Here's an article about clarity in writing.
This bit from the article isn't clear to me:
Because language can have an underlying structure different from its surface structure, syntax can mislead, as the linguist Noam Chomsky demonstrated with this pair of sentences:
John is eager to please.
John is easy to please.
How does the syntax mislead? Both sentences seem perfectly straightforward to me. The first one means that John wants to please people, the second one means that John is easily pleased by people.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I wonder whether Joe Dick contributes more deleted comments than ones with text in them.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, Eager to Please is a brilliant album. Many say Proud Words is better - yes, it is more "solid". But melodically and arrangementwise this is Hensley's best album.
ReplyDeleteThe song Through the Eyes of a Child alone is worth the admission.
"How does the syntax mislead?"
ReplyDeleteTypical academic hair-splitting. Some people seem to think that syntactically identical constructs should convey the same meaning.
The fact that they do not is a problem only for people trying to create natural language interpreters. Oh, and for people who can't read properly (i.e. "skimmers"), too. Can't figure out why I should take care of not confusing people who won't have the courtesy, intelligence or patience to read the text in the first place, though.
Imho, it should go without saying that, while the syntax supports the meaning, it is the words that convey it...
Thanks.
ReplyDeleteI notice the article (which I found by a googling accident) is on a site for people writing ad copy. I guess those are concerned with catching skimmers.
You're a very bitter, hate-filled person, Bert. Please get help.
ReplyDeleteROTFL!!
ReplyDeleteI had a friend, turned out she was a skimmer. I tried talking to her about a book we'd both read, and she had missed half of it.
ReplyDeleteI also had a complete breakdown in communication with a hiring manager. I was almost ready to sign on the dotted line, and he completely miss read an e-mail. I decided I couldn't work for him. Imagine 3-7 years of being misunderstood by your boss?
Bert, you have to take care with your writing style as I completely missed your sociopathic subtext the first three times I read it ;-)
"Bert, you have to take care with your writing style as I completely missed your sociopathic subtext the first three times I read it ;-)"
ReplyDeleteAlex, can you pleease shed some light on this? I'm asking because I read my text a lot more than three times (counting proof-readings), and I still can't figure out what's so aggressive about it!!
I mean, yeah, there's some light disdain for the false puritanism behind the subject. I mean, other than specialists, who really cares if the syntax is irregular.
But hatred? Bitterness? Wow. I'd be devastated if I wasn't so amused... ;-)
The question is, do I simply point out that I've gotten into the lazy habit of saying ;-0 when I mean "Some sarcasm embedded in previous sentence". Or should I rib you a bit about how "skimmers are valid people and entitled to their opinion".
ReplyDeleteI really didn't see you as a sociopath.
I guess the only way to avoid flaming on any board is to not have any opinions, or at least voicing them. Citing prescriptive linguists as "hair splitting" may be flamers (and I don't mean that in the homophobic sense) trigger.
Maybe flamer sees "skimmer" as derogatory, implying "poor reader".
My skimmer friend graduated as a chemical engineer (BSc), was very AR about language and became a teacher. That doesn't mean poor reader, just meant she was a lazy, or avaricious reader during leisure time.
So Bert, I see no reason to call you a sociopath, except as a mechanism to add to your "ROTFL" which questioned anonymous' attack.
Sorry if I irked you.
"[...] add to your "ROTFL" which questioned anonymous' attack."
ReplyDeleteAnd that's exactly how I perceived it, no worries here! Gee, not my day for clarity...
"Sorry if I irked you."
[in a frankly amused voice] Don't think you'd succeed even if you tried really hard! ;-) And the same goes to any of the pathetic souls aimlessly wandering in cyberspace under the cover of anonymity. (I just like the sound of the words, thus this must qualify as a favorite sentence and I therefore should strike it. Nah.)
And, Alex, you can rest assured that, other than by occasionally expressing a conflicting point of view, I would never intentionally aim at irking you, or anyone else here.
I view this as a relaxing place, where everyone is welcome to contribute what he will (1), and that's why I like it. Now, why would I want this to change? I realize that such an idea must sound alien and offensive to flamers, but I won't apologize for it. :-))
(1) And this goes for Mr. Beep, too. Don't delete a post, even when you're calling me stupid (yes, Blogger emails your comments before you delete them... so what's the point in deleting?). I'll survive, you know. We could even end up enjoying the occasional skirmish. Should our host tolerate such behavior, that is. ;-) After all, we're all guests here. Oops, did it again: offended the flamer with an alien concept. Dang.
And while I'm at it, I'll add that the reason why Alex can't irk me through his comments is not because I'm so thick-headed, but rather because Alex has earned enough credibility that I will always extend him the courtesy of properly reading his comments and making the effort of understanding. And the same goes for most of the regulars. And, guess what? A new name is automatically extended the same courtesy.
ReplyDeleteOuch, now that must be hard to grasp for a flamer. Reading leading to understanding? Reading without assuming malicious intent? Reading without assuming that the words are aimed at you, personally? N-O-N-S-E-N-S-E! he cries in the dark...
Oops. Meant Joe Dick, and wrote Mr Beep. Apologies, never been good with names.
ReplyDeletePerhaps being known as the too-subtle sociopath is not the worst fate? At least it's unusual. :)
ReplyDeleteWill need a keyboard macro for my new name, for sure... too bad Blogger won't allow it, because I would make it "the too-subtle-right-in-your-face-sociopath- with-a-dogmatic-ego"... Could start an Ent-like fashion of carrying your whole history in your name. :-)
ReplyDelete"Ent"?
ReplyDeleteAbbreviations: ENT
is short for:
Ear Nose And Throat Medical->Physiology
Ear nose throat Medical->Oncology
Medical->Physiology
Ear, nose, throat Medical->Physiology
Enewetak Island, Marshall Islands Regional->Airport Codes
Enterprise Business->General
Computing->Networking
Governmental->Military
Governmental->US Government
Governmental->NASA
Entrance Community->Housing Abbreviations
Equant, N. V. Business->NYSE Symbols
Evil Neopets Team Miscellaneous->Funnies
Exports Needs Tags Business->International Business
Ent - Tree spirit.
ReplyDeleteIt is in Tolkein's Middle Earth.
I have yet to find the word in a dictionary, or other mythology.
An Ent is a being who looks like a tree, but can move around. They have life spans such as trees, and as a consequence see no need for brevity of speech.
The Ent we spend most time with is "Treebeard", though his name is many syllables long.
Ah, trust Wikipedia
Well considering I have not posted in several days it's strange that I am being credited with deleting comments.
ReplyDeleteI have still be reading, but not posting. I am not the only one who deletes comments but have not done so in quite some time.
Lately I have been reading (but not posting) over at Mr. Pascal's blog, since I kind of miss his comments here.
Yeah, I think Pascal has been struggling with a cold and many Internet blackouts.
ReplyDeleteJoe, the tease was too easy, couldn't resist... glad to hear you're OK.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, we do miss Pascal's unique prose.
Well, what can I say to that? It just makes me go a big rubbery one.
ReplyDeleteAw, thank you guys! I miss me too. :-)
ReplyDeleteBut prose in not all that I do...
Thanks for visiting Joe, I knew you were there
Ever since I got me that nifty click counter.
All those readers had to come from somewhere.
I've also had a lot of work, thankfully that's over.
I'm hoping to soon comment again.
Bart, I have to concur with that Anonymous man
(Provided that's not... a woman?):
One person only does need more help than you...
And that's ME. (But of course, you all knew!)
TTl, though it seemed to be written clearly,
You've missed the point of the post entirely:
John's not the one who sings Eager to please.
Joe? Are you CEO of Giant Dildo Companies? ;-)