Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Science, Math, and Philosophy Discussions regarding science, math, and/or philosophy.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2016, 04:10 PM   #126
Rikers
veteran
 
Rikers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: in a moment
Posts: 2,325
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
The tighter you hold to the "grammar nit" and "grammar Nazi" labels, the more you show the underlying weakness of your position. You simply can't make any positive points in the absence of those labels. So please, continue to put up your "resistance." I don't mind it at all. I'm actually quite enjoying this.
Are you fit? <10% fat?

Quote:
Aaron I have a lot of experience in this area and I can tell you only have experience being a grammar nit.

How many people have you subjected to that kind of behavior?
Aaron is playing closer to Nash then the "rest" grammar mistakes guys; so he can't be pushed out of his position for being "wrong"...

He does not understand he is losing life EV, as most Nash players don't...
Rikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 04:10 PM   #127
Rikers
veteran
 
Rikers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: in a moment
Posts: 2,325
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by plaaynde View Post
Maybe you should look into your spelling?
I'm ryping from a gym treadmill...sry...
Rikers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 04:46 PM   #128
Trolly McTrollson
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Trolly McTrollson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Winesburg, Ohio
Posts: 30,225
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

This forum is just amazing.
Trolly McTrollson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 05:01 PM   #129
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 30,066
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by spanktehbadwookie View Post
Aaron I have a lot of experience in this area and I can tell you only have experience being a grammar nit.
Yeah, that's right. You linked that other thread where you've done this before.

Quote:
How many people have you subjected to that kind of behavior?
BILLIONS.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 05:16 PM   #130
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 30,066
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by mackeleven View Post
That wouldn't be wise, and that is a strawman, considering my point is thus:

There aren't wrong ways to make the rules of grammar is the point.
I don't think anyone is disputing this. But this is much different from saying that "there is no such thing as 'correct grammar.'"

Quote:
Pidgin English as spoken in Hawaii may not follow our rules, but their rules are not incorrect or wrong, don't you see.
It's definitely wrong for conducting business outside of Hawaii.

Quote:
Exactly. It would be non-standard to communicate with someone in another dialect than their norm, generally speaking, assuming they aren't bidialectal.
"Non-standard" is too soft. It's wrong if it fails. If you're trying to conduct business in Pidgin English, nobody will understand you, and you will fail at business. (Unless you're only conducting business in Hawaii with people who speak Pidgin.)

If you are in college and you fail to write an essay in academic English, you're probably going to fail the assignment. (It depends on the assignment. Some assignments provide for more leniency than others.)
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 05:20 PM   #131
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 30,066
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rikers View Post
Are you fit? <10% fat?
Probably.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 05:31 PM   #132
spanktehbadwookie
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
spanktehbadwookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: River Region
Posts: 19,378
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
Yeah, that's right. You linked that other thread where you've done this before.







BILLIONS.

That was a different sub-forum with different rules. That's obvious.

Do you have any evidence of wide-spread success in breeding conformity by applying internet grammar authoritarianism? That aforementioned google search doesn't indicate that it seems to either work or is widely received enthusiastically.

It doesn't appear that people typically join internet communities because some random is going to persistently correct their grammar.
spanktehbadwookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 05:48 PM   #133
mackeleven
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,593
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
I don't think anyone is disputing this. But this is much different from saying that "there is no such thing as 'correct grammar.'"
Correct grammar implies somewhere grammar can be incorrect. When I pressed you on this, your answer was; grammar is incorrect when applied to other groups of people who don't follow the same grammatical rules(or words to that effect). But how then can one dialect be correct and the other incorrect, intrinsically. We are back where we started so I will have to leave it there.
Quote:

"Non-standard" is too soft. It's wrong if it fails.
My non-standard phone charger won't fit my new phone and therefore fails to charge it. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the charger, it simply doesn't meet my new phone's standards. It would be wrong of me to keep attempting to charge my phone with it. However, put said charger in its intended phone and all is good.

Last edited by mackeleven; 03-19-2016 at 06:12 PM.
mackeleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 06:51 PM   #134
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 17,705
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
It was an explicit example used in the conversation. Did you miss that in Post #72?

Or perhaps you are hanging on a point from a different aspect of the conversation that isn't directly tied to the point I'm making? I can't tell.
You weren't replying to #72. I gave you what would have been a more apt response to the post you were responding to.
BrianTheMick2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 07:27 PM   #135
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 17,705
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by mackeleven View Post
Correct grammar implies somewhere grammar can be incorrect. When I pressed you on this, your answer was; grammar is incorrect when applied to other groups of people who don't follow the same grammatical rules(or words to that effect). But how then can one dialect be correct and the other incorrect, intrinsically. We are back where we started so I will have to leave it there.
Statements can be (and are) grammatically correct/incorrect in a specific time and place.

Are you seriously thinking that anyone (in the entire world) believes that grammar rules are immutable or that they obey some sort of physical law rather than being somewhat arbitrary?

Dude, nothing about any social behavior is "inherently" anything. That mean doesn't rules there aren't.
BrianTheMick2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 07:49 PM   #136
mackeleven
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,593
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

[QUOTE=BrianTheMick2;49615994]Statements can be (and are) grammatically correct/incorrect in a specific time and place.

I'm arguing that no dialect, of say English, is more correct than any other dialect of English.
If someone writes an essay in Hawaiian Pidgin English, in standard UK English class, or Spanish class, they would obviously not meet the standard that was asked of them.

dialect. noun. 1. a form of a language spoken in a particular geographical area or by members of a particular social class or occupational group, distinguished by its vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation.

Quote:
Are you seriously thinking that anyone (in the entire world) believes that grammar rules are immutable or that they obey some sort of physical law rather than being somewhat arbitrary?
I'm stating the exact opposite for a few pages now. Please go back and re-read. Or not.

Last edited by mackeleven; 03-19-2016 at 08:04 PM.
mackeleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 07:57 PM   #137
mackeleven
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,593
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

List_of_dialects_of_the_English_language
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...glish_language

Within a given English-speaking country, there will often be a form of the language considered to be Standard English – the Standard Englishes of different countries differ, and each can itself be considered a dialect.

Last edited by mackeleven; 03-19-2016 at 08:11 PM.
mackeleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 08:29 PM   #138
spanktehbadwookie
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
spanktehbadwookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: River Region
Posts: 19,378
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Some more links:

http://www.personal.psu.edu/ejp10/bl...ixes-when.html
Quote:
When to Correct

In case you were wondering, I am not against correction, especially being proofed. I really do want my resume to be perfectly Standard as well as most promotional materials and academic articles. You will also never hear a linguistics presentation given in Ebonics/AAVE (even if the topic IS AAVE). Some social norms are just too strong to challenge.

When the discourse is more spontaneous or conversational though, I think the Standard English noose can and should be loosened. Would Bob Marley have said as much to us if he had been forced to correct his Jamaican English to Standard English all the time?

https://www.feverbee.com/nitpickers/
Quote:
3. They want a sense of superiority. This is the most common group. They are not favourably predisposed to your messages. They either dislike the content, dislike the sender, or are looking to increase their self-esteem at your expense.

This third group won’t debate with you on the core issues of the message, but score tiny victories by pointing out minor mistakes. Don’t engage the final group – especially if they end their message with snark (i.e. “You made a typo on page 9, just sayin’”). This group is highly resistant to any messages from you. Their needs are to feel superior, unchallenged, and increase their self-esteem at your expense.

This behavior often stems from the message challenging the recipient to change their ways. Instead of assessing the problem, they ignore it. Instead they react against the message and its sender.

Focus on the first two groups. Remove the errors and niggles where possible. But don’t change or sand the edges of your messages to appeal to the nitpickers.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...t-there-fault/

Quote:
To find out, I spoke with Maryellen MacDonald, a cognitive psychologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who studies how the brain processes language. She said that even though your brain knows the grammar rules, other forces override that knowledge. The brain doesn’t just store words like a dictionary does for easy retrieval, it’s more of a network. You start with a concept you want to express and then unconsciously consider several options from its associative grouping and quickly select one. For instance, if you’re explaining how you hit a ball, you might cycle through the concept of a stick, a pole and a bat. Next, your brain will use sound to aid its expression. Here’s where things can get tricky.

“Usually we pay a lot of attention to pronunciation while we’re typing because it’s usually a really good cue how to spell things,” MacDonald said. But homophones can trip this process up. “When someone types ‘Are dog is really cute’, it’s not that they don’t know the difference between ‘are’ and ‘our’; it’s that the pronunciation of ‘our’ in the mind activated the spelling ‘our’ but also ‘are.’” Even nearby “hour” might come out, she said.

The brain doesn’t always consult a word’s sound, but studies have shown that it frequently falls back on it, and sound tells us nothing about the difference between “you’re” and “your.” Research on typing errors reveals that sound creates even odder mistakes, such as people writing “28” when they mean to type “20A.” It’s no wonder that people who know better will routinely confound closer pairings such as “it’s” and “its” or “know” and “no.”
spanktehbadwookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2016, 11:13 PM   #139
plaaynde
Poker Historian
 
plaaynde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rebel of Eden
Posts: 19,094
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Nice. All good points.
plaaynde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 02:16 AM   #140
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 17,705
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

[QUOTE=mackeleven;49616111
I'm arguing that no dialect, of say English, is more correct than any other dialect of English.[/QUOTE]

For what purpose?
BrianTheMick2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 02:21 AM   #141
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 30,066
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by spanktehbadwookie View Post
Do you have any evidence of wide-spread success in breeding conformity by applying internet grammar authoritarianism? That aforementioned google search doesn't indicate that it seems to either work or is widely received enthusiastically.
1) Do I need the evidence "wide-spread success" before suggesting that proper grammar is worth learning and practicing?
2) You really suck at the internet if you think that finding random articles using the search terms you used are going to function as evidence that should persuade me of something.

Quote:
It doesn't appear that people typically join internet communities because some random is going to persistently correct their grammar.
1) Persistently? There were all of two posts in which I addressed OP about his grammar directly, and you were on my case after one.
2) I still believe OP would benefit from practicing proper grammar. He can choose to ignore that advice, and that's on him.

At this point, the best I can tell of you is that you're a sad, whiny case of someone wanting to believe he's standing up for grand moral principles by getting into pointless internet pissing contests. I am under no delusion of the level of impact I'm likely to have. You seem to actually be taking this incredibly seriously. That's more worrisome than anything.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 02:22 AM   #142
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 30,066
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by mackeleven View Post
Correct grammar implies somewhere grammar can be incorrect. When I pressed you on this, your answer was; grammar is incorrect when applied to other groups of people who don't follow the same grammatical rules(or words to that effect). But how then can one dialect be correct and the other incorrect, intrinsically. We are back where we started so I will have to leave it there.

My non-standard phone charger won't fit my new phone and therefore fails to charge it. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the charger, it simply doesn't meet my new phone's standards. It would be wrong of me to keep attempting to charge my phone with it. However, put said charger in its intended phone and all is good.
Why are you inserting the word "intrinsically" when I've explicitly talked about the need for contextualization? This is a pretty poor reading of the position I've taken.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 02:24 AM   #143
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 30,066
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
You weren't replying to #72.
You know that conversations are often more than one post deep, right?
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 02:35 AM   #144
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 30,066
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Okay. I don't see how any of this makes any points for you, but okay.

The first link speaks to two particular situations when the specific outcomes are different. The first is about learning math as the primary objective, so that ignoring the secondary objective of fixing grammar is a reasonable thing to do. The second is about the use of language in a deeply emotional story. Are you drawing a specific parallel to OP here, or just flailing about at random?

At best, you can say that OP's post was deeply emotional, and that we should have a much deeper concern for the feeling of lostness that he's experiencing. But this forum isn't a group therapy session, so I'm less inclined to believe that this should be treated as a safe space in which we should validate every feeling that's expressed. Instead, I chose to focus on an area of improvement that could actually have a meaningful impact on his financial situation.

The second link is one of those blog posts that I just shrug at. You're welcome to think that I'm doing this to feel superior. I couldn't care less what you think of me. The reality is that I observed errors in his grammar in a somewhat rambling post and took all of 10 seconds to reply. If OP takes the advice, good for him. If not, it's no skin off my back.

So in response to you posting this, I just laugh to myself and shrug. Does that make me arrogant? You might think so. But again, I don't care. The level of emotional investment I've got here pretty low, and my choice to continue engaging has more to do with attaining a level of amusement than trying to make myself feel smart.

The third link appears to be much more about making errors of the type I might classify as "ooops errors." We make mistakes. If OP had one or two errors, I wouldn't have pointed to grammar as being an issue. I've laid out the systemic problems OP demonstrated, which is of a different type of error than what the third link is describing.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 03:33 AM   #145
plaaynde
Poker Historian
 
plaaynde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rebel of Eden
Posts: 19,094
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
Okay. I don't see how any of this makes any points for you, but okay.

The first link speaks to two particular situations when the specific outcomes are different. The first is about learning math as the primary objective, so that ignoring the secondary objective of fixing grammar is a reasonable thing to do. The second is about the use of language in a deeply emotional story. Are you drawing a specific parallel to OP here, or just flailing about at random?

At best, you can say that OP's post was deeply emotional, and that we should have a much deeper concern for the feeling of lostness that he's experiencing. But this forum isn't a group therapy session, so I'm less inclined to believe that this should be treated as a safe space in which we should validate every feeling that's expressed. Instead, I chose to focus on an area of improvement that could actually have a meaningful impact on his financial situation.

The second link is one of those blog posts that I just shrug at. You're welcome to think that I'm doing this to feel superior. I couldn't care less what you think of me. The reality is that I observed errors in his grammar in a somewhat rambling post and took all of 10 seconds to reply. If OP takes the advice, good for him. If not, it's no skin off my back.

So in response to you posting this, I just laugh to myself and shrug. Does that make me arrogant? You might think so. But again, I don't care. The level of emotional investment I've got here pretty low, and my choice to continue engaging has more to do with attaining a level of amusement than trying to make myself feel smart.

The third link appears to be much more about making errors of the type I might classify as "ooops errors." We make mistakes. If OP had one or two errors, I wouldn't have pointed to grammar as being an issue. I've laid out the systemic problems OP demonstrated, which is of a different type of error than what the third link is describing.
Wow, good material as such. Aaron, if you just learned not to be so confrontational, you'd get a greater audience, and would maybe have greater success.

That's the homework I'm recommending.
plaaynde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 05:25 AM   #146
mackeleven
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,593
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
For what purpose?
I posted a Steven Pinker video on linguistics. There's lots of great stuff in it.

It's not commonly known that what we are quick to call broken english or slang or unruly, that is other dialects, is as equally complex, meaningful and rule based, when broken down by what we know thus far of linguistics. That's what I wanted to get across, without spending this long doing so.

There's a few different topics going at once. I side with spank in that I also feel not the need to correct a person's grammar when the semantics is not lost, and that it wastes times, etc.

Ideally, as far as languages go, we should all speak the same, maybe, something less prone to ambiguity like how mathematics is, maybe not... It's not currently possible.

Last edited by mackeleven; 03-20-2016 at 05:36 AM.
mackeleven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 10:14 AM   #147
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 17,705
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
You know that conversations are often more than one post deep, right?
Yes.

My comments were directed at your comments that you were directing to a specific post that had little-to-nothing to do with post #72 other than that the acronym AAVE was used.
BrianTheMick2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 10:38 AM   #148
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 17,705
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by mackeleven View Post
I posted a Steven Pinker video on linguistics. There's lots of great stuff in it.

It's not commonly known that what we are quick to call broken english or slang or unruly, that is other dialects, is as equally complex, meaningful and rule based, when broken down by what we know thus far of linguistics. That's what I wanted to get across, without spending this long doing so.
I think that point needed to be made in the 1980s. It was, fortunately, made in the 1980s. Pretty much all of society has accepted the point and moved on.

You still need to use standard American English when writing a CV for a job in America. This is mostly because you are demonstrating a willingness to do so. You should also brush your teeth and bathe before an interview even if the actual job description states that you will have no interactions with others when on the job.

Quote:
There's a few different topics going at once. I side with spank in that I also feel not the need to correct a person's grammar when the semantics is not lost, and that it wastes times, etc.
I am absolutely certain that you are putting words into spank's mouth.

Quote:
Ideally, as far as languages go, we should all speak the same, maybe, something less prone to ambiguity like how mathematics is, maybe not... It's not currently possible.
Up until the last bit which fixes the paragraph, that is ridiculous. It didn't entirely fix it, since the word "currently" is, at best, superfluous.

I'll side with the guy you think (incorrectly) that you are siding with and say that ideally we should all have our own individual private languages and the onus is entirely on the reader.
BrianTheMick2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 10:45 AM   #149
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 17,705
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by mackeleven View Post
I'm stating the exact opposite for a few pages now. Please go back and re-read. Or not.
Who, exactly, do you think is arguing against that?

No one thinks that "intrinsic" belongs in the conversation at all. Everyone recognizes that context matters.
BrianTheMick2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2016, 10:51 AM   #150
chezlaw
Limey Bastard
 
chezlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 39,882
Re: is it worth going for less then 1%

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
Since that is exactly the standard that employers use, it isn't an issue at all.
There is no exact standard used identically by all employers. Many don't follow any standard beyond what matters to them.

What we should get those institutes for research into the blindingly obvious to do is more stuff along the lines of the implicit racism tests. Identical CVs except some of a smattering of grammatical errors - we expect to miss out on some interviews but then the really hard part of the research follows which is to see how well it works as a filter of the prospective employer.

Quote:
OP should definitely make sure to tell any prospective employers that he doesn't think he doesn't believe he is well-suited for working for others. It is important that any employer is a good fit for him.
Not particular to the OP but some of us (me included back in the day) definitely benefit from realising that a) we want employers who appreciate unusually-suited employees and b) realise we can do something to help avoid the employers who want the most ordinarily-suited.

Note I may have made up some words there but I hope the sense is fairly clear.
chezlaw is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online