Eye-roller of the day: Declaring war on "said"

[mordorbund]

I relate more to the one critic in the article:

 

 

 

Ms. Walters has ditched the list. “Kids were just randomly selecting words, picking the ones they ‘thought sounded the coolest,’ and not thinking about their piece in particular,” she recounted in an email.

 

And the article itself provides a perfect example of this (you probably noticed the post was an exercise in avoiding the word "said" and other "dead" words):

 

 

 

The search for synonyms dates to ancient times, and Peter Mark Roget published his thesaurus in 1852.

 

A century and a half is now "ancient"?

[Guest]

My English teacher said,"The only people who should be using a thesaurus are those who don't need it."

His meaning was that you learn the meanings in other ways. But you only reference the thesaurus when you realize that the word that comes to mind is not quite right. The Thesaurus is only there to help you find the mot juste.

[prisonchaplain]

My English teacher informally banned a certain phrase from our writing and speeches.  It's stuck with me to this day.  The phrase is "I think..."  She cut off the student who started reading her paper with that phrase and said, "Who's name is on the paper you are reading?"  

 

"Uh...mine?"

 

"And who is giving the speech."

 

"I am?"

 

"Is this not obvious to everyone?"

 

"Well, yes."

 

"Then why the redundancy?"

 

Of course, the answer is that the phrase "I think" is a subconscious wimping out.  It means, "This is my opinion.  You don't have to agree.  Please do not harshly criticize me for what I say, as you are welcome to alternative views." 

 

Sadly, the omission of "imho" or "in my opinion," is today perceived almost as a macro-aggression.  :::sigh::  I must be getting old to rant so. 

[NeuroTypical]

In an alternate dimension:

 

Vort Critic #12b: "The teacher was just trying to get students to find other things to end their sentences with."

 

Vort: "You just ended a sentence with a preposition."

 

Vort Critic #12b: "Fine.  The teacher was just trying to get students to find other things to end their sentences with, and Vort is a big jerk."

Edited December 22, 2015 by NeuroTypical

[unixknight]

Sadly, the omission of "imho" or "in my opinion," is today perceived almost as a macro-aggression.  :::sigh::  I must be getting old to rant so. 

 

Right there with you, brother.

[Guest]

I swear it's an elephant.

[Ironhold]

As a writer and English type? 

 

When I was going through school, we were frequently pushed into using the most "advanced" words possible; the fancier, the better. 

 

This was because, we were told, fancier words tended to net better scores on standardized testing. The people responsible for grading essay and short-answer questions look at vocabulary and spelling as much as they look at coherency and form, and so spewing out flowery language was supposed to earn us a higher grade than someone who didn't, all other things being the same. 

[zil]

A century and a half is now "ancient"?

 

"When one hundred fifty you are, ancient you will feel," Yoda said.

[zil]

My English teacher informally banned a certain phrase from our writing and speeches.  It's stuck with me to this day.

 

And this is the concern for me (and I suspect anyone who is passionate about language, reading good literature, and writing): it stuck with you.  While what your teacher taught was a good thing to stick with you, what that article describes is not a good thing, and if it sticks with the students, the end result will not be good.

[zil]

As a writer and English type? 

 

When I was going through school, we were frequently pushed into using the most "advanced" words possible; the fancier, the better. 

 

This was because, we were told, fancier words tended to net better scores on standardized testing. The people responsible for grading essay and short-answer questions look at vocabulary and spelling as much as they look at coherency and form, and so spewing out flowery language was supposed to earn us a higher grade than someone who didn't, all other things being the same. 

 

At least in this case you were given a valid invalid reason (valid in that if that's the game, you may as well play to win - no point losing something important just because the game has stupid rules; invalid cuz, well, the rules are stupid).

 

The article doesn't seem to be making this point (unlike Vort's "artificial exercise" example above somewhere).

[prisonchaplain]

Zil, I remember a flip-side incident.  Even in high school I loved social studies.  One semester I got stuck in a class with the teacher that not-so-good students liked.  If you memorized what he wrote on the board, you'd get at least a B.  On the first exam I got 82% (a B, back then...or so I thought).  He came up to my seat, patted me on the back, and congratulated me for doing so well--getting the high score in the class.

 

Nearly 40 years later that scene sticks with me.  I did not respect the teacher much after that.  Today I realize that he was a gifted teacher, and really helped social studies-haters to learn and pass the subject.  Also, I suspect the occasional student like myself was savvy enough to realize that we were not geniuses because we got the high score in his class.  We'd face much stiffer rigor in college.

 

My point?  I think most middle and high-schoolers will eventually discern the stellar lessons from the flawed ones.  The more creative a teacher is the more likely s/he is to come up with the occasional stinker of a lesson.  For the truly dedicated, it's worth the risk.  Most kids are resilient enough.  And the ones who aren't won't fair well in a world with 7 billion flawed souls, anyway. 

Edited December 22, 2015 by prisonchaplain

[zil]

My point?  I think most middle and high-schoolers will eventually discern the stellar lessons from the flawed ones.  The more creative a teacher is the more likely s/he is to come up with the occasional stinker of a lesson.  For the truly dedicated, it's worth the risk.  Most kids are resilient enough.  And the ones who aren't won't fair well in a world with 7 billion flawed souls, anyway. 

 

I hope you're right.  (Please understand, I'm passionate about teaching writing well because writing is the one and only thing I have _always_ wanted to do (since 8th grade anyway) - my efforts right now are to reach a point where I can retire from my day job and write for a living. I'm one book away from that goal - which is the most difficult thing I have ever done - because nothing else was worth this much effort.  So this is one of those things that hits me closer to home than it will ever hit 99% of the rest of the population.)

[Backroads]

The problem is that this isn't a single lesson, but a sincere belief on the part of the teacher that "said" and other words are wrong without any regard for established classic and popular writings. It's a useless lesson with too much risk.

[Vort]

As a writer and English type? 

 

When I was going through school, we were frequently pushed into using the most "advanced" words possible; the fancier, the better. 

 

This was because, we were told, fancier words tended to net better scores on standardized testing. The people responsible for grading essay and short-answer questions look at vocabulary and spelling as much as they look at coherency and form, and so spewing out flowery language was supposed to earn us a higher grade than someone who didn't, all other things being the same. 

 

Wow. Of such cynicism are homeschooling parents born.

[Ironhold]

Wow. Of such cynicism are homeschooling parents born.

 

No, it was high school that led me to decide I'd home-school if I ever had kids. 

 

Nothing like being accosted by a cop with a hangover to start your day off. 

[Guest]

No, Lehi convinced me (along with his daughter) that we should homeschool.  It was only later that I gained an appreciation for it.

 

If any man shall do Lehi's will... :)

Edited December 23, 2015 by Guest

[Anddenex]

Sure.  Make English even more difficult, why don't you.

 

Banning words is stupid.  Teaching WHEN to use words - including said and bad and good - is a better teaching method.  Words are important and each word have their place in expression.  Giving words a funeral defies that concept and teaches that there are words that are not important.

 

Unless your a programmer than words become antiquated or obsolete

[Anddenex]

I don't ever remember being told, don't use "boring" words, use more "colorful" words (Elementary, Middle School, HS were in Southern Cali), but I do remember being told to try alternative words.

 

I do remember two constants that still to this day enter my mind when I write/type: 1) Use another word other than "thing" if possible."  Teacher would doc us if we used "thing" and another word would have been better.  2) Watch out for repetitive use of any words.  I remember the paragraph with all the "red" pen marks and how I used one word about 7 times to illustrate my point.

 

I now am one of those offenders that use words in the wrong place, because I pick a word that sounds cool but is not in the right place.  Still working on that.

[Guest]

Unless your a programmer than words become antiquated or obsolete

 

I did get docked for using IF NOT... repeatedly.  I didn't care.  My teacher can dock me all day long and I still will write IF NOT instead of IF {do nothing} ELSE.

[zil]

Unless your a programmer than words become antiquated or obsolete

 

I'm a programmer.  And I'm perhaps the most passionately opposed to this of all of us.  I'm also a writer.  Programming is just another language.  That said, there are a fair number of programmers who don't seem to know English, despite it being their native language.

 

And I think your teacher gave good advice.

Edited December 23, 2015 by zil

[zil]

I did get docked for using IF NOT... repeatedly.  I didn't care.  My teacher can dock me all day long and I still will write IF NOT instead of IF {do nothing} ELSE.

 

Other people say "Everyone is not a programmer."

 

I say: "Not everyone is a programmer."  Because some of us are programmers, and the other wording makes it sound like no one is a programmer.

 

Other people think I'm weird. :)

 

 

I think your teacher should get over it.  Sometimes, IF NOT at the start is the way to go.

 

For example, I never do:

 

IF {condition} THEN

  ;do stuff

ELSE

  ;don't do stuff

ENDIF

 

...when I could do:

 

IF NOT {condition} THEN

  ; return

ENDIF

;do stuff

 

...the second way is just more efficient and easier to read. :)

 

Also, I will put the IF NOT first if the block of code between it and ELSE is smaller than the block between ELSE and END - again, because it's easier to read that way.

Edited December 23, 2015 by zil

[prisonchaplain]

Considering the title of this thread, I'm imagining writing an end-times novel where the Antichrist turns out to be the dreaded Prime Minister SAID. 

[zil]

Considering the title of this thread, I'm imagining writing an end-times novel where the Antichrist turns out to be the dreaded Prime Minister SAID. 

 

Now look what you've done! The back of my brain has already begun working.  Minister Said is wearing a tie at the moment (not sure why that's important, but he is wearing a tie), and is quite pleased with his recent success in convincing the world that "evil" is just "live" spelled backwards.

[prisonchaplain]

Now look what you've done! The back of my brain has already begun working.  Minister Said is wearing a tie at the moment (not sure why that's important, but he is wearing a tie), and is quite pleased with his recent success in convincing the world that "evil" is just "live" spelled backwards.

 

I choked on my food while reading this, from laughing so hard.  Funny thing is--I wasn't eating anything. 

[Guest]

Considering the title of this thread, I'm imagining writing an end-times novel where the Antichrist turns out to be the dreaded Prime Minister SAID. 

Didn't Rowling do something very similar with Professor Umbridge?