Drat. I have to subscribe to the WaPo. Must’ve used up my free passes.
You know, I seem to be seeing a lot more of such ambiguity lately (although it might have been there all along and I’ve only just started really noticing it) and find myself confronted more and more with the inadequacies of language. I like to tell myself that in conventional matters there’s always a way to make yourself 100% clear, and maybe there is, but there was one sentence I recently came across that could have been read either way, and it struck me, because out of context the sentence was completely rudderless and for the life of me, try as I might I couldn’t see how to make it better! I wish I could remember it so you could see what I was up against.
Most of the time, though, it’s hard for me to give journalists a pass on the basis of supposedly being under the gun; some of the least clear writing I’ve seen floated in a soup of self-absorbed and chatty glibness, so the old ideal of striving for concision can’t be the culprit.
Escondido Fire Department Twitter feed, re: the Escondido, California fire:
“Escondido has a propositioned San Diego strike team and an extra brush patrol staffed.”
Really, that’s inappropriate. Good thing it wasn’t an extra ‘bush’ patrol.
I feel the same way when I get an email or read posts where the writer uses text type, “u” for “you” or “ppl” for “people.” Relatedly in spoken communication “ain’t got no” or “don’t got” make me perhaps too judgmental of the speaker.
Your example the misusage of “its” and it’s" is a common and confusing. It seems quite odd that to make a word, say a proper name possessive an apostrophe and s is used. But to make “it” possessive no apostrophe.
For me it depends on the situation. Since my first concern in interaction is clear communication, normally I reserve my standards for myself, and so long as I know what the other means, I work with that. That being said, even though “u” for “you” is probably intended to be chummy, it can also give the impression that I don’t even merit the time it takes to type two more measly letters, and what am I to make of that? True, there is the fact that it’s more or less fashionable style especially in text these days, but it’s also frankly undignified, and runs the risk of being disrespectful in its offhandedness. For those reasons, in my own usage it would be most unusual for me to go there except for humor’s sake. I don’t let myself get too bent out of shape if others do, though; if they want that for their style, that’s their business, although the assertion that it’s done in the name of concision strikes me as a bit too facile. It could also be a working solution to poor literacy, and while it’s unfortunate, there’s no blame in that.
For some reason the difference was never a problem for me; it’s simply a convention whose inconsistency from normal punctuation is an awkward fact, and the inconsistency would still be there if it were the other way around. So, you just remember which is what, rather than being distracted by the inconsistency. I’m not entirely certain, but off the top of my head I think it’s the only example of its kind, so that simplifies things enormously.
“Harrods” as opposed to “Harrod’s” is a different issue, and more one of style than grammar.
I suspect the text typing has much to do with age. I did not grow up with a Smartphone and still do not own one. So my encounters with text typing are mainly You Tube comments. The use of text talk makes the poster seem not serious, trying to be cool or considerably younger than me. I feel much the same way towards coworkers who suffix a statement with, “just sayin’.” Likewise with “bro”, “dude” and addressing a full adult with the inane quip, “young man.”
If by “text typing” you mean the abbreviations and such of the current mode of SMS Language (I only just discovered the term a few minutes ago), you might be surprised about age being a factor: it’s also partly cultural. I know people in their forties who do it - even a lady in her seventies, now that I think of it! - and it has much to do with their social circles, interests, or simply buying into the form. Some of my siblings and in-laws - no spring chickens themselves - are way too free with the emojis and pre-formulated “like” entries, bless their Facebook-addled, pointy little heads. If they’re doing it to feel younger, they should try a treadmill.
[EDIT] Here’s an example of the inanity: Someone in my family just texted the lot of us asking if anyone could bring ice to the Christmas gathering, and I replied, “Sure.” Then someone else replied to that with, “Liked ‘Sure.’” They do this all the time in texts, “liking” things of little account in my book. It baffles me, and I will definitely take the opportunity to get an explanation straight from the horse’s mouth later today.
As for things like YouTube comments, I think SMS language sets itself up to be ignored, or at least to be given little weight. It comes off as mere babble for mere babble’s sake. Usually it’s incoherent in any case, and that’s sure not a matter of me having an inflexible mind; people who know me will attest that, between the ears, I get very bendy indeed.
I eventually got a smartphone, and I really like it because I can access the Internet if I need to - it’s great for settling arguments, like debunking the myth that lice can jump, or whatever else your drinking buddies are blathering on about next - as well as texting, email, weather, calculator, flashlight, pitch pipe, taking photos (no selfies!), GPS when I’ve needed it, and - ironically - rarely phoning except to pay bills or to talk to my Luddite friends. That’s really all I need, even if some think that’s under-utilization of the resource. But I’m not a gamer, I don’t access C&F by smartphone if I can help it, and having zero FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out), I will gladly gnaw off my fingers before I use Facebook or Twitter. Once you tick 'em off, my relatively limited smartphone use doesn’t seem so limited after all. It’s kind of like a Swiss Army knife.
u r adding humor to your posts lol! But srsly a funny tidbit about phones. My Mom has a working rotary phone. I told this to a teen coworker who responded, “What is a rotary phone?” I don’t have a Smartphone just out of having no need for one. If I had a family or traveled a lot then maybe. But even in such a circumstance a flip phone would be enough.
Also haven’t had TV for 25/26 years. One movie in the last ten years. Listen to the radio less than a half hour a year. Haven’t read a newspaper in perhaps seven years. I’m quite divorced from my culture.
A grandniece wanted to know what a ´telephone book´ was. And just consider that Clark Kent´s modesty is seriously impaired these days without a ´telephone booth´. Wonder if he can borrow a tardis. . .
The SO had what I termed her kerosene operated flip phone for ages. . .until her hair dresser would only set appointments sent by SMS! Now she struggles with a ´semi-dumb phone´, but it is SMS capable.
I didn’t know those still worked under the present system. Interesting.
A young adult told me that a lot of his generation don’t know how to read an analog clock. I can understand not knowing what a rotary phone is, but the clock thing is harder for me to grasp.
I was in fact thinking about that yesterday on account of this conversation! On a hunch I just had a look, and sure enough, under a small table next to my desk are a couple of forgotten and very, very dusty phone books from 2008. Only eleven years, but a world away. I think I’ll hang onto 'em as antiques.
And just consider that Clark Kent´s modesty is seriously impaired these days without a ´telephone booth´. Wonder if he can borrow a tardis. . . 