its nice to see prime examples of taking exactly what you want to from a statement and not including the entire sentence. This is probably why you seem to bitch constantly about these things instead of making the effort to go beyond them.

Sorry I botherd.

You know, if everyone was telling me that I couldn't read, I might start to listen eventually.

Are you even reading what I am writing? I am not saying it is ok not to proof check your work and I have said multiple times now that I am not talking about spelling mistakes. I said specifically that not using the spell checker is unacceptable.

I am saying that for other grammatical problems it may not be a lack of attention to detail, but rather a poor understanding of the english language. And that no every job requires that you write very well. And it is unfortunate to eliminate qualified candidates based on that.

Chubby - the fact that you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there. When you call people "fags" (as you have repeatedly defended on this board), you say you don't see homophobia. When you call Noop/HFP racists because they think white America often screws over black America, you don't see your own racism. When you say that people who have trouble speaking English are situated the same as people with body odor, you don't see prejudice. Maybe you don't see it because you don't want to - not because it isn't there.

And Chubby - almost eveyone on this board disagrees with me (I'm used to that) - you are one of a very small number that seems incapable of having a discussion.

And yet not everyone can learn the language so that they have the same accent/grammar/pronounciation. I guess they should be blamed and try harder rather than actually encouraging tolerance. When people come to this country (or even grow up) speaking other languages or having different accents, we should welcome them, not tell them that they suck for being different.

And you use being a programmer as an example. You don't think that you need a good understanding of the english language to be a programmer???

We're not talking complicated language components, you used its instead of it's as an example. This is basic. Every job does require you to communicate well which is what you are trying to do through a resume. If you can't tell someone that "they are doing..." but tell them "their doing..." then you can't communicate on a high school level.

I can't say I disagree with this. Clearly you have to be able to manage the process and you have to weed out the candidates some how.

So I guess I would have to say that if you are doing it simply because otherwise the list of candidates is unmanagebale then it is still unfortunate, but somethign that probably can't be avoided. In the example that started this conversation though the question was would you be more inclined to listen to a person speaking proper english or in slang. So if we are talking about only two resumes and one deosn't use an ' correctly while the other one does, but everything else looks equal. I think it would be a shame not to talk to both of them.

Who can't learn the language? The people that are too lazy to be bothered?

I would like to say I am one of those you can not hold a discussion with and I am someone no one agrees with also.

Whenever the team I am on is looking for a new member, we have to inform the "recruitment specialists" that we do not want them to exclude anybody and to send us ALL resumes directly and let us make up our own minds. They balk. A VP has to sign off on our request. Inevitably, we still find out that the "recruitment specialists" discarded some for arbitrary reasons and have actually hired from that discard pile in the past. We do our best to prevent what you are talking about. It also demonstrates that, when your frontline resume-sorters (really, that is all they seem to be) know nothing about the jobs they are "recruiting" for, they will discard good candidates. Some teams/managers/companies want to get it right, but others just let the game play out and rob themselves of great talent.

Just try. Try to read. I've given many examples (of which I'm sure you will only reply to one and compare it to body odor): immigrants who are learning a second language, regional accents and dialects that are hard to shed, people who grew up in the US speaking different languages, and people who grew up in the US speaking a variation of English. I guess all the immigrants are "lazy?"

I said what HFP SAID was racist not that HE was racist, again RE READ John. Yet you talk about only wanting to see what I want to see supposedly. And Noop called me racist not the other way around, but again, believe what you want.

"When you call Noop/HFP racists because they think white America often screws over black America, you don't see your own racism."

Where the hell am I racist in that? Since a) I never said they were and b) I have said numerous times that it happens but I haven't seen it to the extent that noop claims. But w/e John, whatever you say is gold right?

As has been proven in other threads, I don't agree with you either. This is actually a first.

how many times do I have to say it? I'm not talking about accents, damn you are slow. FUCKING READ, seriously.

It IS acceptable for all people to be able to speak english in an acceptable manner. No where have I ever said "if they speak with an accent then I'd ignore them". Don't speak slang, don't speak another language then you turn around and say "not everyone can learn english". Yes they can, it might take them a while (for immigrants as an example) but they CAN learn it.

Calling someone's words racist and calling them a racist is a distinction without difference (unless the words are spoken as an accident). People are called racist based on their actions.

As for your racism, I'm not going to bother. You won't read it anyway.

In my humble, pointless, opinion, it seems it all boils down to this:

Everyone have to make their own way in life, the way they best see fit. Nothing is going to be handed to you, and you aren't entitled to have everything you want. If you aren't happy with your situation, you have to stop, take stock of the situation, and see what needs to change. Maybe it's behavior (or behaviour for our UK friends), language, location, approach, mindset, whatever. If you are happy with your situation and the way things are progressing, then keep on keepin' on. It's your own responsibility to make your way, not the responsibility or fault of anyone else.

you see, this is the whole point, of course there are those who simply don't have the aptitude or abiility to get to that higher level, but those people are the VAST minority.

This whole discussion isn't about the extremes, its about the mainstream, and right now the mainstream in this country seems to be the chant "We don't want to try harder so you have to accept us and treat us equally with those that do"

and that, I say, is horse shit.

If I have to hire someone for a position, ANY position, and my top three candidates come in for interviews, ALL else being equal, I'm going to hire the candidate I can understand and communicate with the easiest, because THAT is whts best for my company.

Is that racist? prejudiced? bigoted? no, thats common sense. I will tolerate almost anything in my personal activities, but when it comes to a work situation, take your "jive" and "street lingo" and stuff it womewhere dark and quiet, because it won't be acceptable in relating to co workers or customers.

The wisdom of the Afoci (when not crawfish related) is strong. I'm going to listen to him and VPI97 on this one.

Ok... who wants Jell-O?

No I don't believe you do need to be able to write well to be a good programmer. And I know several very good programmers who consistently make the mistakes we are talking about here in e-mails to me. They are all college graduates, but for whatever reason consistently use the wrong to or the wrong their. However they are excellent coders.


I agree with you that we are not talking about very complicated rules. At the same time that still doesn't make someone a poor programmer. It makes them a poor writer. I am in no way saying that it wouldn't benefit everyone to both be excellent writers and speak proper english. I am however saying that I have seen people who have had "perfect" resumes get jobs over more qualified people for silly little mistakes and the company was worse off because of it.

Ok John. If your are defining stupid people as a race then I guess I'm guilty as charged. Otherwise w/e. You won't bother because you have no basis in fact.

It may be a distinction without difference to YOU but not to me. Ooops, everything must be based around what you believe, sorry...

Considering the Thread title, it has to be a Jell-O Pudding Pop.

Only if it's a pudding pop!

This one seemed to slip through unnoticed, and I'm curious why you differentiate between the two. Perhaps a different thread would be in order, but I'm interested in your reasoning.

Dear god no!

Am I the only one who sees a difference between the following:
accents v. slang(dialect)
immigrant v. natural born citizen
person attending english class all their live v. immigrant/naturalized immigrant.

Heck I can drive down the street and see signs in Spanish all over down here anyways. We do not have an "official" language, but in the business world for the most part English is implied.

Technically 95% of us do not speak proper English. I type it much better than I talk it.

I believe you are one of the few as am I. Particulary on the 1st item.

I think precisely for the reasons stated here about resumes. It is much easier to work hard in preparing written work and using "proper English" in a resume than it is to adapt in spoken English. I think people should be expected to be correct in grammar and spelling when they have time to edit and check. Unfortunately, our brains can't do that when it comes to spoken English.

Yes. Even though I am the one using them interchangably, I think there are important differences. Still, I think at the core, discrimination on any of them is dangerous (with the exception of use of words in improper settings).

Accents are distinct from dialects but they typically go hand in hand. Exceptions are generally those who speak the language as a second language--and thus learn the "proper" language, but still speak it with an accent (of their native tongue).

You mean like when you say you can define "fag" as being not offensive and ignore EVERYONE who is offended by the use of the term?

How was calling Noop/HFP's words "racist" calling them "stupid?" How can anyone be called "racist" if it isn't based on their words and actions?

OK. Side note, but I'm curious to the difference y'all see between an "accent" and "dialect" (and perhaps it is just semantics...)

Where is your evidence for this assertion? Are the millions of people in NYC who speak with accents that are hard for many to understand lazy or stupid?

Instead of just outright calling "bullshit" on this, I think we should take up a collection and send you to spend the summer with Sky Dog.:D

I think it is mostly semantics, but I think a dialect has different words whereas an accent has different pronounciations. I'm not sure where things like "ya'll" fall.

I'd say there is a huge difference between accent and slang. I think a discerning person would be able to pick that out.

So are you lazy or stupid? ;)

Note who you are talking to when you said that.

It depends on what you call "slang." Is "ya'll" slang - in NYC it is. Is "axe" slang - in Iowa it is. Is saying "like" every other word slang - in some parts of California it may not be. I've never defended the use of four letter words or inappropriate language in certain settings (like work), but I'm not sure all "slang" is unacceptable in those settings.

That being said, I think there is a difference between accent and slang, but I think language discrimination on either can be troublesome (with the caveats I made above).

It's y'all!!!

I'd classify "y'all", "mamanem", "dadgum", etc. as colloquialisms, fwiw.

My Yankee roots show. :p

Well, I generally use the two interchangeably, though that may not be the correct usage. I usually use "dialect" as a particular manner of speaking, not necessarily as slang. Perhaps we just use different meanings of the word. I can see how dialect would fit in with slang, although I feel slang is completely different from accents.

Although I will agree accents and dialect go hand and hand.

Can we ask the people who do not want to speak correct English which word does not seem to fit in with the rest?

Accents are just that. How we say the words we do. A southerner and a midwesterner will pronounce the word bag or greasy two different ways, but the words still have the same meanings.

Dialects are broader and include localized words and/or meanings of words (as well as the accent). Off the top of my head, a southerner referring to pulled pork as barbecue is one example (that may be a bad example, but I think foods are often cases where we see differences).

It is often hard to separate the two, because accent plays a big part in dialect. The one example I can think of, which I gave previously, is someone who becomes fluent in a second language through formal education. An American who learns to speak French at a school in Paris will likely speak with an American accent, but not an American dialect.

Does this make sense at all?

According to linguists (may or not be cunning, I don't have 1st hand knowledge), a dialect is a regional variation in pronunciation by a mother-tongue speaker, and an accent is pronunciation in a language other than mother-tongue.

Grammar and spelling defined by whom?

Jesus

Completely.

There I would say conventional English books on style and form (although I'm not as tight on some rules as someone like QS).