This Bamdamconfuzzles me.

Click here for the Article.

Name: In defence of unnecessary words
Date: 6/2/14
Author: Stan Carey

Key Ideas:

  • New Neologisms can appear at any time, and no-one  will know when or how it will happen.
  • Be creative, enjoy the fun of new words
  • Likes the idea of freedom to make up new words, and not the annoyance of fixating on sufficiency
  • Annoyed at snobby literary critics that think that words NEED a meaning
Language Features: Neologisms, semantics, suffixation
Course Aspects: Unit 3 - AoS 1: Relationship between the context and the features of language in informal texts, analyse the effects of context on language choices

Personal Opinion: I think that Carey is right, and that words don’t need boundaries. Words should be free and come in whatever shape or form they like. Talking about how we are ‘well stocked’ with words is ridiculous. Words are being created every day, whether they require a meaning or not. It doesn’t mean that they should not be spoken. The English Language is built on the imagination of people and their ability to make words, and should not be restricted by people that think there are too many or they need to make sense.

“Quotes”:

  • “instinctive inclination to play with words and letters as though they were an abstract kind of toy”
  • the ultimate question is, Is it necessary?” To answer that properly we must consider carefully the word necessary.
  • When we talk about whether there’s a need for some grammatical or lexical innovation, we shouldn’t limit our interpretation to semantics.
  • William Zinsser, in his classic On Writing Well, puts his foot down firmly on upstarts and colloquialisms he dislikes: “I won’t accept ‘notables’ and ‘greats’ and ‘upcoming’ and countless other newcomers. They are cheap words and we don’t need them.” No amazeroonie for him, I bet.

This journal entry leaves a bad taste in MY mouth. Or maybe it’s the hangover…

Click here for the Article.

Name: Increased fines for offensive language leave bad taste in mouths of critics
Date: 2/6/14
Author: Amanda Hoh, Alexandra Back

Key Ideas: 

  • Swearing has become so offensive in Australia that a fine has been placed on offensive behaviour.
  • Fines were issued after a warning, or particularly when f*ck and c*nt were used aggressively in a public space.
  • The fine seems to unfairly target minority groups such as aboriginal people and young people
Language Features: Swearing, Language Progression, Euphemisms, Expletive swearing, Social/Stylistic functions of swearing
Course Aspects: Unit 3 - AoS 1: Informal Language - Role of swearing in society, Swearing, Relationship between the context and the features of language in spoken English

Personal Opinion: This basically puts a cost on words and is ridiculous, because in the end, hurtful or not, they’re just words. Swearing should not be an offence that can fine a kid that accidentally swore in public because he forgot where he was or who he was around. The worst thing to happen to a person caught swearing would be a stern talking to and warning to stop swearing in public places. If caught a second time in that same instance only then should someone be fined for swearing. Not much else to say on this matter. 

“Quotes”: 

  • Police will soon be able to issue fines of up to $500 to anyone who displays offensive language, up from $150.
  • The criminal offence of offensive language is often part of a “trifecta” of infringement notices – the original offence, offensive behaviour and offensive language.
  • Critics such as solicitor Jane Sanders, from free legal service The Shop Front Legal Youth Centre, said swearing was part of everyday vernacular and the laws unfairly targeted minority groups such as Aboriginal people and young people.

Comma to be Removed? HA!

Click here for the Article.

Name: Comma may be abolished from the English Language
Date: 9/2/14
Author: ???

Key Ideas:

  • Comma might be removed from the English language
  • John McWhorter believes this won’t have a major impact on the state of some texts (even though this is in the US)
  • The Oxford Comma is not needed to make complete sense of texts in the English Language.
Language Features: Complete shift in language, sentence structure, pauses, cohesion, punctuation etc..
Course Aspects: Unit 3 - AoS 1: Informal Language - Language Variation, stylistic features in informal speech and writing

Personal Opinion: I believe that this is ridiculous, I use the comma every single day of my life. Punctuation is apart of every day life, and if removed, it could in fact ruin most texts and change the way we read them. Short article, but interesting nonetheless.
“Quotes”:

  • “Nobody has any reason for it that is scientifically sensible and logical in the sense that we know how hydrogen and oxygen combine to form water,” McWhorter told Slate magazine.
  • “You “could take them out of a great deal of modern (American) texts and you would probably suffer so little loss of clarity that there could even be a case made for not using commas at all,” McWhorter said.”

Texting kills the English Language…?

Click here for the Article.

Name: Is Texting Killing the English Language?
Date: 25/4/13
Author: John McWhorter

Key Ideas:

  • Argumentative text saying that texting is developing its own language.
  • Texting should stay in text form, not spoken out loud in daily conversation. e.g. “LOL that was so funny”
  • Instead of LOL having a literal meaning, it conveys an attitude. People don’t actually laugh out loud when they write the word LOL.
  • Texting and messaging reproduce the speed of talking
  • Texting is a work in progress in regards to the English Language
Language Features: Prosodic Features - Capitalisation, Emoticons. Lack of punctuation, Variation in spelling, reductions and shortenings, initialisations, pictograms (<3)
Course Aspects: Unit 3 - AoS 1: Informal Language - the relationship between the context and the features of language in informal texts. Analyse the nature, features and functions of informal written texts and transcripts of informal language

Personal Opinion: I don’t believe that texting is killing the English Language, but making it more advanced. I think that texting is a work in progress, It still has a ways to go in regards to how we talk in texting and how we talk in conversation, and I also believe that texting should stay in texts, not in spoken conversation, as it gives a certain informality to the speech that isn’t kind to people listening, it certainly isn’t enjoyable for the older community, as they will not understand what youths are saying.
“Quotes”:

    • Texting has long been bemoaned as the downfall of the written word, “penmanship for illiterates,” as one critic called it.
    • LOL signals basic empathy between texters, easing tension and creating a sense of equality.>
    • In the old days, we didn’t much write like talking because there was no mechanism to reproduce the speed of conversation.
    • All indications are that America’s youth are doing it quite well. Texting, far from being a scourge, is a work in progress.