Luminous Landscape Forum

Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: jmlphotography on May 15, 2015, 10:12:07 am

Title: Once again
Post by: jmlphotography on May 15, 2015, 10:12:07 am
Really?

"Kevin has lead photographic workshops ..."

Title: Re: Once again
Post by: mbaginy on May 15, 2015, 10:15:19 am
Why your doubt?
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: amolitor on May 15, 2015, 10:30:45 am
The past participle of the verb 'to lead' is not 'lead' but 'led'.
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 15, 2015, 02:01:36 pm
 ;)

Title: Re: Once again
Post by: AlterEgo on May 15, 2015, 02:14:37 pm
it is called : grammar nazi(sm)

(http://www.laverdadrefresca.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/27/2015/03/portada.jpg)
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Rainer SLP on May 15, 2015, 02:27:00 pm
A lot of people think that writing on a forum or whatever social media communication in the internet is like talking and when they talk you can not see their ortography ...

... but writing uncovers their knowledge ...

How can I take serious a comment when there are orthographic errors ...

If there is one orthographic error in this message written by me SORRY, English language is not my mother tongue ...

... but there are many good pages in the internet, that if I have a doubt about a word, I just consult them and find out how it is written ...

OK, just my 2 cents to this sarcasm about writing and talking ...

" Never trust in the first sight of a person, as Light travels faster then Sound "

saludos amigos  ;D
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: amolitor on May 15, 2015, 02:35:01 pm
There's random posts on the internet, where one is writing causally, and not everyone even speaks the language as a native.

Then there's, let's say, a scholarly text, where one expects a mastery of language, and one expects language usage that is not jarring.
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on May 15, 2015, 02:56:01 pm
... How can I take serious a comment when there are orthographic errors ...

Easily, look for the content, past superficial imperfections.

Title: Re: Once again
Post by: mbaginy on May 15, 2015, 03:35:04 pm
Well, I misread, but understood correctly.  Guess I'm used to misspelling and am maybe a bit more tolerant than others.  Oh brother!   ::)
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Rainer SLP on May 16, 2015, 02:34:04 pm
Easily, look for the content, past superficial imperfections.



Hi Slobodan,

I like that German Chaos  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: PeterAit on May 16, 2015, 03:53:23 pm

... but writing uncovers their knowledge ...

How can I take serious a comment when there are orthographic errors ...


What I do is try to get to the intended meaning of the message. Someone who is not fluent in English (whether they are a native speaker or not) may still have valuable things to say about the topic at hand. I used to be a bit of a grammar nanny, but then realized it was petty for me to do that (with the one exception of conversations about language and writing). It quite frankly seems to me a way for the not-very-bright to express their "superiority" by pointing out other people's minor errors.
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: David Sutton on May 16, 2015, 04:13:45 pm
How we want those we respect to be perfect.
I hear some folks have never recovered from knowing that Mother Teresa farted in a lift. (Elevator for our American cousins)
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: MarkL on May 16, 2015, 05:06:23 pm
This needed a new thread, really?
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Kevin Raber on May 16, 2015, 06:56:57 pm
You know, a personal email pointing an error out is all it would have taken. 

Kevin
Title: Once again (NSFW if you know Finnish or Dansk)
Post by: BJL on May 16, 2015, 07:43:22 pm
The Finnish have a blunter word, pilkunnussija, and for Danes Flueknepper. The literal translations are NSWF, so I leave it to your own research.

As others have suggested, tolerance for errors should depend on context, and internet forums are a free-fire zone for every other kind of error, so ...
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Rainer SLP on May 17, 2015, 01:21:14 pm
quote PeterAit

Quote
It quite frankly seems to me a way for the not-very-bright to express their "superiority" by pointing out other people's minor errors.

That is the other side of seeing this ...
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Rainer SLP on May 17, 2015, 01:22:44 pm
quote Kevin Raber

Quote
You know, a personal email pointing an error out is all it would have taken. 

Kevin

even so you can get into devils hell ...
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Rainer SLP on May 17, 2015, 01:24:16 pm
There are many sort of people ...

The ones who want to learn ...

The ones who know everything ...

The ones who think they know everything ...

...
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: Dave Millier on May 17, 2015, 03:47:51 pm
In many cases, spelling errors and grammar faults don't damage the meaning at all, so in that respect, they are often not a problem and I can understand people being willing to ignore them.  But if it happens frequently, it does look a little sloppy and unprofessional - or at least, rushed.  And in the long term that doesn't help credibility so it is in the interest of the authors to try and have published work properly proof read. It's also a little bit dis-respectful to the reader. One of the most frequent complaints I read in reviews of Kindle books is complaints about typos and proofreading - because it does jar.

Luminous landscape is a high quality online mag but it isn't immune to typos (or simply the wrong choice of word). Sometimes, I feel it's almost a trademark! I don't think it matters that much but if the guys could tighten up the editing a little (maybe enlist volunteer proof readers?) it would be appreciated....
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: jjj on May 17, 2015, 04:47:11 pm
You know, a personal email pointing an error out is all it would have taken.  

Kevin
The sensible solution.

Also of note is that even if you are a good speller and excellent with grammar mistakes can and will be made.
Plus tech likes to trip you up too. OSX has an autocorrect which I've turned it off because it autocorrected things that didn't need it.
As for the cretinously designed autocorrect on the iPhone, a prime example of terrible user interface design.
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: LesPalenik on May 19, 2015, 04:20:49 am

Really?
"Kevin has lead photographic workshops ..."


You know, a personal email pointing an error out is all it would have taken. 

Kevin

EXACTLY! Any reasonable, proper-grammar loving individual would do just that. On second thought, a reasonable person would not have bothered for one extra letter.

One more thing!
If you are going to use ellipses, proper way (as recommended by Oxford University Styles Rules) would be to space the dots " . . ."
or if you are pressed for time, use Microsoft method "..."
But don't ever again, use " ..."
 
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: michael on May 19, 2015, 07:11:57 am

Luminous landscape is a high quality online mag but it isn't immune to typos (or simply the wrong choice of word). Sometimes, I feel it's almost a trademark! I don't think it matters that much but if the guys could tighten up the editing a little (maybe enlist volunteer proof readers?) it would be appreciated....

Two comments...

We are aware that our editing has sometimes left something to be desired. For this reason we recently hired a professional editor and for the past couple of months all articles have been rigorously proofread and edited by a third party.

Nevertheless, typos happen, and as but one example, a day hardly goes by when the New York Times does not note typos from the previous day's edition. Perfection (https://luminous-landscape.com/rantatorial/eschewing-perfection/) is hard to attain, and sometimes not even desirable.

As for casual online messaging, on this forum or elsewhere, in my view holding it to a high standard for grammar and spelling, as some here are proposing, is just pedantry. People write online quickly, and casually, and few expect to have their Grade 8 spelling teaching standing over their shoulder when composing a post.

Also, allowance for people who are not native English speakers and/or poor typist needs to be given.

I'll simply add that I'm much more interested in what people have to write than in the correctness of their presentation, and I am interested not at all in reading anything by those who simply like to prove that they are smarter than someone else (which they likely are not).

Michael
Title: Re: Once again
Post by: fdisilvestro on May 19, 2015, 09:40:52 am
a day hardly goes by when the New York Times does not note typos from the previous day's edition.

Michael

In the newspaper industry a minimum amount of typos (very few) is actually accepted. Think about the quantity of pages that have to be completed with short deadlines (and with a lot of pressure), with no time to peer review or proof read by another person (to keep the costs down)

I agree however, that a private message would have been a better approach in this case