|
|
Post by jean on Jan 9, 2010 17:40:05 GMT
All pupils at her school had to do a language (as well as English) up to Standard Grade level (the old O Grade level). The normal French was on offer, as well as Urdu (which seemed a bit unfair, as the kids who took Urdu all spoke Urdu at home, so it wasn't exactly the same as an English-speaking kid doing French, was it?) and Latin was the 3rd choice. Uberteen being Uberteen took Latin. She is now learning Chinese as her 'arts' subject at Uni. She did 3 sciences at Higher and is now studying Chemical Engineering, but they make all the first years do an arts subject as well as all the chemistry and maths to stop them being complete geeks. She's great at languages. Picks them up really quickly. But she feels her real strengths lie in the maths/chemistry/physics kind of world. Good for her, indeed! Latin is quite taxing and (though it's unfashionable to say this sort of thing these days) it's a good training in logical thinking. We found when I was teaching that universities were quite impressed by a bit of Classics, and we once had a girl accepted by medical school with Ancient Greek as one of her A-levels. (It's never too late, trubble. My rates are very reasonable.) |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 9, 2010 18:13:20 GMT
(It's never too late, trubble. My rates are very reasonable.) Trubble. Take tutela. Is est a raptor. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 9, 2010 18:20:58 GMT
Hope you meant in the financial sense, riot. (Not that it's true even then.)
But I'm not an 'is', I'm an 'ea'!
|
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Jan 9, 2010 18:52:10 GMT
Mediæval Finnish? Or perhaps Classical Sauchiehallian? We MUST be told! |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 9, 2010 19:10:13 GMT
Hope you meant in the financial sense, riot. (Not that it's true even then.) But I'm not an 'is', I'm an 'ea'! Hey, that's the online translation for 'be careful. She is a thief'. Don't hold me responsible for mistakes on online translation places. |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 9, 2010 20:24:48 GMT
Mediæval Finnish? Or perhaps Classical Sauchiehallian? We MUST be told! Ssshh weyland - we teachers know that we must not discourage people when they are making an effort.Anyway I understood what riot was trying to say, though I was a bit worried about raptor because it means ravisher as well as thief, and I didn't like being masculine. |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 9, 2010 20:50:59 GMT
Mediæval Finnish? Or perhaps Classical Sauchiehallian? We MUST be told! Ssshh weyland - we teachers know that we must not discourage people when they are making an effort.Anyway I understood what riot was trying to say, though I was a bit worried about raptor because it means ravisher as well as thief, and I didn't like being masculine. Are you saying - you cheeky bitch - that Trubs is not ravishing? |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 9, 2010 21:28:27 GMT
No - I am saying that if she trusts me, she will not be ravished.
|
|
|
|
Post by everso on Jan 10, 2010 0:21:12 GMT
This is getting to complicated for me.
My brain hurts.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 10, 2010 11:05:54 GMT
'...For I
Except you bind me, never shall be free,
Nor ever chaste, except you ravish me.'
(John Donne)
Who(m) was he talking to?
(The answer isn't Nick.)
|
|
|
|
Post by NickCosmoSonde on Jan 11, 2010 12:23:45 GMT
I haven't fallen out with Ms X in the slightest. I simply refuse to waste my time and patience trying to correct her grammatico-philosophical confusion any further. It's eerily reminiscent of trying to educate the Toad.  Just in case you're wondering what I modified, Jean, I added the smiley - just in case you were grammatico-philosophically confused. |
|
|
|
Post by everso on Jan 11, 2010 12:29:01 GMT
What is all this unfluffy talk about toads? And another thing: I don't think we usually correct each other's grammar and spelling on this board (unless it's to make a joke). That way leads to all sorts of arguments and unpleasantness - and you have to be so careful in case someone catches you out. |
|
|
|
Post by NickCosmoSonde on Jan 11, 2010 13:33:41 GMT
Quite so, quite so, everso, ever so.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 11, 2010 13:40:11 GMT
I I simply refuse to waste my time and patience trying to correct her grammatico-philosophical confusion any further. It's eerily reminiscent of trying to educate the Toad. That's exactly what I said to you, Nick ( the Toad-parallel has been obvious to me for some time, though of course it's not me that's ranically challenged.) |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 11, 2010 13:43:28 GMT
...you have to be so careful in case someone catches you out. Unfortunately, Nick wasn't careful enough, and that's exactly what happened - and he's been regretting it ever since (though he could never bring himself to admit it.) |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 11, 2010 13:43:30 GMT
So I'm at my GP surgery today - as per - waiting to get my new sick line (another 4 weeks off) and bored, so am reading the posters in the waiting room.
(This is to do with grammatico-philosophical confusion.)
Proudly stuck to the wall is a certificate from no less than the Director of Public Health for the Greater Glasgow NHS Area (or whatever it's called), issued to my GP surgery to mark "it's commitment" to and "it's encouragement of" breastfeeding.
We let these people cut us up and give us drugs, and they can't use apostrophes?
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jan 11, 2010 14:22:49 GMT
We let these people cut us up and give us drugs, and they can't use apostrophes? I'm guessing here, but is it possible that the employee who can't manage apostrophes is not the one who's going to cut you up? |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 11, 2010 14:25:16 GMT
We let these people cut us up and give us drugs, and they can't use apostrophes? I'm guessing here, but is it possible that the employee who can't manage apostrophes is not the one who's going to cut you up? One would hope not. But there is a point about corporacy here. If you have a PR Department unable to use apostrophes properly, it doesn't foster trust in the other parts of the organisation. It makes the organisation look sloppy, careless, poorly educated, whatever . . . (We all make spelling and grammar mistakes, which is why when we are writing professionally for a public audience we use colleagues to check and proof written material surely? It's basic.) |
|
|
|
Post by everso on Jan 11, 2010 14:35:48 GMT
I'm guessing here, but is it possible that the employee who can't manage apostrophes is not the one who's going to cut you up? One would hope not. But there is a point about corporacy here. If you have a PR Department unable to use apostrophes properly, it doesn't foster trust in the other parts of the organisation. It makes the organisation look sloppy, careless, poorly educated, whatever . . . (We all make spelling and grammar mistakes, which is why when we are writing professionally for a public audience we use colleagues to check and proof written material surely? It's basic.) Absolutely! I'm only averse to criticising board members' grammar and spelling. In the business world I'm all for it! As you say, bad grammar makes an organisation look sloppy etc. and unprofessional. |
|
|
|
Post by motorist on Jan 11, 2010 15:08:42 GMT
One would hope not. But there is a point about corporacy here. If you have a PR Department unable to use apostrophes properly, it doesn't foster trust in the other parts of the organisation. It makes the organisation look sloppy, careless, poorly educated, whatever . . . (We all make spelling and grammar mistakes, which is why when we are writing professionally for a public audience we use colleagues to check and proof written material surely? It's basic.) Absolutely! I'm only averse to criticising board members' grammar and spelling. In the business world I'm all for it! As you say, bad grammar makes an organisation look sloppy etc. and unprofessional. I only ever bring it up if the post I am looking at is really incomprehensible. I couldn't give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut about the odd typo |
|
)