Founding Fathers ever intended to suggest that all people ARE equal, only that they should be TREATED equallly under the law. That distinction escapes many and leads to many amusing situations such as the Ebonics movement and the current lemming like movement toward self esteem, which begs the question of what people are to esteem themselves FOR.Just existing, apparently.
So this idea that all ways are similarly OK, as Nat seems to suggest, is a very slippery slope and while I understand and even applaud the inclusionist sentiments, I think we have to be able to look past our emotions and see where well meaning ideas will really take us.
Mags
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 397
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 3:32 pm: |
|
Mags, we have the same problems.
Anything with the word "black" in it - blackboard, blackguard - has been criticised as racist or similar. Of course, "black" in contrast to "white" had linguistic meaning long before the same word was taken up to replace "negro" or similar words. So we now refer to "chalkboards"!!
The logic escapes me.
Sinister is alos questioned as its derivation (from the Latin for left, of course) seems to stigmatise the left-handed.
We live in strange times, but language (especially the English language) constantly adapts i fear such social pressures less than i fear that TXT SPK will replace proper spelling 4ever!!
That - which reflects laziness - I see as a real possibility for the future...
Phil |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 371
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 3:43 pm: |
|
fil, u r rite!!
five words five words five words five words
Mags
|
Phil Hill
Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 401
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 3:50 pm: |
|
Don't u start, Mags!!
400 posts in four months (to make me meet the 5 word rule!) how's that? (It wouldn't let me post otherwise.)
Phil |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 372
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 4:00 pm: |
|
I suppose the five word rule is good otherwise we'd get pithy two word replies instead of multisyllabic run on sentences with no parargrah breaks.
Mags
|
ex PFC Wintergreen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 5:57 am: |
|
This thread is hilarious. If you read the first post it's of a man pleading that future posts be more to do with the subject of Jack the Ripper and to only mention the important facts of the case rather than prattle on about inane babble.
What follows is a tirade of some the most pointless and off-topic drivel this site has seen.
Let me be the first to say:
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
