Vandals in Hot Water for 'Fixing' Typo on Historic Grand Canyon Sign (What the?)

Fox News ^ | 8-23-08 | AP

[Terriergal]

It’s a good thing she didn’t have any typos in her instructions on how to build the buildings...

[Terriergal]

It was’nt their sign to correct.

Well, it could be argued that it was, actually, since it was National Park Property.

What does emense mean?

I guess it doesn't matter, what since publick screwels don't actually teach proper grammar, spelling, phonix, or math anymore.

[Terriergal]

This is hugh! Series!

Yeah, I know! ;-)

[Terriergal]

On second thought, from now on i’ll make a lot of intentional ones just to tick uou off!!!!

Be my guest. I think it's funny how many people get their panties in a wad at the mere THOUGHT of being corrected.

I appreciate people drawing my typos to my attention, *especially* if it causes confusion.

And, let me reiterate, typos in colloquial writing (e.g. bantering back and forth, IRC, IM, or comments) -- are not such a big deal. Technical writing however should be correct and accurate.

It shows something about the pride one takes in their work. If we don't think this stuff is a big deal we may as well get rid of at least ONE of the "R's" in publick edyacayshun. Oh that's right, they are already working on that. "riting." "Rithmatic" is kind of on the chopping block too. Hey if I write/type 3 instead of 4 I can just say it was a typo...

[Terriergal]

It is the classic example of the “no life” no-it-alls who just can’t let an innocent type go.

In fact, I let them go all the time. I only notice them. And sympathize. That's all I really said.

But it is sloppy and reflects poorly on the individual who uses them (And as I have said several times now, colloqualism is different than technical writing).

But you do have a good point about the archaic spelling of emense. I looked it up and it is indeed an archaic spelling. I stand corrected on that one. And I appreciate you bringing it up!

[Terriergal]

I agree. You make some good points. And yeah they should have just kept their mouths shut. However I think the line about emense was hilarious.

Ideally they should have petitioned to have the sign changed, and in the process would have found out, as longtermmemory did prompt me here, that emense was an archaic spelling of 'immense.'

I am glad to see that emense was indeed spelled that way.

I am also amazed that a simple idiosyncracy on my part, which causes me to sympathize with the perps here, is so vilified and taken personally by people here who have *yet* to be corrected for any typos by me.

I certainly am not against, for example, Old English nor do I think Canterbury Tales and other official documents written before our time should be rewritten (Writings such as Canterbury Tales and Shakespeare's plays of course fall under the genre of art anyway and as such have much more leeway.) .

BUT it is telling also that in order to understand Canterbury Tales for those of us not brought up reading, writing, and speaking Old English we need a "Cliff's Notes" version in todayt's standard English in order to understand it. Certainly one or two archaic words allow you to figure out by context what the author means, but there comes a point where so many are used (such as in writings like Canterbury Tales, or some Shakespeare) that you must pretty much translate line by line to be able to understand it, at least until you are familiar with it.

Thinking out loud here:

Since we conservatives are all about having a standardized English language here, and about quality education, we ought to use the language correctly. Otherwise why not start putting in Spanish words here and there (after all everyone knows what some of the more common Spanish words mean, si amigo?)

Thanks for your post. :-)

[Terriergal]

In a sane world, someone would have shoved their entire stock of Sharpie pens up the anal orifices of these destructive smart asses. Let them figure out how to correct THAT.

Now, see, I fail to see how the offense of daring to correct someone's grammar (which I generally don't do, unless it causes confusion, whereupon I ask for clarification and actually often have APOLOGIZED for having to draw the author's attention to it,) is worthy of suggesting they deserve physical violence?

[Terriergal]

lol

comet baby wrote: How they love to be THE ONE to show others that they know better.

People take things so personally around here! Even BEFORE anyone says anything!

BTW your argument is of course, an ad hominem, and as such, is invalid.

But just for fun let's try reversing the logic:

"this compulsive hangup some people have about people who correct typos, and about those who want to encourage correct usage ... they cannot wait to correct people they see someone step out of line and draw attention to their social error. How they love to be THE ONE to show others that they know better."

[Terriergal]

Are road signs historical artifacts? I thought a sign was for informational purposes and the historical artifact would have been the tower itself?

But someone has already corrected me on the ‘emense’ thing. I only said I sympathized and that the story was strange. I cannot imagine it will cost $3k to fix the sign. Only in the government.

[Terriergal]

I disagree with you. Whenever I see incorrect parts of speech, bad grammar and misspelling of words, I feel it undermines the credibility of the poster.

You are right. Although I do try to focus on the actual content as much as possible.

It seems to me, though, that typos and misspellings in colloquial speech and writing, which is often used in posting, is not as big a deal. Much writing contains elements of other styles (for example a movie script will have much colloquial speech writing and the instructions will be technical writing which really shouldn't contain errors, ideally). And sometimes people will be bantering back and forth, which does not call for such conformation to standards. It helps though to try and stick close to them. Obviously there comes a point at which straying too far from the common use of language becomes a hindrance even in everyday language. In our everyday verbal speech we are anything but 'correct' in grammar and sentence structure (and obviously punctuation is irrelevant there). Just try to transcribe some speech, sermon, or TV interview sometime!

I know a lady who makes a lot of money doing medical transcription. Typos are a bad thing...you had better make sure you get it down right since it is going into the person's medical records! If there is any error it had better be that of the doctor whose voice you are transcribing.

And of course, different fields REQUIRE different levels of competence at this sort of thing. BUT it is good to strive for excellence and clarity in communication, even if a person's particular field does not require it.

We've all heard the ad for Verbal Advantage:

"People Judge You By The Words You Use.

Studies over many decades have proven that a strong command of the English vocabulary is directly linked to career advancement, to the money you make and even to social success.

To move ahead in your career, your business vocabulary level must at least equal the average level of the members of your profession. To excel, your vocabulary must surpass that of your colleagues.

Every day, people judge you by the words you use. Rightly or wrongly, they make assumptions about your intelligence, your education and your capabilities. Nothing makes a better impression than a solid mastery of the English language. Improve your vocabulary today with a vocabulary builder and start down the road to advancement.

[Terriergal]

And then we have "The Impotence of Proofreading" by Taylor Mali (warning, risque language) Brilliant and comic illustration of why proofreading is impotent.

:-) On a related note:

Verbicide

“Verbicide, the murder of a word, happens in many ways. Inflation is one of the commonest: those who taught us to say awfully for ‘very’, tremendous for ‘great’, sadism for ‘cruelty’, and unthinkable for ‘undesirable’ were verbicides. Another way is verbiage, by which I here mean the use of a word as a promise to pay which is never going to be kept. The use of significant as if it were an absolute, and with no intention of ever telling us what the thing is significant of, is an example. So is diametrically when it is used merely to put opposite into the superlative. …The greatest cause for verbicide is the fact that most people are obviously far more anxious to express their approval and disapproval of things than to describe them. Hence the tendency of words to become less descriptive and more evaluative; then to become evaluative, while still retaining some hint of the sort of goodness or badness implied; and to end up by being purely evaluative - useless synonyms for good or bad.”

Some of the comments there are pretty funny!

[Polybius]

Are road signs historical artifacts?

Some are.

Ancient Roman milestone

Some are not.

I thought a sign was for informational purposes and the historical artifact would have been the tower itself?

This particular sign was hand painted, at the historical time in question, by the famous architect herself. It is BOTH a historic artifact and for informational purposes.

Imagine finding in an attic the hand painted sign that John Augustus Roebling painted himself to place in front of his office at the time he was personally supervising the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge. It was originally only for information. But, with the passage of time and his fame, it would now be a historical artifact.

I only said I sympathized and that the story was strange. I cannot imagine it will cost $3k to fix the sign. Only in the government.

The sign cannot be "fixed".

It was once a historic artifact in original condition as the original artist painted it. It will now be a historical artifact that some vandals defaced, the original misplaced comma is now destroyed forever and the replacement comma is now merely a reproduction made to look like the original that was destroyed.

It will never again be as the artist made it.

Historical repair is a highly skilled craft and costs money.

What is objectionable in this case is the vandalism and how some people like these vandals have absolutely no respect for our nation's historical artifacts.

[river rat]

These clowns were not simply correcting someone’s grammar — they were DAMAGING PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY in their misguided belief that they were anointed to do so....

Often — I feel “anointed” to address the offensive actions of offensive characters.....
I guess some would call it a “character flaw”.....
I think of it as a public service....