The Illiteracy of Corporate American E-Mail 1267
Dave writes "There is a pretty amusing/sad article about functional illiteracy when it comes to professional e-mails. Some of the samples are just ridiculous."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Illiteracy of Corporate American E-Mail
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion
How they become? (Score:5, Interesting)
P.S. This are one of the Slashdot articles that I am so worrifiedably scared to be picked at by one of these Spelling/Grandma Nazis [slashdot.org].
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Interesting)
There have been several times when advertising departments at places I've worked have let huge glossies and other very visible ads get all the way through printing with major spelling and grammatical errors. How can anyone take a company seriously if it looks like everyone at that company is illiterate?
spelling and grammar? (Score:5, Funny)
The geniuses suceeded in publishing a report with a map on the front which just had a gap where Wales should have been.
Stuff Spelling and Grammar, 3 million people and a few billion sheep just ceased to exist!
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was teaching econ, I several times made the mistake of setting an essay test. It showed that the American students couldn't write. When I marked them down for incomprehensiblity, they were shocked! ``You should grade the econ, not the grammer.'' they said. Unfortunately, the grammer and organization was bad enough that there wasn't any coherent content to grade.
Some of them did know the material, but it doesn't matter what you know, if you can't communicate it clearly to others. If you can't communicate, you might as well know nothing, because that's what everyone will assume.
By contrast, some students for whom English was a second language had grammer problems, but their writing was coherent enough that I could figure out what they meant.
Grammer? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Consistantly? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Funny)
"Hurting" above is incorrect. To agree with "impact" it should be "hurt":
But since this forum doesn't support editing, we'll forgive you.
The Grammar Nazis
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Insightful)
This myth prevails because it's what students are taught in school.
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Funny)
hm. makes me think there should be a study on the illiteracy of slashdot posts.
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Informative)
I've offered to buy a couple of grammar manuals for the department, but no one seems to be interested, and no one with purchasing power will authorize it through normal channels.
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Funny)
I, for one, welcome, to the full extent possible, our new, lovely, comma, overlords!
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Insightful)
Everybody should care because the intended recipient may not be the only recipient as a matter is discussed. My emails get forwarded and (b)cc:'d to others all the time and I receive similiar correspondance every day. Concise, understandable emails mean I don't have to repeat myself.
They also stand the test of time. Ever have an email come up a few months or a year later and have to address it? Something well composed is easier to explain than a choppy stream of consciousness.
Sure, its only 20 seconds, but the only point in editing your message is to conform to implied social norms - an objective that has nothing to do with getting the job done. Thankfully those silly social norms have not yet been applied to emails yet.
This shows such a lack of business savvy and professionalism it is actually depressing. You can't even invest half a minute into reviewing your work and making sure it's presentable because in your limited view it has nothing to do with your actual job. The simple fact is that in any organization you don't exist in a vacuum and being able to effectively communicate is a primary job function not some "silly social norm." Save those anarchist tendencies for IRC and /. Whether it is "fair" or not, in a business environment consistently poor writing is going to get you labeled as stupid and inept. The big problem with this is the judgement will many times come from upper management due to the simple fact that your email is the primary work product they see.
Soft skills count and as the job market gets tighter those skills will be the ones that differentiate you from the rest of the pack. It is actually called reality and not "silly social norm."
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Insightful)
I may be able to interpret poorly written English, but that's not to say it's enjoyable. Presentation errors not only make the individual committing them look bad, but also take away focus from the actual content.
I expect people communicating with me in a business context to make a reasonable effort to communicate clearly in much the same way that I would be offended if a coworker chose to give me messages scribbled in sloppily written crayon: Poor presentation distracts from the content. The scribbled memo would needlessly require extra time to read and interpret; likewise do poorly spelled messages.
Another aspect that falls out of the above is one of respect. Since comprehending sloppily-written messages takes more time and effort, writing well is nothing less than displaying respect for the value of the time of one's readers, whereas writing poorly is stating that your time and effort is more valuable than that of the individual to whom you send your message. I make a serious effort to do this when writing material for others' consumption; consequently, I find it only reasonable for others to respond in kind.
They should and do. People who send poorly written email (particularly mass mailings) are genuinely and rightly offensive, for all the reasons above.Re:How they become? (Score:5, Insightful)
1) So the recipient doesn't have to spend 20 seconds trying to work out what your meant, or wasting both his and your time by replying asking for a clarification.
2) So people don't think you're a moron.
3) So people outside the company don't think you're all morons (if the message is forwarded, as often happens, sometimes inadvertently).
Anything you write, anywhere, can come back to haunt you.
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Interesting)
"2) So people don't think you're a moron."
Exactly! In 2002, I wrote this one short e-mail to the IT security people correcting them on some small thing they put on the company intranet regarding the dangers of e-mail attachments. There was a small but obvious typo in the message that made it look like I had made a grammar error.
To my surprise, three weeks later my e-mail was printed in the company newsletter being distributed to 10,000 people, with a note congratulating me on helping to increase the computer networks' security. My typo was there for all to conclude that I was a grammar-ignorant idiot.
Moral of the story: You never know who will read what you write, even if it is an internal company e-mail. Spending that 20 seconds to check your grammar/spelling/etc is worthwhile. You never know what small thing might come back and bite you in the butt later on.
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Insightful)
You work in a purchasing department, can you tell me what this person wanted?
"Onetwenty foot lenth of steel, 1/2 in thk, 3 in angle."
Here, we're not so much concerned about the spelling. Is this a twenty foot length of steel? Or is it a 120 length of steel? Either one could be wrong, (though one is far more likely than the other) so you have to call for clarification, which takes time, and instead of processing the purchase, you have to call this chap on the radio, phone, and/or e-mail and wait for him to get back, and god-forbid if it's a hot project, and he's now on vacation or hit by a beer truck. Time, by the cliched equasion, equals currancy, aka, business.
This is just metal, simple metal, hunks of steel, imagine something more complicated. Something electronic? Something computer-related? Imagine the confusion of a common omission of the final comma in a list, exemplified by this famous line:
"My parents, God and Ayn Rand."
Put a comma in between "God" and "And" and it's slightly more clear it's a list. Unless that person is claiming divine lineage or a chunk of an Objectivist trust fund . .
Okay, obviously, that's a purchase, we hope that person is specific as they are conveying a need (though I can tell you that often those folks expect you to know what they want). Critical stuff. So, what about e-mail then? What about normal stuff?
People judge you, rightly or wrongly, by the words that you use. Beyond the base level technical things, it's a game, where even ORDER on the TO: line can have something to do with how the item is read. ("Can" does not equal always, by the way.) Stupid, perhaps, but it is so.
And if takes you 20 minutes to check your grammar for anything of normal length, you haven't internalized the rules, and thusly are inefficient. It's not about perfect grammar, either; hyper-correctness is, in itself, totally obnoxious and useless and paralyzing. (I know I misspelled a few things in here, a few grammar gaffaws, but I hope I'm clear enough.)
I agree, if you're clear and everything is good, then great. You needn't be able to diagram the perfect sentance, but you should be able to state your goal clearly; and if anyone comes back with questions, or, worse, doesn't ask you the questions they have, then your language has failed, or maybe the person is an idiot.
People you may or may not ever meet make decisions based on your communication. Treat it as such.
In the interests of full disclosure: my Masters Degree is going to be in Rhetoric and Professional Writing. Waste of time for some, I imagine, but I think it's interesting. Takes all kinds, I guess.
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Informative)
Another issue: Netiquette (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem I run into at my job is not so much spelling and grammar. I fortunately run into very few problems with that. What sets my teeth on edge is lack of basic netiquette skills.
For instance, I cringe when I see someone reply to a long email outlining multiple points in a discussion, only to see the person head the message with "My comments below IN CAPS". This person then proceeds to do just that, namely give all her comments in all uppercase. Ugh. There is no need for this. It is very clear what is quoted text and what is not quoted text.
Another one that is rampant at my company is top-posting. Everyone insists on quoting a message in a reply and proceeding to post their comments at the top. When I try to lead by example and properly bottom-post, people complain my emails are not clear. Argh.
At least I no longer have a boss like I did on my last job. She wrote her emails in all lowercase and used HTML blink tags.
Re:Another issue: Netiquette (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't quote (Score:4, Insightful)
Think about ehat you want to say and write a self-contained reply without the ugly point for point nit-picking style promoted by quoting.
This has the added benefit, that your receipients either take your interpretation of what was said before or have to work and dig through their own archive.
I had the experience, that this leads to calmer mail exchanges.
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Insightful)
Having to go through multiple iterations of the message to make sure your point is clearly presented can slow things down significantly.
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:How they become? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think one of the problems with email is that it's so easy to prepare and send one that many people don't believe that an email needs to be correct. I don't claim to be very proficient with the English language, but I at least run spell check before sending an email, which is more than I can say for almost all of my coworkers.
Re:How they become? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How they become? (Score:5, Funny)
A man rides into a new town, and needs to get his CV proofread. The town has only two CV proofreaders. So he gets copies of their CVs to help him decide whom to go to. One of the CVs is beautifully presented, with impeccable spelling and grammar and a clear, logical layout. The other is messy, confused, and poorly spelt. There are many obvious grammatical mistakes.
Which proofreader does the man go to, and why?
Re:How they become? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:How they become? (Score:3, Insightful)
A barber, on the other hand, could reasonably be expected to have somebody other than himself cut his hair.
Re:How they become? (Score:3, Interesting)
Alot of people are just disinterested in proofreading-- they'd realize how atrocious their emails look if they actually read what they typed before pressing "Send".
As for your fear of spelling nazis, I fear you are jus
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Funny)
1. You should have said: "Her problem is that she forgets to proofread."
2. It is "A lot", not "Alot".
3. "Disinterested" means one doesn't have a conflict of interest. You should have used "uninterested".
4. It is "justified", not "justificated".
5. It is "disenfranchised", not "disenfrenchfried", unless someone took away their French fries.
Then again, maybe these were intentional and slashdot just removed the <GWB> and </GWB> tags.
Re:How they become? (Score:3, Interesting)
I see it all the time. People who can write excellent essays, articles or letters on an actual physical piece of paper suddenly become illiterate idiots when they begin to write an e-mail.
It's a corporate culture that doesn't treat e-mail with respect. This is along the same vein as mass forwards to p
Re:How they become? (Score:4, Insightful)
And then there are the people who have professional services do their resumes, CVs and cover letters -- either once for manual submission, or as part of a headhunter type operation where fixing their clients weaknesses is part of the job.
And let's face it, when YOU were in college, what was the general intellectual orientation of most business/marketing school types, anyway? I found they nearly all fit the stereotype -- frat/sorority members with more interest in their personal appearance and social standing. Grades (and not necessarily *learning*) merely being important if they had some kind of status-oriented grad school plans or a cash payback plan from Mom and Dad for not flunking out.
To be fair, there were people that fit that description who were real smart, too, but most of them really weren't. College was something they were expected to do, like wear Polo-brand clothes, and join the right Greek house, and get a corporate job.
Is it any surprise that once this anti-intellectual group is in a position where they have to represent their ideas in writing that they fall apart? I think half the problem with them isn't just a lack of writing skills, it's also the quality of the ideas. It's hard to write well about a bad idea.
Re:Not completely bleak (Score:4, Funny)
Of course you don't care - survival is your primary concern! A stable situation, job, regular income. Once you have those things under control, then perhaps you could be interested in learning about someone's hierarchy of needs. But more likely you'll be interested in sex - getting a girlfriend, etc. So first the job, the regular income, the steady girlfriend, oh and that car you've always wanted. Then perhaps you could be interested in Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
Conspicuously... (Score:5, Funny)
Mox
The Title is Funny. (Score:4, Insightful)
No irony was intended. Let's try another more direct form,
CNet can't write a title.
Sam, the limits of form imposed by advertisement funded, dead tree writing are clear to see. I'm sure the title was made up by some editor, but I feel bad for you.
This wasn't posted by CmdrTaco.
When the nations "Paper of Record" can't get it right, what do you expect from the rest of us? Slashdot digs up news that matters and that's all I care about. Noam Chomsky would say that the media should not be able to write a proper sentence if it's working right. He claims the media's purpose is to limit thought and it does so by presenting what it's owners consider the limits of an acceptable future in an obnoxious and belligerent way. You are supposed to think of news and politics as unpleasant, unpolite and ultimately something beyond your control. What you get from your average 15 minutes a day of news "consumption" is direction not information. George Orwell's "Duck Speak" is exactly what you should expect.
Go back to sleep now.
All because of vatican 2 (Score:5, Funny)
My personal favorite (Score:5, Funny)
Subject: COULD YOU SEND ME THAT MEMO
Body: (empty)
In case it's slashdotted: (Score:5, Funny)
"1 NeED HeLp," 54Id +H3 MEs54G3, whiCh w4$ Dev01d oph PuNC+UA+ion. "1 am WR1+1nG @ e$$4Y 0n wRI+iN9 I W0Rk ph0R TH1$ C0mp4nY @nd my 8O5s W4N+ me +0 h3lP IMpR0V3 tEh w0rKer$ WRItin9 5K1ll5 c4n y4ll H3lp me w1TH $0m3 InpHoRm4+I0N +h@nK y0U".
HuNdR3d5 0Ph 1NkWIR1ES Phrom m4n49ER5 AND EXECU+iveS 5E3K1NG To 1MPR0vE Th31R 0WNZOR oR +HEiR woRKeR$' wRi+1N9 pOp In+O HOG4N'$ 80XoR In-B45K3T E4cH mONth, He 5AY5, D3SCRIBIn9 4 nUMb3r +H4+ H@S $uRg3D @5 3-M4IL H45 R3Pl4C3D +He pHoN3 PHor mUCH WORkPLac3 COmMuNiCaT1ON. mIll1On$ 0Ph 3MPLOY33S Mu5+ WR1Te M0RE FR3kWentLY 0n teH J0b +h@N pr3VI0u5lY. 4ND ManY @r3 M@k1nG 4 h4$h Of 1t.
"E-m@1L 1$ 4 PArTY +0 wHIch eNgLI$H TE4Ch3R5 H4VE NO+ BEEn 1nvIt3D," HO94n $41d. "it HA$ C0Mp4Nie5 +34riNG +h3ir h@1r oU+."
@ REc3nt SUrV3y Of 120 4MER1C4n COrp0r4T10NS RE4CHeD 4 5IMIl@r coNCLu51On. +HE $TUdY, by +3H N@+I0n@L cOMM1$$Ion On WR1tInG, 4 p4N3L 35+48Li$h3D 8Y teh CoLl39E 8OaRD, c0NCLud3d +H4t @ th1Rd Oph 3MPloY335 1n +HE N4+1on'5 8LUe-ch1P CoMP4N1E5 wro+3 pO0RLy AND +h@+ bU5iNE5$E5 Were 5PEnD1nG 4$ mUcH 45 $3.1 b1LLioN @NnUally On reM3D1@l TR4InING.
+hE PR08lem 5h0W5 UP N0+ onLY IN 3-ma1L Bu+ 4lSO in R3pORT5 4ND 0tH3r T3xt5, +h3 COMMi5$I0n 5@Id.
"1T'S N0+ +ha+ C0mP4N1Es w4NT +0 HIRE t0l5T0y," $@Id $U5AN +R4im4n, 4 dIrecToR @+ TH3 BU$1ne$5 R0unDt4bL3, 4n @$50Cia+1ON Of l34d1N9 CH1EPH EX3cU+1Ve5 wH0sE c0rP0R4+10N5 W3r3 $URVeY3D 1N tH3 $TUDY. "BUt +H3Y n33D P3oPLE WH0 C4N WrItE cl3@RLY, 4ND M4NY 3mpl0yEE$ AnD @PPl1C4Nt5 F4lL 5h0rT 0F th@T $+4nD4rD."
m1LliON5 OF IN5CRU+@BL3 E-M4iL Me$$4935 4RE CLO991n9 C0rpoR@T3 B0X0r5 BY 5e+TIN9 OfF r3kWE5+$ pHor Cl4r1PHIC4+10N, @nd M@nY 0Ph +HE ReKWE5T5, IN +uRn, 4Re 4L5o CH40TICaLly Wri+T3N, R3$ULtIN9 1N whoL3 CyCle5 0f CoNpHUS1on.
h3RE 15 0NE fr0M @ $Y5+3mS 4N4Ly5+ T0 heR 5UpERvI5OR @T 4 H1gh-+eCH CORpOR@tiON B453D 1N paL0 @l+O, C@LIF.: "i uPD4T3D +Eh 5t@+U$ REp0rt For +h3 FOuR D1$Cr3P@NCie5 l3NnIe PH0RwARd u5 VI4 E-M4il (TheY 1N 8arRY PhIl3).. tO MAKE $URE MY l0G1C w4$ C0rr3C+ I+ $e3M5 We pR0v1De MUrR4Y With 1nc0rreC+ 1NPh0RM4t1oN ... h0WEv3R 4PHt3r veRipHY1ng cON+R0lS 0N jbl - JBL H45 TH3 inDIcatOR @5 B ???? - 1 w@n+3D +O M4Ke 5ur3 WItH tH3 R3cen+ CH4Ng35 - I pR0C355ED TOd4Y - 8EFoR3 mURr4y M4Ke thE CH@NG35 494iN 0n T3h M4INphr@me +0 'c'."
+He 1NC0h3R3NC3 0F +h@+ mE$5@GE PeR5u4DEd +Eh @N@LysT'5 eMPl0yer5 +H4t 5H3 N33ded r3MEDi4L +r4In1ng.
"tH3 MORE ELEC+Ron1C 4ND gLoB@l w3 G3+, +hE L355 IMp0R+4NT +h3 Sp0KEn wORD hA5 b3COME, 4nd iN e-M41l CL@ri+Y 15 CrITIc4l," $@1d S3@N PhIlLip$, R3CrU1tMEnT d1R3CTOR AT @NO+HEr $iL1C0N v4llEy CORp0R4Ti0n, 4ppl3r4, @ 5UPpl13R 0F 3KW1PMEnT pHOr L1PH3 $cIENC3 R3$3@RCH, wh3RE Mo5t
Re:In case it's slashdotted: (Score:4, Funny)
Too much L33T! (Score:3, Funny)
(With apologies to any Sealab fans out there)
What scares me (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I filtered out all the crap (Score:5, Funny)
Very Inprofesional (Score:5, Funny)
It's a disgracement.
Re:Very Inprofesional (Score:5, Interesting)
To her, it probably was correct... (Score:5, Insightful)
"patience" is spelled correctly. In context, it's probably the wrong word, but it's still spelled correctly.
I've seen that happen quite a few times - people relying on the Outlook/Word spellchecked and it corrects their email by inserting correctly spelled, but irrelevant words.
The CxO drones don't even notice it.
i m a l337 riter! (Score:5, Insightful)
My spelling's pretty good, too, but not perfect, so no flames please!
Re:i m a l337 riter! (Score:4, Interesting)
The signature appended to every message said his name, company, and job title: "CEO."
Re:i m a l337 riter! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:i m a l337 riter! (Score:4, Funny)
Some help needed here... (Score:3, Funny)
Sad but true. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sad but true. (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a good point. Much like the web allows almost anyone to publish just about whatever they want, it seems that technology has also allowed every idiot to [and those of us who just play idiots in print =) ] to escape the watchful eyes of those more skilled at proper correspondence. Sometimes lowering the barriers to entry (as technology such as email and the internet do) do more than just let more people get in on it -- it also lets more crap in with all the good.
Illiterate? Or just unprofessional? (Score:5, Insightful)
For the first problem, either a) don't hire people who can't write, or b) provide on-the job training to bring writing skills up to an acceptable level.
For the second, I think the company needs to make a clear set of standards for both internal and external communication, and enforce them. External communication - to customers, etc. - is particularly important. Anything as badly written as those examples would be deleted from my inbox before I got to the end of the first sentence.
I used to work as a technical writer for a large company, and they kept us busy. It's fine to hire engineers who are good at what they do, even if they don't have great writing skills - as log as you also hire someone to decipher and rewrite everything that comes out of the engineering dept.
PS. I respectfully submit that the headline should read either "The illegibility of email" or "The illiteracy of corporate america"... I might try to make my email literary, but not literate (and my slashdot posts are probably neither...)
Re:Illiterate? Or just unprofessional? (Score:4, Insightful)
IMHO, if an engineer is imprecise in his language, in any medium, he will be imprecise in other more important areas. This is especially true for a software engineer/developer/code monkey since C, Java, Perl and Python are but different languages where you are trying to speak to a machine, not a human. A Technical Writer shouldn't have to do much more than parse the comments in the code, provide helpful diagrams and give a higher level view of how to use the software. Using precise, thought out language in all your communications means that precision will spill over into your code. As an example, here you are espousing that you just need someone like yourself - a communications expert - to correct the errors of others and you make a simple spelling mistake (don't have great writing skills - as log as you also hire someone to) which gives your credibility a hit. Allowing yourself the luxury of a native English speaker being able to over-look that error and still unuderstand you is what starts the downward spiral.
As far as the article goes, this is the issue - people let thier communications skills atrophy. They take it for granted others are able to correct thier 'misteaks'[1] or will reply back with a "Hunh?", and the idea can eventually be parsed out of the conversation. It's a question of discipline, of placing a real value of your communications ability and keeping that ability at its peak.
I read over every e-mail I before I click send and ask "Do I sound lucid, professional and do I actually communicate my idea well"? It takes a bit longer to do, but it also cuts down on mis-communication.
Soko
[1] Taken from that old poster that says "Know Misteaks Aloud!"
Again, Dijkstra said it best. (Score:5, Informative)
Just a couple weeks ago this comment [slashdot.org] made sense, and hey, now it makes sense even more.
Spelling And Grammar Still Apply (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Spelling And Grammar Still Apply (Score:3, Funny)
Learn Them Some Grammar (Score:3, Funny)
Spell Czech (Score:5, Funny)
It plainly marques four my revue miss steaks eye kin knot sea.
Eye strike a key and type a word and weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write. It shows me strait a weigh.
As soon as a mist ache is maid. It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite. Its rarely ever wrong.
Eye have run this poem threw it. I am shore your pleased two no.
Its letter perfect in it's weight. My chequer tolled me sew.
Sauce Unknown
(Reader's Digest.)
It will only get worse. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It will only get worse. (Score:3, Funny)
And conversely, an English major married you to compensate for the miniscule earning power that English majors have...
Have they ever heard of English as a 2nd language? (Score:3, Informative)
The article doesn't once mention the possibility that the authors of some of these emails may not have learned English as their primary language. Here's a new flash for them: English is not the most widely spoken language in the world (Chinese is).
As we have more and more global influence in America's corporate workplace, we're going to see more and more people who have learned English as a 2nd language, which is probably the real reason why "corporate America can't build a sentence".
Re:Have they ever heard of English as a 2nd langua (Score:4, Insightful)
Newsflash 2: People who speak English as a second language are often better at correct grammar then native English-speakers.
ESL musings (Score:5, Insightful)
My spoken English, and especially my understanding of it, has improved by leaps and bounds since I started living in an English speaking country (Canada). I wish I could say the same about my writing: due to being constantly exposed to your/you're and similar constructs, I feel its quality has definitely decreased.
Re:ESL musings (Score:4, Interesting)
> I feel its quality has definitely decreased.
When proof reading, mentally expand all contractions (e.g. you're becomes you are), replace there with here, and replace your with his. If the sentence still makes sense, you're good to go.
I use the same types of tricks in french, expanding "a" to "avoir" and seeing if it changes the sense of the sentence (although that particular trick DOES mean you're proofing with mentally incorrect grammar).
Re:Have they ever heard of English as a 2nd langua (Score:3, Interesting)
Speaking of the article, what's with page breaks occurring in the middles of sentences? That's extremely bad style.
Re:Have they ever heard of English as a 2nd langua (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, I know that there's also that little 1|2|3 at the bottom of each page, but that broken sentence thing is there as an extra clue/incentive to make you click next to see how the sentence ends.
It's one of the many tricks of commercial copywriting that breaks the rules of proper english...
When corporate email goes bad (Score:3, Funny)
Erm, I'mma not sure if that was grammatically correct r not....
Holy crap! (Score:5, Funny)
God help us (Score:3, Insightful)
"If you want to indicate stronger emphasis, use all capital letters and toss in some extra exclamation points," Sherwood advises in her guide...
Personally I like the other person's suggestion that you should be allowed only two exclamation points in [your] whole life. I've seen SO MANY DAMN CAPS and exclamation points!!! that I WANT TO SHOOT SOMEONE!!!!!
--
Sounds like a scam, but it works. [wired.com]
Free Flat Screens [freeflatscreens.com] | Free iPod Photo [freephotoipods.com]
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d (Score:5, Funny)
Obligory quote (Score:5, Funny)
Problem is... (Score:3, Insightful)
Add to that the fact that most people are slow at typing, and their thoughts outrun their fingers and they forget to type some of those words. I see this every day in our online support desk requests.
People just need to take the time to read what they write in their correspondance, and most just don't.
I see this happen a lot with IMs... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I see this happen a lot with IMs... (Score:3, Interesting)
Then we agreed to switch to instant messaging. And we went along fine. His written English was great, while his spoken English was unbearable.
It's amazing what people put in their emails (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm always joking about how these people are represented by their emails. In fact you could modify a bad joke and make it worse:
"You might be a corporate idiot if..."
- You type all your emails in the MS Comic Sans font
- You sign your emails with a custom signature in some big, illegible font
- You don't know how to properly quote the email you're responding to
- You type your emails in a needlessly large font
- You type your emails in a very loud, needless color (Fucia anyone?!)
- You never learn how to spell, and you send out all your emails with 1st grade-level spelling errors
I could go on, but you get the picture. I SO wish that part of our performance appraisals would take into consideration how you present yourself in corporate communications. We have tons of people in executive positions who actually think that combining several of those items I've listed above is the best way to get their point across.And once you get a poorly worded email, written in Comic Sans font, colored hot pink, you have a lot less respect for the person who authored it, regardless of their role, or the content of the email. It's amazing to me that these peoples bosses don't see this the same way, but often they're equally guilty.
Glad to know we're not alone though!
One of my all time favourite e-mails... (Score:3, Funny)
Thaasnkas
thias ias not as joke
(name withheld)
Yes I did actually receive this from an employee (actually an manager) of a client that I provide tech support for (Though in his defense, he really had spilled water on his keyboard).
Huh? (Score:4, Funny)
Don't forget about typing skills... (Score:5, Insightful)
Spend some of that $3.1B on typing skills as well as language skills!
Drooling thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
"E-mail has just erupted like a weed, and instead of considering what to say when they write, people now just let thoughts drool out onto the screen," Hogan said. "It has companies at their wits' end.
Well I for one think this is cause it's just too easy to do so; as many slashdotters at one point or the other claimed they could "type faster then they can think", or certainly "type faster then writing a letter" (which requires some thought to compose, certainly if you're going to handwrite; it's a bit nono to scratch out your errors in formal mailing.)
If you're able to just open up a browser, your email-client, type your first thoughts out at 300chars/min, and hit send in a matter of seconds you don't have this process of thinking out what you want to say, or which message you want to bring across. (or make sure it's understandable what you're trying to bring over)
I catch myself as well at alot of 'stupid errors', while checkreading the next day what I wrote earlier. While I was pretty confident it was properly written.There should be a 2minute rule before hitting "send", to cure people having elliptic seizures on their keyboards while sending formal communication.
The nature of the medium.... (Score:3, Insightful)
In the past if you received a communication from a superior it would be either verbal or written. Written correspondence would take time and likely involve a proofreading by an administrative assistant.
Your response would also take time and go through a similar process.
E-mail allows instantaneous communication. I'm not sure how everyone else on Slashdot feels, but when I receive an e-mail I feel as if it requires my immediate attention. This is a radically different mental process than if I receive physically written correspondence. The extra time and reduction of immediacy ensures that my written correspondence is of a much higher quality than my e-mails.
The immediate nature of e-mail means that our superiors may be expecting an immediate response to their communication. You may simply not feel that you have the time to compose a well written response, and that a timely response is more important than a coherent one.
The audience certainly matters as well. If you are writing a report that will be physically distributed to many people you are more likely to take the necessary time to write a coherent response. Your response, especially if it is going to customers, reflects upon: you, your company, your division within that company, etc.
I do not see the same consideration when mass e-mails are sent out, be they within a specific organization or between various organizations.
These people, probably, know how to write. They just do not feel that they have the time to write properly. If they do not know how to write then the 'remedial' training suggested in the article may be appropriate. If the real issue is time and the culture surrounding e-mail communication, that sort of training is not only inappropriate but demeaning to those individuals.
This is the worst they can come up with? (Score:5, Insightful)
"I updated the Status report for the four discrepancies Lennie forward us via e-mail (they in Barry file).. to make sure my logic was correct It seems we provide Murray with incorrect information
The reason why that message seems so "incomprehensible" is not because of the poor writing but rather because we, the not-intended readers, do not have knowledge of the systems discussed in the email.
Actually the quote looks like it would be quite understandable if I knew
(1) what the status reports were,
(2) what the Barry file is
(3) who Murray is
(4) what "information" they provided
(5) the details of the technobable at the end of the email.
Clearly all of these are things the intended recipient would already know.
I could write an email about an advanced physics topic using perfect grammar and spelling and it would be no more comprehensible to the average reader than this email.
If that is the worst they can come up with than corporate America is in good shape.
Tolstoy?!? (Score:5, Funny)
From TFA: "It's not like we're trying to hire Tolstoy."
It's a damn good thing, too. The last thing corporate America needs is a 2000 page corporate org chart in which Alexei Sergeyevich has dotted line responsibility for Sergey Alexeyevich, and both of them are in love with Anya Lamentova (who is referred to half the time as Anyushka, making it look like these two are chasing different women so what's the problem?), and by the time Napoleon finally retreats from Moscow and Sergey Alexeyevich has recovered from the duel with Alexei (Sasha) Sergeyevich we haven't even come close to our quarterly projections and don't give a shit about any of it any more and spend our entire day checking the want ads.
It's nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
Ode to a Spell Checker (Score:5, Funny)
Someone other than me originally wrote this. My apologies to non-native English-speakers, as this is bound to do some brane damage to those that do their best to try to comprehend:
I have a spelling checker.
It came with my PC.
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot sea.
Eye ran this poem threw it,
Your sure reel glad two no.
Its vary polished in it's weigh,
My checker tolled me sew.
A checker is a bless sing,
It freeze yew lodes of thyme.
It helps me right awl stiles two reed,
And aides me when aye rime.
Each frays come posed up on my screen
Eye trussed to bee a joule.
The checker poured ore every word
To cheque sum spelling rule.
Be fore a vailing checkers
Hour spelling mite decline,
And if were lacks o'er have a laps,
We wood bee maid to wine.
Butt now bee cause my spelling
Is checked with such grate flare,
Their are know faults with in my cite,
Of nun aye am a wear.
Now spelling does knot phase me,
It does knot bring a tier.
My pay purrs awl due glad den
With wrapped words fare as hear.
To rite with care is quite a feet
Of witch won should be proud.
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew flaws are knot aloud.
Sow ewe can sea why aye dew prays
Such soft ware for pea seas,
And why I brake in two averse
When righting what aye pleas.
"New York Times" is guilty too (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not just corporate email. The "New York Times" now routinely spells "NASCAR" as "Nascar" as well as mangling other acronyms. I have written to them several times to find out what is going on but they haven't replied. I think it's the result of using MS Word which has a nasty tendency to downcase things.
Since we're on the subject, I'll bring up a related complaint: I think the program which checks your spelling is a "spelling checker" and not a "spell checker" (unless you're some sort of warlock or witch). I know, I need to relax and get used to it but it does bother me.
Politics and the English Language (Score:5, Informative)
The author George Orwell wrote an article about this in 1945; I find it a very interesting read, and probably even more relevant today. (It seems remarkably prescient in many respects.) It's called Politics and the English Language, but don't let the title put you off: it's not about politics per se, just about how writers (mis)use English in various types of writing, political and otherwise.
It's online in many places, for example here [k-1.com] and here [commnet.edu]. Well worth a read.
True story (Score:5, Interesting)
"hello, i am a freelance makeup artist who is also a film student. i have worked on many productions in the philadelphia area including film, video, commercial, print etc.. i would love to work on your project. give ma a call @ 267-nnn-nnnn. thank you
Christy McCabe"
My reply:
"Hello,
I appreciate your interest in Dangerous Movies. We're hip, we're independent and we're unconventional. We have no confidence, however, in people who do not know enough to use proper grammar in business correspondence. The rules for capitalization have not been repealed. And it's obvious you did not proofread your email before sending it out. If you're that careless in trying to get the gig, how careful are you going to be on the job?
I hope you accept this advice in the spirit in which it was given: not to put you down, but to educate you."
Her reply to my reply:
"you are a complete asshole. it is common knowledge that when sending an e mail, all rules of capitalization are thrown out the window. thank you for saving me from having to work on a shitty movie with a bunch of pompous assholes such as yourself. i hope your movie never makes any money.
fuck off."
I'm afraid Miss McCabe's attitude is not unusual among young people these days. She's not merely ignorant. She's indignant when someone is kind enough to try to help her out. Not to mention vulgar and hateful.
Sloppy English is a sign of disrespect: an example (Score:4, Interesting)
The background: I have a somewhat unusual background of an engineering education prior to entering medical school, and I've written on the Web a few articles for engineering students interested in pursuing medicine as a career. In these articles, I encourage readers to contact me with questions, and even though it has been a few years now, requests continue to come in regularly.
This is not the only email I've received that sounds like this:
> i read u r artical in information on medical.
> pl let me know in which college/universities is engineering along with medical is avialable like
> in university of western ontorio.so that if we dont get admission in medical we can continue in
> engineering.
> with engineering is good for females both monetary and job satisfation.
[name withheld]
My first thought was: "You gotta be kidding me." My reply:
--(start)--
You will not get into medical school.
Your sloppily written email to me reveals that you have failed to bother with any modicum of care in writing your request.
First, your English is bad. There are parts I still don't understand, such as "with engineering is good for females both monetary and job satisfation". What is that supposed to mean? Women will be attracted to you if you become an engineer?
While you might simply blame it on a lack of skill with English, it is clearly more than this. You make mistakes with something as straightforward as the name of the university. Who do you think you will impress with an essay entitled Why I Should Be Accepted To "university of western ontorio"? Are you not aware that the word "I" is capitalized in English? That "u r" is not a substitute for "you are"? (This in any case is incorrect usage, since it should be "your", not "you're" or "you are", and certainly not "u r".)
You've read my article on entering medicine, an article freely available to you that I posted at my own expense of time and effort. Having presumably benefitted from my free advice, you now seek further free advice from me. Can you not show me some basic respect by putting some thought into compsing your email? Can you not even be bothered to press the "Shift" key when you type the word "I"?
If all this is really due to ignorance, then you lack the basic learning capacity to function in medical school. If this is due to sloth, then all the worse --you may possibly have the potential, but you certainly haven't the attitude.
Please save yourself and others a great deal of effort by turning your endeavours to other fields. Thank you.
Even in answering your question, I've wasted more than you deserve. To compensate, I'm going to post your missive, and my reply, on the Web so that I will not be bothered by others like you.
--(end)--
Re:I'd be happy (Score:5, Funny)
No, it is not.
Re:I'd be happy (Score:5, Funny)
write their replies BELOW on the SIDE of
what they're quoting. what I am quoting, myself.
Top posting is just wrong. Side posting r00ls, w00t!!
Re:Not too suprising (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not too suprising (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not too suprising (Score:3, Insightful)
Trust me, I am British. "Yank Bashing" is something of a national sport since the empire fell apart
Bad email is not in any way an America only thing (neither are falling standards in education!). I have seen emails sent to customers which make me cringe. I know people for whom English is a 4th of 5th language who can compose better emails than some born and bred Brits.
A letter would be passed to a workmate to "have a quick look at", or typed by a secretary. Email is seen
Exactly. (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed, your own post is another example of time wasted due to poor writing skills. It was necessary for me to read your message two or three times in order to determine your meaning. A properly written post would not have required rereading. My time was further wasted by replying to your post with this chastizing comment. You now owe me $2.00
Re:Time to ditch the English Language? (Score:3, Informative)
Agreed. The thing that really gets me though is that some of the bastardizations are the fault of grammarians themselves.
For example, two of the main things that get grammar folks screaming are ending sentences in prepositions and splitting infinitives... these aren't even real problems. Hell, there not even the result of English's polyglot roots. A few jerks about a century ago decided that English should conform to t
Re:Time to ditch the English Language? (Score:3, Funny)