From skrause@emich.edu Thu Jan 9 13:26:50 2003
From: skrause@emich.edu (Steven D. Krause)
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 08:26:50 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Welcome to the mailing list!
Message-ID: <02D82753-23D6-11D7-A15B-000393090C40@emich.edu>
Hey everyone--
If you're getting this message, then that means you have successfully
subscribed to the class mailing list. To send messages to the list
about the readings or what-have-you, send a message to
eng328a@list.emich.edu Or, easier still, reply to this message, change
the subject line to whatever you think is more appropriate for your
message, and then start typing away.
See you Tuesday night!
--Steve
Steven D. Krause
Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature
614 G Pray-Harrold Hall * Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, MI 48197 * http://krause.emich.edu
From aholland2@emich.edu Mon Jan 13 02:51:36 2003
From: aholland2@emich.edu (Ann B Holland)
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 21:51:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] discussion for 1/14
Message-ID: <2960884.1042426296587.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
I guess I'm starting this discussion thing...I read both "Writing Is a
Technology that Restructures Thought" and "From Pencils to Pixels" and
I liked the second article much better. I became distracted in the Ong
article by the many references to "oral cultures." Instead of focusing
on what Ong could tell me about technology and literature, I was
preocupied with the methods of those studying the "oral cultures" used
in the article to provide stark contrast to our "literate culture."
Maybe I've had too many sociology classes, but I wonder if cultural
factors also have a hand in determining how people use language and
knowledge. Anyway, I felt the second article was much more effective in
helping me understand how technology and written language have been
intertwined for hundreds of years. I certainly agree that computers are
quickly becoming as commonplace and indispensible as a pencil is...in
our literate culture.
-Abby Holland
From Dmyshock@aol.com Mon Jan 13 06:16:41 2003
From: Dmyshock@aol.com (Dmyshock@aol.com)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 01:16:41 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Re: Eng328a digest, Vol 1 #1 - 1 msg
Message-ID: <482919B8.49792079.00722A92@aol.com>
In a message dated 1/9/2003 12:00:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, eng328a-request@list.emich.edu writes:
This is David Majchrzak, in the Tuesday night class. I wanted to respond to the two articles assigned last Tuesday night.
The first article written by Walter Ong entitled "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought" was researched and presented very well, with all of the bases covered in his research into the pros and cons of writing and literacy. Ong seems to have used a Rogerian type argument, which was effective at capturing the readers attention by stating the negative effects of written language and technologies in general. The opening few paragraphs helps the reader realize that writing and literacy is not a natural human atribute and is taken for granted in most societies throughout the world.
There are many references to Plato and his disdain for the written word as it prevents humans from cultivating their mind and from having to remeber information. Ong's disagreement with Plato's ideas on written language become more evident throughout the remaining article, and to Ong's credit, seems to be well thought out and logical.
The bulk of the article describes ways in which written language separates and divides human interaction, which in itself has pro's and con's as he continues on. Language not only separates humans mentally, and emotionally, but physically as well when using computers and the newer technologies where direct human interaction is not necessesary anymore. It seemed to be a very well thought out article explaining the significance of the written word in all of its forms and the benefits which outweigh any negatives. It dad drag on a bit during the 14 points he made about written language and separation, but good non the less and quite inormative on the subject.
~~~The final article assigned, by Dennis Barron, entitled "From Pencils to Pixels" was also a very good articles and in many ways was presented in a much more clear format with a clear thesis that was laid out clearly as well.
Basically computer literacy is the next step in a series of writing technologies that developed many thousands of years ago, and although technically superior to a pencil, the computer is as basic of a writing tool as pencils are.
Barron states that any new technology used for writing or communication is usually met with doubt and fears by the general public for a variety of reasons, but are accepted slowly until the point where they become subliminal or automatic parts of our lives.
It was interesting to note that many teachers around the turn of the 20th century did not enjoy or endorse the invention of having an eraser on the end of pencils as it would allow studnet productivity and accuracy to diminish because of the ability to erase any mistakes. New technologies are usually questioned at first, until the practical applications of the product are valued as an important part of society. Pens and pencils, the telephone, the telegraph machine, and printing press to name a few, were other technologies that were once termed impractical by many, but became as important to society as e-mail is today.
This was a great article, and hopefully helps some of the critics of electronic writing and new communications, to realize that new technologies are not only helpful, but will retain the human attributes and qualities that so many fear will be lost in the latest technologies.
From dhorchem@emich.edu Mon Jan 13 03:51:06 2003
From: dhorchem@emich.edu (David E Horchem)
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 22:51:06 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Walter Ong's...
Message-ID: <1878155.1042429866348.JavaMail.dhorchem@emich.edu>
Walter Ong's "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought" made
me think more about writing then I ever have before. I've always
thought of the symbols we use to make words as just the means to
express our thoughts. Its amazing to me the things Ong writes. One of
the most interesting things to me was his mention of the illiterate. I
never would have thought much more of the term than to mean those who
can't read. I never would have thought of the word in terms of those
who belong to cultures that pass knowledge orally.
From skrause@emich.edu Mon Jan 13 13:46:16 2003
From: skrause@emich.edu (Steven D. Krause)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 08:46:16 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Say... Where is everyone?
Message-ID: <634006C2-26FD-11D7-B2E8-000393090C40@emich.edu>
Hey folks--
Don't forget that y'all need to make a couple of posts before Tuesday
night's class about the readings! Simply send an email to this
address. If you want, you can simply reply to this message, change the
subject to something more appropriate, and give your reading response.
--Steve
Steven D. Krause
Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature
614 G Pray-Harrold Hall * Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, MI 48197 * http://krause.emich.edu
From wpower@emich.edu Mon Jan 13 04:42:38 2003
From: wpower@emich.edu (Walter J Power)
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 23:42:38 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Does this work??
Message-ID: <5418069.1042432958292.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Im posting this message, hopefully it works....email and let me know
Walt
From rshirk@emich.edu Mon Jan 13 22:22:19 2003
From: rshirk@emich.edu (Rebecca J Shirk)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 17:22:19 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Eng 328 mailing list
Message-ID: <1729530.1042496539823.JavaMail.rshirk@emich.edu>
This message is to confirm my place on the Eng 328 mailing list
From our_decision@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 00:30:03 2003
From: our_decision@yahoo.com (Sarah C)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:30:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technologies
Message-ID: <20030114003003.78171.qmail@web40903.mail.yahoo.com>
Discussing Baron: "From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages
of Literacy Technologies"
This is probably the best written argument for
technological advancement that I have read. Finally
there is someone who doesn’t believe that the cold,
heartless computer is going to be the demise of the
human race and he argues why rationally. I like how
Baron doesn’t segregate his audience. He obviously
believes that advancing technology is a good thing,
but he doesn’t come out and say that those who don’t
agree with him are morons.
It’s interesting to see all of the research that was
done to write this piece. Judging by Baron’s voice,
most of the research was probably done on the
internet. For the reader who isn’t in favor of
technology it is a chronological wake-up call on the
advancement of technology from 10,000-year-old Syrian
carvings to Thoreau and pencil obsession. For the
reader who is in line with the changing times, it is a
nice history lesson.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From michellewisher@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 00:37:43 2003
From: michellewisher@yahoo.com (Michelle Wisher)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:37:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] response to readings before 1/14/03 class
Message-ID: <20030114003743.75449.qmail@web14810.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-991480238-1042504663=:74699
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
"Writing is a Technology that Reconstructs Thought", by Walter J. Ong, caused me to conside writing in a way that I had never done before. When sitting in my living room and reading the second paragraph on page 37 wherein oral communication and written communication were being compared, I was both irritated and interested. My initial irritation stemmed from the feeling that I was once again reading for the philosophy class which I took approximately one year ago which ended up being one of the most difficult classes that I have ever taken. However, once I got past my initial reaction and actually began to think about what was being communicated, I was rather intrigued. Interesting to me was the discussion of the use of the word "nevertheless" to explain the difference between writing a word and saying it. Most interesting was the point that the sounded word "nevertheless" could never be present all at once as written words deceptively seem to be. I also had never really considered writing a technology, though I guess have always been aware that it is one. This essay allowed for a better understanding of the philisophical side of writing. Writing was initially criticized by some for various reasons, among them Socrates fear that writing would destroy the memory. This essay put across the point that writing not only actually enhances the memory, but separates the "known from the knower" thereby raising awareness.
"From Pencils to Pixels", by Dennis Baron offered a different explanation for how writing has advanced and influenced technology. This was more technology based explanation for the development of writing and why it is important, discussing the humanists' ideas of technologies along with explaining how writing and technology have evolved. It was quite interesting to consider that one of the first technologies in writing was the pencil and that the making of the pencil, which was met with pessimism by many, has evolved to the computer. It is true that most technologies that are initially met with skepticism eventually come to be considered every-day parts of our lives.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-991480238-1042504663=:74699
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
"Writing is a Technology that Reconstructs Thought", by Walter J. Ong, caused me to conside writing in a way that I had never done before. When sitting in my living room and reading the second paragraph on page 37 wherein oral communication and written communication were being compared, I was both irritated and interested. My initial irritation stemmed from the feeling that I was once again reading for the philosophy class which I took approximately one year ago which ended up being one of the most difficult classes that I have ever taken. However, once I got past my initial reaction and actually began to think about what was being communicated, I was rather intrigued. Interesting to me was the discussion of the use of the word "nevertheless" to explain the difference between writing a word and saying it. Most interesting was the point that the sounded word "nevertheless" could never be present all at once as written words deceptively seem to be. I also had never really considered writing a technology, though I guess have always been aware that it is one. This essay allowed for a better understanding of the philisophical side of writing. Writing was initially criticized by some for various reasons, among them Socrates fear that writing would destroy the memory. This essay put across the point that writing not only actually enhances the memory, but separates the "known from the knower" thereby raising awareness.
"From Pencils to Pixels", by Dennis Baron offered a different explanation for how writing has advanced and influenced technology. This was more technology based explanation for the development of writing and why it is important, discussing the humanists' ideas of technologies along with explaining how writing and technology have evolved. It was quite interesting to consider that one of the first technologies in writing was the pencil and that the making of the pencil, which was met with pessimism by many, has evolved to the computer. It is true that most technologies that are initially met with skepticism eventually come to be considered every-day parts of our lives.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-991480238-1042504663=:74699--
From rshirk@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 00:40:06 2003
From: rshirk@emich.edu (Rebecca J Shirk)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 19:40:06 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Ong and Baron
Message-ID: <6498934.1042504806307.JavaMail.rshirk@emich.edu>
I found both Ong and Baron's pieces on the development of technology
very interesting. Theyre both very different from anything Ive read
before on this topic. I found Baron's description of the development
of the pencil a bit easier to follow. However, the references to
historical events in each essay were interesting and helpful.
Comparing Plato and Thoreau to those who fear technology today helps
convey their point of computer science as the natural progression of
human thought and interest.
Ong makes a very distinct statement about technology, that it "can
enrich teh human psyche, enlarge human spirit, set it free, intensify
its interior life." I dont believe Ive ever heard technology used to
describe the development of the human spirit. If technology is the
natural progression of human thought maybe one day we will hold
computing as sacred as we do writing and writers.
From birdiegirlmags@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 01:33:18 2003
From: birdiegirlmags@yahoo.com (Maggie K)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 17:33:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Posting for Week 2
Message-ID: <20030114013318.37037.qmail@web14808.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-263941954-1042507998=:36927
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I haven't received any messages from anyone in the group, so I'm not sure if the system isn't working or if it's just my email account. Maybe I am wrong, but I thought we were to email each other some thoughts on this weeks readings? Well here is mine, if I am wrong - please delete with my apologies.
I found the article by Ong to be extremely interesting in that it made me think of my parents talking about how things were in "their day". I think that writing is indeed something we take for granted having lived with written communication our entire lives. I really enjoyed the comparison of computers to writing, and how people today react to computers. A lot of people hate them, but then they depend on them as well. The other discussion in the article I enjoyed was the part about knowledge not being passed by communication but rather by the reader taking that into his/her subconcious. At first I didn't agree with the statement, but then thought about how we can listen to a lecture and not really acquire any knowledge, or listen to someone give driving directions and two minutes later find ourselves completely lost. I think this article really breaks writing down into a primitive level as a simple tool. The analogy in the article was of the instruments in an orchestra as an example of high technology - the working together of the different parts to make a whole. Writing can be seen from this perspective in the symbols (letters) which build to form words and then sentences. While I thought the article was a little more dry than the one by Baron, it really made me think about how writing can be broken down into very basic pieces, and the reactions to new technologies throughout the ages really made sense when comparing them to the computer age today.
The Baron article points to literacy and the new technologies and how they develop. Again, in the computer age it's easy to understand why in the past others were opposed to writing tools and later typewriters. The slow introduction of these items and then the cost play major roles, but this article really says that a technology must make life easier, be affordable and trustworthy. I like how this article addressed the issues of fraud, and how even in the Middle Ages people accepted written word as truth even though fraud existed. I never knew that writing developed as a way to keep books and not as a record of thoughts and events. The one point that I agreed with is how the written word doesn't come with non-verbal communication. Reading does not give inflection and tone. While some could read this email as an energetic burst of creative thought, others may view it as just another boring opinion they've been emailed. My emotion behind my words is not portrayed. I think this is the major disadvantage to writing, and one of the major problems I think faces us in a computer-dominated society where it's faster/easier/cheaper to email than have face-to-face communication. I still believe that face-to-face is the best method of most communication encounters. The article did a great job of explaining the history of the pencil through the telephone age and finally to computers. As far as literacy goes, the article never really answers the question of how the computer age will alter literacy, but leaves that as a question to be answered in generations to come.
Maggie Koller
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-263941954-1042507998=:36927
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I haven't received any messages from anyone in the group, so I'm not sure if the system isn't working or if it's just my email account. Maybe I am wrong, but I thought we were to email each other some thoughts on this weeks readings? Well here is mine, if I am wrong - please delete with my apologies.
I found the article by Ong to be extremely interesting in that it made me think of my parents talking about how things were in "their day". I think that writing is indeed something we take for granted having lived with written communication our entire lives. I really enjoyed the comparison of computers to writing, and how people today react to computers. A lot of people hate them, but then they depend on them as well. The other discussion in the article I enjoyed was the part about knowledge not being passed by communication but rather by the reader taking that into his/her subconcious. At first I didn't agree with the statement, but then thought about how we can listen to a lecture and not really acquire any knowledge, or listen to someone give driving directions and two minutes later find ourselves completely lost. I think this article really breaks writing down into a primitive level as a simple tool. The analogy in the article was of the instruments in an orchestra as an example of high technology - the working together of the different parts to make a whole. Writing can be seen from this perspective in the symbols (letters) which build to form words and then sentences. While I thought the article was a little more dry than the one by Baron, it really made me think about how writing can be broken down into very basic pieces, and the reactions to new technologies throughout the ages really made sense when comparing them to the computer age today.
The Baron article points to literacy and the new technologies and how they develop. Again, in the computer age it's easy to understand why in the past others were opposed to writing tools and later typewriters. The slow introduction of these items and then the cost play major roles, but this article really says that a technology must make life easier, be affordable and trustworthy. I like how this article addressed the issues of fraud, and how even in the Middle Ages people accepted written word as truth even though fraud existed. I never knew that writing developed as a way to keep books and not as a record of thoughts and events. The one point that I agreed with is how the written word doesn't come with non-verbal communication. Reading does not give inflection and tone. While some could read this email as an energetic burst of creative thought, others may view it as just another boring opinion they've been emailed. My emotion behind my words is not portrayed. I think this is the major disadvantage to writing, and one of the major problems I think faces us in a computer-dominated society where it's faster/easier/cheaper to email than have face-to-face communication. I still believe that face-to-face is the best method of most communication encounters. The article did a great job of explaining the history of the pencil through the telephone age and finally to computers. As far as literacy goes, the article never really answers the question of how the computer age will alter literacy, but leaves that as a question to be answered in generations to come.
Maggie Koller
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-263941954-1042507998=:36927--
From wpower@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 02:33:58 2003
From: wpower@emich.edu (Walter J Power)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:33:58 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Test
Message-ID: <3392801.1042511638922.JavaMail.wpower@emich.edu>
Does tyhis work???hopefully it does
Walt
From Dmyshock@aol.com Tue Jan 14 02:47:29 2003
From: Dmyshock@aol.com (Dmyshock@aol.com)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:47:29 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Ong and Barron Readings
Message-ID: <494C6B44.15D6A115.00722A92@aol.com>
--I wanted to post one more message about the readings for Tuesday night.
I wanted to point out that I thought Ong's article was very good with alot of information, but seemed to lack a consistency that kept the reading interesting. Like I mentioned before, the reading dragged on to me during his 14 reasons why written language separates humans in a variety of ways. Ong tried to form his thesis around proving Plato's remarks as unaccurate concerning writing. I guess he took particular offense to Plato's remarks.
I liked the topic of Barron's article, and was more interested in the point he was trying to make, in that new technologies always pick up flack from the general populace until people give it a chance. Keep your mind open to new technologies and new ideas, as they will most likely be commonplace down the road.
Thanks--
David Majchrzak
From sschramm@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 04:34:56 2003
From: sschramm@emich.edu (Scott D Schramm)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 23:34:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Writing and Pencils to Pixels
Message-ID: <5682482.1042518896049.JavaMail.sschramm@emich.edu>
You know I forgot to ask in class how long our messages are supposed to
be. I'll go out on a limb and just write as much as I can think about.
After all I can add more later. :-)
>From the first night of class up till now I don't think many realize
the implications of writing. After all writing isn't something that we
are born knowing how to do. Everyone on the planet is born with the
capacity for speech. The earliest writing in Sumeria was used to
record inventories, crop intakes, taxes etc. To keep records and in
that moment we began to use writing to communicate and record mankinds
history on our planet.
Prior to the advent of writing communication was completely oral. In
Africa it is the reponsiblity of the "griot" (storyteller) to pass on
the history and tradtions of his people. There was no such thing as
writing then. The assertion that writing destroys memory is not one
that I personally agree with.
I have never really thought of writing as a technology before. Yet, I
have to agree that it is. I remember not too long ago when nobody knew
what "surfing the net" meant. Now the idea of not having a computer is
almost unheard of. I remember using the really OLD computers in the
basement of Goddard Hall. The ironic thing was that back then those
computers were new and email was something just created.
The age of computers has forever altered (I think) the way that we view
literacy. When I was in school we didn't have any word processors. I
used my grandmothers old typewriter to do my work for school. Back
then I could still turn in a research paper handwritten. If I was to
do that today I'd likely not be in school.
As a historian,scholar and a future educator I can appreciate the
concerns that people have with technology. Already I believe that we
are dependant upon computers. I know that we take them for granted. I
will be teaching writing, and history when I finish up next year. I
have to say that I don't know what my students would do if they had to
spell things without a spell checker. Likewise we have software that
checks for grammar errors now. I confess to using both but I know that
neither one of these applications are perfect.
Knowing the pros and cons of technology I've got a responsiblity to my
students. That responsibility is sharing that information with them.
I'm signing off now...
See everyone in class tommorow.
Scott
From nprintz@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 04:54:52 2003
From: nprintz@emich.edu (Nicole E Printz)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 23:54:52 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reading Response to Ong and Baron
Message-ID: <7567866.1042520092512.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Both of the writers take into account that writing in itself is a
technology that has become so engrained in society it is looked at as a
natural process. They show how there has been initial resistance to
written technologies, but there is eventually advancement in these
fields, leading to a more complicated and integrated society. Ong
writes that "interpretation is always in play when one listens or when
one reads". Although he does realize this, little is mentioned about
the complexities of interpersonal, spoken communication. Spoken
language is obviously a technology, but the authors of the essays seem
to hold it superior to the written word because it is a more basic
necessity. Something needs to be said of the problems that arise
during one-on-one speech. Expectations need to be met during
interpersonal communications, and many people can better express
themselves with the written word. With all of the emerging forms of
communication, there are countless ways to learn from and make contact
with others. Everyone should utilize the tools they need, because all
forms of writing promote communication.
From skrause@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 12:11:29 2003
From: skrause@emich.edu (Steven D. Krause)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:11:29 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Anybody want to speak up?
Message-ID: <502B1FD3-27B9-11D7-BC79-000393090C40@emich.edu>
Hi folks--
I know there are plenty of you subscribed to this mailing list-- I just
checked-- but things have been pretty quiet. So, what's the scoop?
To post a message to the list (so it will go out to everyone else
subscribed to the list), send a message to eng328a@list.emich.edu or
simply "reply" to this message, change the subject line to something
more appropriate, and send.
I'm sure we'll talk about this more tonight, but soon I am also sure
people will get the hang of it.
--Steve
Steven D. Krause
Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature
614 G Pray-Harrold Hall * Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, MI 48197 * http://krause.emich.edu
From skrause@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 12:41:58 2003
From: skrause@emich.edu (Steven D. Krause)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:41:58 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Ignore this message
Message-ID: <9239EF9B-27BD-11D7-BC79-000393090C40@emich.edu>
Just a test of things...
Steven D. Krause
Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature
614 G Pray-Harrold Hall * Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, MI 48197 * http://krause.emich.edu
From californiadreamin212@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 16:37:17 2003
From: californiadreamin212@yahoo.com (Marissa Johnson)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:37:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Re: Abby Holland's message
Message-ID: <20030114163717.25822.qmail@web41003.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-1687989384-1042562237=:25525
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I agree with Abby's interpretation of the Ong reading. She said that she was preoccupied with the methods of those studying "oral cultures" vs. our own "literate culture." What was particularly interesting to me was section 12 on page 41 where he's talking about the amount of vocabulary in oral/written languages. He claims standard English has a "vocabulary of perhaps a million and a half words, as compared with the relatively few thousand words available in dialects without written resources" (41). In regard to Abby's message I thought this section was just a small example of the extent Ong goes to in order to show the differences between oral and written languages.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1687989384-1042562237=:25525
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I agree with Abby's interpretation of the Ong reading. She said that she was preoccupied with the methods of those studying "oral cultures" vs. our own "literate culture." What was particularly interesting to me was section 12 on page 41 where he's talking about the amount of vocabulary in oral/written languages. He claims standard English has a "vocabulary of perhaps a million and a half words, as compared with the relatively few thousand words available in dialects without written resources" (41). In regard to Abby's message I thought this section was just a small example of the extent Ong goes to in order to show the differences between oral and written languages.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1687989384-1042562237=:25525--
From californiadreamin212@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 16:44:41 2003
From: californiadreamin212@yahoo.com (Marissa Johnson)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:44:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Ong
Message-ID: <20030114164441.30720.qmail@web41011.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-1954321665-1042562681=:28543
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I read both assignments but wanted to focus on Ong's essay. I find his writing style extemely tedious, but found the part about musical instruments interesting. He claims "technologies are artificial, but...artificiality is natural to human beings" (39). Then he compares writing to playing an instrument. I think this is a very effective comparison; two things that seem so unnatural to a human, almost instinctively become second nature. Playing the piano and writing both utilize something other than the human body, and both envelop this foreign "thing" like it isn't foreign at all. And isn't that, once you step back and think about it, the wonder of writing?
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1954321665-1042562681=:28543
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I read both assignments but wanted to focus on Ong's essay. I find his writing style extemely tedious, but found the part about musical instruments interesting. He claims "technologies are artificial, but...artificiality is natural to human beings" (39). Then he compares writing to playing an instrument. I think this is a very effective comparison; two things that seem so unnatural to a human, almost instinctively become second nature. Playing the piano and writing both utilize something other than the human body, and both envelop this foreign "thing" like it isn't foreign at all. And isn't that, once you step back and think about it, the wonder of writing?
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1954321665-1042562681=:28543--
From Dmyshock@aol.com Tue Jan 14 17:56:26 2003
From: Dmyshock@aol.com (Dmyshock@aol.com)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 12:56:26 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reading Response to Ong and Baron
Message-ID: <4252D0AF.35DB7E6D.00722A92@aol.com>
I agree with Nicole's observation that the two articles failed to mention that spoken and verbal communication is a learned technology that we take for granted, even more, than written communication.
Children can not learn a a meaningful language without the proper training, observation, and examples that are usually supplied during the early years of life. Why can't children learn a language innately? Because it is an artificial activity that gives meanings to specific sounds. So basically, almost any creative human attribute you can thhink of is considered artificial in nature. So why the big fuss over written communication?
David Majchrzak
From michellewisher@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 19:05:07 2003
From: michellewisher@yahoo.com (Michelle Wisher)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:05:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] In response to Abby Holland's posting
Message-ID: <20030114190507.90565.qmail@web14812.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-814162213-1042571107=:89953
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Well, I now have 18 messages in my email from the message list and it appears that everyone was as confused as we were as to why we had no emails. Anyhow, in response to your posting, I think that you and I sort of share the same opinion with regard to these two articles. I too enjoyed the "From Pencisl to Pixels" article much more than the "Writing is a Technology" article. I think that both did make their specific points incorporating the idea that writing is one of the most primitive of technologies. It was interesting to consider that something as advanced as the computer has ultimately stemmed from a piece of lead and some wood used to create the pencil. The Ong article did, however, make me think back to my Native American Lit class from last semester and the endless time that we spent discussing the "oral culture" of the Indian people and I could understand why some held oral communication sacred. The Ong article also caused me to reflect upon a philosophy class that I took about a year ago wherein it discussed the idea that some initially feared that writing would cause us to forget how to think. Anyhow, the second article was more straight forward and gave, in my opinion, a more solid understanding of the relationship of writing to technology and how our society has developed.
Michelle Wisher
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-814162213-1042571107=:89953
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Well, I now have 18 messages in my email from the message list and it appears that everyone was as confused as we were as to why we had no emails. Anyhow, in response to your posting, I think that you and I sort of share the same opinion with regard to these two articles. I too enjoyed the "From Pencisl to Pixels" article much more than the "Writing is a Technology" article. I think that both did make their specific points incorporating the idea that writing is one of the most primitive of technologies. It was interesting to consider that something as advanced as the computer has ultimately stemmed from a piece of lead and some wood used to create the pencil. The Ong article did, however, make me think back to my Native American Lit class from last semester and the endless time that we spent discussing the "oral culture" of the Indian people and I could understand why some held oral communication sacred. The Ong article also caused me to reflect upon a philosophy class that I took about a year ago wherein it discussed the idea that some initially feared that writing would cause us to forget how to think. Anyhow, the second article was more straight forward and gave, in my opinion, a more solid understanding of the relationship of writing to technology and how our society has developed.
Michelle Wisher
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-814162213-1042571107=:89953--
From sschramm@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 19:18:23 2003
From: sschramm@emich.edu (Scott D Schramm)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:18:23 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Fwd: Re: [Eng328 Sec. 5] discussion for 1/14
Message-ID: <843892.1042571903290.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
------=_Part_423_2805603.1042571840004
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Scott D Schramm wrote:
>I just wanted to drop a quick note and say that I agree with Abby about
>the articles. The second one was a much easier read for me than the
>first. In the first article I found that I had to put it down and read
>more later on. It wasn't really something that I could read all the
>way in one sitting.
>
>The second one by Baron I was really able to get into much more. I'm
>probably not the oldest student in the class but I remember when we
>didn't have the advantages we didn't have now. I really did use my
>grandmas typewriter to do my papers on. I remember when VCRs were
>new...the ones that were top loaders! I grew up listening to 8tracks!
>
>I guess that whole point to this is that I have seen a lot of changes
>in a short space of time. I feel that people get nervous about the
>advances mankind is making because we haven't had time to get used to
>things we have right now. It won't be long before we never have to
>type again. I'm willing to bet someone will create a word processing
>program where we will just be dictating what we want the paper to say.
>
>Scott
>
>
>Ann B Holland wrote:
>
>
>>I guess I'm starting this discussion thing...I read both "Writing Is a
>>Technology that Restructures Thought" and "From Pencils to Pixels" and
>>I liked the second article much better. I became distracted in the Ong
>>article by the many references to "oral cultures." Instead of focusing
>>on what Ong could tell me about technology and literature, I was
>>preocupied with the methods of those studying the "oral cultures" used
>>in the article to provide stark contrast to our "literate culture."
>>Maybe I've had too many sociology classes, but I wonder if cultural
>>factors also have a hand in determining how people use language and
>>knowledge. Anyway, I felt the second article was much more effective in
>>helping me understand how technology and written language have been
>>intertwined for hundreds of years. I certainly agree that computers are
>>quickly becoming as commonplace and indispensible as a pencil is...in
>>our literate culture.
>>-Abby Holland
>>_______________________________________________
>>Eng328a mailing list
>>Eng328a@list.emich.edu
>>http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
>>
------=_Part_423_2805603.1042571840004
Content-Type: message/rfc822; name=forward.cpm
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=forward.cpm
Message-ID: <6235674.1042562312331.JavaMail.sschramm@emich.edu>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:38:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Scott D Schramm
To: Ann B Holland
Subject: Re: [Eng328 Sec. 5] discussion for 1/14
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I just wanted to drop a quick note and say that I agree with Abby about
the articles. The second one was a much easier read for me than the
first. In the first article I found that I had to put it down and read
more later on. It wasn't really something that I could read all the
way in one sitting.
The second one by Baron I was really able to get into much more. I'm
probably not the oldest student in the class but I remember when we
didn't have the advantages we didn't have now. I really did use my
grandmas typewriter to do my papers on. I remember when VCRs were
new...the ones that were top loaders! I grew up listening to 8tracks!
I guess that whole point to this is that I have seen a lot of changes
in a short space of time. I feel that people get nervous about the
advances mankind is making because we haven't had time to get used to
things we have right now. It won't be long before we never have to
type again. I'm willing to bet someone will create a word processing
program where we will just be dictating what we want the paper to say.
Scott
Ann B Holland wrote:
>I guess I'm starting this discussion thing...I read both "Writing Is a
>Technology that Restructures Thought" and "From Pencils to Pixels" and
>I liked the second article much better. I became distracted in the Ong
>article by the many references to "oral cultures." Instead of focusing
>on what Ong could tell me about technology and literature, I was
>preocupied with the methods of those studying the "oral cultures" used
>in the article to provide stark contrast to our "literate culture."
>Maybe I've had too many sociology classes, but I wonder if cultural
>factors also have a hand in determining how people use language and
>knowledge. Anyway, I felt the second article was much more effective in
>helping me understand how technology and written language have been
>intertwined for hundreds of years. I certainly agree that computers are
>quickly becoming as commonplace and indispensible as a pencil is...in
>our literate culture.
>-Abby Holland
>_______________________________________________
>Eng328a mailing list
>Eng328a@list.emich.edu
>http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
>
------=_Part_423_2805603.1042571840004--
From sschramm@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 19:31:53 2003
From: sschramm@emich.edu (Scott D Schramm)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:31:53 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Ignore the attachment
Message-ID: <2257078.1042572713271.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
I don't know how I managed to send an attachment. I checked there's
nothing there so pay it not mind.
Scott
From marnittah@excite.com Tue Jan 14 19:45:58 2003
From: marnittah@excite.com (Marnitta Harris)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:45:58 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] (no subject)
Message-ID: <20030114194558.708BEBFA0@xmxpita.excite.com>
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__fb59fa3871e5124ee69095ae8c9b61b1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I read both the articles and I think I may have enjoyed the Ong article the most. He incorporated a lot of history and by doing that he allows the reader to understand the changes that have taken place during time. He mentions how oral tradition did not use to be a tradition, it was simply how things were. When writing came to be they were afraid, the same way people were afraid when computers came to be. The Baron article is similar in the way that he explains how things were before computers. The examples I enjoyed the most were those that had to do with education. At first teachers didn't allow use of erasers, now if one isn't used that is unacceptable. At first spellcheck was only known to the professors, now if it is not used everyone can tell. Technology has changed quite a bit over time. Baron say it "as the old technologies become automatic and invisible, we find ourselves more concerned with fighting or embracing what's new." Our society has done it repeatedly and I am sure we will continue to do it with each new technology that comes our way. -Marnitta
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__fb59fa3871e5124ee69095ae8c9b61b1
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I read both the articles and I think I may have enjoyed the Ong article the most. He incorporated a lot of history and by doing that he allows the reader to understand the changes that have taken place during time. He mentions how oral tradition did not use to be a tradition, it was simply how things were. When writing came to be they were afraid, the same way people were afraid when computers came to be. The Baron article is similar in the way that he explains how things were before computers. The examples I enjoyed the most were those that had to do with education. At first teachers didn't allow use of erasers, now if one isn't used that is unacceptable. At first spellcheck was only known to the professors, now if it is not used everyone can tell. Technology has changed quite a bit over time. Baron say it "as the old technologies become automatic and invisible, we find ourselves more concerned with fighting or embracing what's new." Our society has done it repeatedly and I am sure we will continue to do it with each new technology that comes our way.
-Marnitta
|
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__fb59fa3871e5124ee69095ae8c9b61b1--
From marnittah@excite.com Tue Jan 14 19:59:56 2003
From: marnittah@excite.com (Marnitta Harris)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:59:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reply to Sarah
Message-ID: <20030114195956.14CE7BF6D@xmxpita.excite.com>
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__1d8f9fc9991732b5c1a76a7bd5fa2973
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I agree with Sarah on the advancement of technology in relation to the human spirit. It is interesting how Ong was able to compare the two and illustrate the connection that the two have to each other. Just as oral speaking was how the wise were distinguished from those who were not, writers are looked upon as some of the most wise in our current society. Agreeing with Sarah again, maybe one day computers will be as sacred as books are now.
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__1d8f9fc9991732b5c1a76a7bd5fa2973
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I agree with Sarah on the advancement of technology in relation to the human spirit. It is interesting how Ong was able to compare the two and illustrate the connection that the two have to each other. Just as oral speaking was how the wise were distinguished from those who were not, writers are looked upon as some of the most wise in our current society. Agreeing with Sarah again, maybe one day computers will be as sacred as books are now.
|
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__1d8f9fc9991732b5c1a76a7bd5fa2973--
From lmyersjr@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 21:37:24 2003
From: lmyersjr@emich.edu (LeRoy E Myers Jr)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:37:24 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] 1st Readings
Message-ID: <2756866.1042580244044.JavaMail.lmyersjr@emich.edu>
I found the Ong reading much less appealing than the section by Baron.
Ong's philosophy of linguistics seems to reinforce old ideas about
cultural superiority. While he makes several interesting points, I
found his continual reference to the inferiority of primarily oral
cultures to be highly distracting. I'm also unclear as to why he
sidetracked from his central focus on the impact of writing on the
processes of human thought to point out that women are largely
associated with, perhaps responsible for, the move away from "high"
languages such as Latin to "low" vernacular languages.
As ever, it is not necessarily what you say but how you say it. By
associating the concepts of high, male and classical and aligning them
opposite to low, common and female, he manages to give his text a
slightly misogynistic flavor. Baron's writing delivers a message as
equally powerful but without the canonical air of superiority.
In either case, writing is a technology so important and commonplace
that it can feel as natural to human expression as the process of
speaking. What these readings make more than clear is that this
impression is simply not true. Writing technology, therefore, is
something worthy of closer scrutiny than most of us have ever thought.
From our_decision@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 21:45:48 2003
From: our_decision@yahoo.com (Sarah C)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 13:45:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Pencils to Pixels
Message-ID: <20030114214548.71456.qmail@web40905.mail.yahoo.com>
I had a much better response written, but I neglected
to save it (lapse of sanity), so here goes my 2 hours
before class comments. I thought it was interesting
how Baron kept his audience all-inclusive. He spoke
to the technology “believers” and gave a neat history
lesson on the advancement of technology. And for the
non-believers, he used the technology timeline to
explain why we need technological advancement.
Technology can be a scary thing at first, but if we
want a better society we better jump on the bus, or
get left behind. I think Baron did a great job of
explaining why advancement makes sense.
As for Ong… human thesaurus. That’s all I can say
about that.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From our_decision@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 21:52:10 2003
From: our_decision@yahoo.com (Sarah C)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 13:52:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Response to Marissa
Message-ID: <20030114215210.33235.qmail@web40903.mail.yahoo.com>
Marissa hit the nail on the head with Ong. His
writing style is ridiculously hard to read, but he had
some interesting things to say. You just had to wade
through all of the obnoxiousness to find it. His part
about musical instruments was fascinating. Looking
back through that piece, I found that is also the only
part where he drops his 15 letter words and just
flows. Perhaps that is why that part stuck out in my
mind too.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From our_decision@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 21:59:11 2003
From: our_decision@yahoo.com (Sarah C)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 13:59:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Ok, what's going on
Message-ID: <20030114215911.34732.qmail@web40903.mail.yahoo.com>
Well, this has been crazy. I'm getting 20 messages a
minute now. It wasn't working three hours ago, and
now I'm getting the same postings 10 times over. Even
the message I sent out yesterday, that wasn't here 25
minutes ago, has just appeared, AFTER I wrote a new
response. UGH! Oh well, I assume it will get better.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From etreece@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 22:58:00 2003
From: etreece@emich.edu (Erin C Treece)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 17:58:00 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy
Technologies
Message-ID: <4115289.1042585080485.JavaMail.etreece@emich.edu>
I agree, Baron offers a great argument. In particular, I liked the
part about Thoreau and the pencil; I never thought about a pencil as a
form of technology. I agree that "technology", especially in reference
to writing, includes anything manmade whatsoever, even a pencil. I
think Bill Henderson should take that into consideration.
Sarah C wrote:
>Discussing Baron: "From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages
>of Literacy Technologies"
>
>This is probably the best written argument for
>technological advancement that I have read. Finally
>there is someone who doesn?t believe that the cold,
>heartless computer is going to be the demise of the
>human race and he argues why rationally. I like how
>Baron doesn?t segregate his audience. He obviously
>believes that advancing technology is a good thing,
>but he doesn?t come out and say that those who don?t
>agree with him are morons.
>
>It?s interesting to see all of the research that was
>done to write this piece. Judging by Baron?s voice,
>most of the research was probably done on the
>internet. For the reader who isn?t in favor of
>technology it is a chronological wake-up call on the
>advancement of technology from 10,000-year-old Syrian
>carvings to Thoreau and pencil obsession. For the
>reader who is in line with the changing times, it is a
>nice history lesson.
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
>http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>Eng328a mailing list
>Eng328a@list.emich.edu
>http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
>
From etreece@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 23:10:13 2003
From: etreece@emich.edu (Erin C Treece)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:10:13 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Pencils to Pixels
Message-ID: <7473962.1042585813350.JavaMail.etreece@emich.edu>
Don't feel bad, it is now 6 pm on Tuesday and I have only just now
figured out how to do this. Sometimes I hate computers, which relates
to my post:
I really loved Baron's essay. As someone who has a slight computer
phobia, I don't even have the internet at home. In the past 2 years,
college education is really being taken over by computer technology,
and I don't think that's a bad thing. As Baron writes, writing itself
is a form of technology, and as humans advance, it is only logical that
writing technology will advance as well. As an Enlgish major, I do
love the printed word, and I love having books around me. But I also
realize communication with the world I live in is just as important,
and technology is a tool we can use to keep in touch with the world.
Like Baron, I am unsure how computer technology and the web will affect
literature and the written word in the future, but as a future teacher,
I see it as an important tool for both the classroom and personal life.
There is no way to escape technology, so we may as well embrace it and
conform it to our own needs.
Sarah C wrote:
>I had a much better response written, but I neglected
>to save it (lapse of sanity), so here goes my 2 hours
>before class comments. I thought it was interesting
>how Baron kept his audience all-inclusive. He spoke
>to the technology ?believers? and gave a neat history
>lesson on the advancement of technology. And for the
>non-believers, he used the technology timeline to
>explain why we need technological advancement.
>Technology can be a scary thing at first, but if we
>want a better society we better jump on the bus, or
>get left behind. I think Baron did a great job of
>explaining why advancement makes sense.
>
>As for Ong? human thesaurus. That?s all I can say
>about that.
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
>http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>Eng328a mailing list
>Eng328a@list.emich.edu
>http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
>
From kkurze_swc@yahoo.com Tue Jan 14 23:19:45 2003
From: kkurze_swc@yahoo.com (Kristen Kurze)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:19:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Response to W. Ong
Message-ID: <20030114231945.56073.qmail@web20802.mail.yahoo.com>
I have a friend that is disgusted by digital cameras.
She is a photographer, and is appalled by the
misconception that a photo is intended to record a
moment. To her (and most photographers) photography
is the study of light and shadows. Digital cameras
record pixels, they record moments, but they ignore
the depth of the light and the shadows. To me,
someone who interprets photography a bit more detached
(as a casual observer) I don't understand what the big
deal is. Sure, you can manipulate photos manually in
the darkroom and the detail may be more intricate, but
with a computer you can purely capture a moment, or if
you want, manipulate the pixels in a thousand
different ways and produce something that is totally
different than the original "moment". You can also
immediatly observe the photo, to see if the "moment"
was capture or if it's really just a big smudge of
color. You can transport the image in mere seconds,
as opposed to film that can take hours to develop and
print. The quality may not be as high as with a
manual camera, but digital cameras open up so many
more doors.
Although seemingly unrelated, this debate is very
similar to the questions Ong brings up in his piece,
whether or not writing is a technology, and how a
literate society differs from a oral/illiterate one.
Just as some higher levels of thinking (such as
philosophy) didn't come into exhistance until written
text (p. 28), thousands of ways to manipulate images
that we rely on for advertising, illustration, etc.
would not have been possible without digital cameras.
(Oops! This is incomplete! I ran out of time.)
Kristen Kurze
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From smorrow@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 23:39:34 2003
From: smorrow@emich.edu (Sean W Morrow)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:39:34 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Ong and Baron articles
Message-ID: <3841523.1042587574962.JavaMail.smorrow@emich.edu>
Upon reading both of these pieces, I have come to a few conclusions.
The Ong piece relys heavily on writing as this environmental
predisposition. While I would agree that wrting is a technology as
well as a convention there is one thing that the Ong article does not
account for. The humanistic or artisic, if there is a differnce
between the two, is not discussed in either article. While writing
itself may be a technology that we all employ because we are exposed to
it, each of us as individual human beings has enumerous syntactic
capabilities within us. We have the ability to create within writing.
From aschucker@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 23:49:52 2003
From: aschucker@emich.edu (Ann E Schucker)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:49:52 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] (no subject)
Message-ID: <5168260.1042588192560.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
I think that Ong made some excellent points about the relationship
between the written word and the more oral form of communication. He
touched on some points and ideas that I had never before been asked to
think about. This proves the point that Ong is making. Writing has
become so natural to us that we are unable to understand or comprehend
other forms of language and communication. The fact that I had never
even thought about this other type of culture proves how foreign it is
to us all. I think that it is true that we as a society are scared of
this more foreign way of thinking because of our need to "pin down"
ideas and to give each thing a sound meaning. I found it interesting
that the one thing we use to show literacy, that is writing, was
considered shameful and unnatural in Platos time. I fear that books may
befall the same fate as the oral tradition did as technology becomes
more advanced.
From smorrow@emich.edu Tue Jan 14 23:50:01 2003
From: smorrow@emich.edu (Sean W Morrow)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:50:01 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] response to Kristen kurze
Message-ID: <6244838.1042588201824.JavaMail.smorrow@emich.edu>
I would have to agree to what Kristen's friend said about photography
and I can make a similar analogy with music. There is mixing software
out there called Pro tools, which allows people to record and produce
music. This technology allows people to play a segment of a song and
then copy and loop it until a full song is in tact. Vocal notes that
are off key can be altered, as well as the timing of the instruments.
In this case one doesn't have to aquire any talent what so ever to make
a perfected piece of music. It lacks humanity. However I do agree
with "writing" for the sake of "writing" as being a technology.
Computers and word processors make it easier for us to "write" they
don't produce our thoughts or alter what we are writing like pro tools
does to music
From aholland2@emich.edu Wed Jan 15 04:10:59 2003
From: aholland2@emich.edu (Ann B Holland)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:10:59 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Posting for Week 2
Message-ID: <5672672.1042603859134.JavaMail.aholland2@emich.edu>
I agree with Maggie's comment that written language does not have the
advantage of non-verbal communication and intonation. Of course, like
we discussed in class tonight, this forces writers to be articulate and
thoughtful, which is a good thing. But face-to-face communication is
often essential when you want to convey strong emotions, foster a
strong connection with another person, or 'read' another who is not
verbally articulate.
-Abby Holland
P.S. Sorry this posting is late, I haven't checked my e-mail since this
morning.
Maggie K wrote:
>
>I haven't received any messages from anyone in the group, so I'm not
sure if the system isn't working or if it's just my email account.
Maybe I am wrong, but I thought we were to email each other some
thoughts on this weeks readings? Well here is mine, if I am wrong -
please delete with my apologies.
>
>I found the article by Ong to be extremely interesting in that it made
me think of my parents talking about how things were in "their day". I
think that writing is indeed something we take for granted having lived
with written communication our entire lives. I really enjoyed the
comparison of computers to writing, and how people today react to
computers. A lot of people hate them, but then they depend on them as
well. The other discussion in the article I enjoyed was the part about
knowledge not being passed by communication but rather by the reader
taking that into his/her subconcious. At first I didn't agree with the
statement, but then thought about how we can listen to a lecture and
not really acquire any knowledge, or listen to someone give driving
directions and two minutes later find ourselves completely lost. I
think this article really breaks writing down into a primitive level as
a simple tool. The analogy in the article was of the instruments in an
orchestr!
>a as an example of high technology - the working together of the
different parts to make a whole. Writing can be seen from this
perspective in the symbols (letters) which build to form words and then
sentences. While I thought the article was a little more dry than the
one by Baron, it really made me think about how writing can be broken
down into very basic pieces, and the reactions to new technologies
throughout the ages really made sense when comparing them to the
computer age today.
>
>The Baron article points to literacy and the new technologies and how
they develop. Again, in the computer age it's easy to understand why
in the past others were opposed to writing tools and later typewriters.
The slow introduction of these items and then the cost play major
roles, but this article really says that a technology must make life
easier, be affordable and trustworthy. I like how this article
addressed the issues of fraud, and how even in the Middle Ages people
accepted written word as truth even though fraud existed. I never knew
that writing developed as a way to keep books and not as a record of
thoughts and events. The one point that I agreed with is how the
written word doesn't come with non-verbal communication. Reading does
not give inflection and tone. While some could read this email as an
energetic burst of creative thought, others may view it as just another
boring opinion they've been emailed. My emotion behind my words is not
portrayed. I th!
>ink this is the major disadvantage to writing, and one of the major
problems I think faces us in a computer-dominated society where it's
faster/easier/cheaper to email than have face-to-face communication. I
still believe that face-to-face is the best method of most
communication encounters. The article did a great job of explaining
the history of the pencil through the telephone age and finally to
computers. As far as literacy goes, the article never really answers
the question of how the computer age will alter literacy, but leaves
that as a question to be answered in generations to come.
>
>Maggie Koller
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
From birdiegirlmags@yahoo.com Wed Jan 15 19:44:02 2003
From: birdiegirlmags@yahoo.com (Maggie K)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:44:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reply to Leroy's Post Ong/Baron
Message-ID: <20030115194402.13589.qmail@web14811.mail.yahoo.com>
While I respect this point of view, I will have to
disagree with the statement that Ong's article
reinforces cultural superiority. I think that Ong was
trying to simply discuss differences with his intended
audience. By pointing out differences, I don't think
he is classifying anyone as lower or higher than
another group. They are just different. I don't think
he is saying that oral cultures are inferior, but
rather different in the method in which they pass on
communication (ie verbally vs written). I believe his
intent was to simply give a historical perspective on
developments in communication and to make us think in
new ways and to respect other cultures that don't use
written communication. By thinking about how
"nevertheless" looks/sounds to someone in an oral
culture vs. a written one, it opens us up to a whole
new world of thought. I think that this actually
enforces cultural education by showing me how others
might view something that I take as a standard in my
life.
I really enjoyed reading all of these responses. As
always, it's enjoyable to see how differently we all
interpret the same readings.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From npolifron@emich.edu Thu Jan 16 03:27:19 2003
From: npolifron@emich.edu (Nicholas S Polifroni)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 22:27:19 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Late Late Late
Message-ID: <3045277.1042687639861.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Well, I'm not too sure what to write about the two readings
assigned the other day. I read a few of the other responses people
wrote, but that didn't really tell me too much. Some of the things Ong
had to say about people who don't use a written vocabulary were pretty
interesting, the fact that they imagine sounds instead of letters when
they hear words. I'd never really heard or read anything quite like
that before. In fact, I can't even conceive hearing a word and not
thinking of how it were spelled, that just seems really left field to
me. It was the most interesting part of the article in my opinion. On
the other hand, all the references to Plato and philosophy i didn't
really get into as much. I've never read Plato, I failed
existentialism, I'm an art major...what more can I say. Since I'm not
as familiar with a lot of that I think it was just going over my head,
plus I was caught up in the whole idea of how words sound after reading
the whole "nevertheless" part of the article. I was getting really
caught up on words that sounded interesting after that, and all of the
little italicized Latin references.
One last thing about Ong, I was extremely hung up on the quote;
"...knowledge cannot be physically transferred verbally from one human
person to another but must always be created by the hearer or reader
within his or her own consciousness.." That was great, I always thought
you learned things by playing cassette tapes to your self while you
sleeping (sorry).
Now the other essay, From Pencils to Pixels, that gets my
business. I enjoyed that one a lot more. It was interesting with all
the comparisons between pencils, and telegraphs, and Thoreau, and so on
(and so forth). The whole idea of history in repetition is an idea I'm
a little more familiar with than any of the ideas of Plato. It was also
kinda funny how Thoreau's father was one of the guys who perfected the
pencil, yet Thoreau wanted to boycott the whole telegraph and
typewriter revolution it seemed. Maybe when Thoreau wrote the book
about Walden, it was really some sort of pathetic attempt at an ad
campaign for Thoreau Pencils. Perhaps in the near future people will
move to remote islands to escape from the internet. A lot of people who
come into my work hate the idea of computers and internet. It's kinda
funny sometimes, because I work in the photo department at Meijer, and
we have that stupid picture machine that they have at all those types
of stores now. It's usually elderly people who come up to the counter,
and they seem to think since I'm young and I work there, I must be some
sort of computer genius or something. Half of them don't know the
machines are computers, I love it when they say; "I don't understand
this damn thing, I don't know about computers either." Sorry, you throw
a computer in a kiosk and suddenly it's futuristic robot or something.
Anyway, I'd keep talking but it's pointless, I just really enjoyed the
whole thing about how people get mad about new technology. They fear
change or something, once you hit a certain age it seems like you
decide you don't need to learn anything anymore. I hope I die before I
become closed minded about advancement of idea's. Hopefully someone
will make a connection with what I am trying to say about Baron's
essay, but I have to go....my mom's talking and I can't concentrate.
n i ck
From lmyersjr@emich.edu Mon Jan 20 19:12:42 2003
From: lmyersjr@emich.edu (LeRoy E Myers Jr)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:12:42 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reply to Leroy's Post Ong/Baron
Message-ID: <6227183.1043089962096.JavaMail.lmyersjr@emich.edu>
I do agree with Maggie about his intent. However, I think that certain
stylistic qualities and points suggest some things about Ong?s
worldview that should not be overlooked. The use of the words high and
low regarding language and the sexes were there. In addition, I would
like others to consider the following quote:
?Comparisons like this are really not doable. People who make them do
not realize that the notion of what a "word" is is quite variable among
languages and indeed it is not even clear that all languages have
words. By most definitions of word, Eskimo has infinitely many words
so Eskimos know more "words" than anybody else whose language does not
generate infinitely many words.?
The quote can be found on the Linguist List here at Eastern
(http://linguistlist.org/~ask-ling/archive-most-recent/msg05449.html).
It was posted by Joseph F Foster, Ph D
Associate Professor of Anthropology
Director of Undergraduate Studies
Dept of Anthropology
U of Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0380 USA
This quote is in response to a question regarding working vocabularies
of English speakers but I think it illustrates my point about Ong?s
assertions and, when combined with other ?facts? from the reading,
gives a good indication that Ong is writing from a specific view of
cultural superiority. In my linguistics classes it was drilled into my
head that there is no such thing as a ?primitive? language. English may
have as many words as Ong indicates but to suggest that oral cultures
are limited to a few thousand is misleading. Again, Ong makes several
valid points but this reading still strikes me as offensive.
Ed Myers
Maggie K wrote:
>While I respect this point of view, I will have to
>disagree with the statement that Ong's article
>reinforces cultural superiority. I think that Ong was
>trying to simply discuss differences with his intended
>audience. By pointing out differences, I don't think
>he is classifying anyone as lower or higher than
>another group. They are just different. I don't think
>he is saying that oral cultures are inferior, but
>rather different in the method in which they pass on
>communication (ie verbally vs written). I believe his
>intent was to simply give a historical perspective on
>developments in communication and to make us think in
>new ways and to respect other cultures that don't use
>written communication. By thinking about how
>"nevertheless" looks/sounds to someone in an oral
>culture vs. a written one, it opens us up to a whole
>new world of thought. I think that this actually
>enforces cultural education by showing me how others
>might view something that I take as a standard in my
>life.
>
>I really enjoyed reading all of these responses. As
>always, it's enjoyable to see how differently we all
>interpret the same readings.
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
>http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>Eng328a mailing list
>Eng328a@list.emich.edu
>http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
>
From skrause@emich.edu Mon Jan 20 21:36:10 2003
From: skrause@emich.edu (Steven D. Krause)
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:36:10 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] READ ME! Slight Schedule Change
In-Reply-To: <3045277.1042687639861.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Message-ID: <30D512B8-2CBF-11D7-A056-000393090C40@emich.edu>
Hey folks--
I've made a very minor to the class schedule that will effect next
week's class. Go to the class web site at
http://krause.emich.edu/eng328/sec5 and print off another copy of the
schedule.
--Steve
Steven D. Krause
Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature
614 G Pray-Harrold Hall * Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, MI 48197 * http://krause.emich.edu
From nprintz@emich.edu Tue Jan 21 20:57:19 2003
From: nprintz@emich.edu (Nicole E Printz)
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:57:19 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Fwd: Re: [Eng328 Sec. 5] For Marnitta
Message-ID: <6430092.1043182639202.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
------=_Part_5508_5263540.1043182592755
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> I am sending this late, and I just wanted to let you know that I was
thinking some of the same things you were writing about when I went to
write my paper. It is interesting to look at the history of writing
technologies and see how far we've come. After finishing the project,
I have realized how completely dependent on technology we all are, and
I am excited to see what there is to come.
>
>
------=_Part_5508_5263540.1043182592755
Content-Type: message/rfc822; name=forward.cpm
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=forward.cpm
Message-ID: <3049180.1043181981792.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:46:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Nicole E Printz
To: eng328a@list.emich.edu
Subject: Re: [Eng328 Sec. 5] For Marnitta
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
x-cp-sent: CHECKED
x-cp-signature:
x-cp-receipt:
x-cp-grouptools:
I am sending this late, and I just wanted to let you know that I was thinking some of the same things you were writing about when I went to write my paper. It is interesting to look at the history of writing technologies and see how far we've come. After finishing the project, I have realized how completely dependent on technology we all are, and I am excited to see what there is to come.
------=_Part_5508_5263540.1043182592755--
From rshirk@emich.edu Sun Jan 26 22:35:15 2003
From: rshirk@emich.edu (Rebecca J Shirk)
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 17:35:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <3504628.1043620515365.JavaMail.rshirk@emich.edu>
Strunk and White's manual on style is unlike any that Ive read before.
I do like that it is concise, straight to the point. As I read I
wondered how many times Ive broken these rules in the countless papers
Ive written. Using our language correctly is very important - not that
I believe it has to be followed 100 percent, but perhaps writers should
know the rules before they choose to break them.
For myself the most valuable section is about using an active voice
versus a passive one. The book simplifies it and makes it easier for
me to understand. Reading this book will surely force me to take a
closer look at my writing.
This book is a great for reference for any writer, its also very easy
to read. Although I feel content should take precedence over style -
correct grammar, etc. is essential in creating a powerful essay.
From sschramm@emich.edu Mon Jan 27 02:37:33 2003
From: sschramm@emich.edu (Scott D Schramm)
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 21:37:33 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <847835.1043635053360.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
I have used Strunk and White before for other classes. I first
encountered Strunk and White during History 300 aka Historical Research
and Writing. This style guide has helped get me through some very tough
times in regard to writing. The main thing that I enjoyed about this
guide was the fact that it is so easy to follow.
The book is not written by a grammarian but by someone who can bring
all the technical jargon down to the average joe. I had to look on the
back to see what I paid for the book. I bought it new many years ago
for only $6.95. I have since gotten more than my money back and will
continue to use it for many years to come.
Scott
From kkurze_swc@yahoo.com Mon Jan 27 03:21:57 2003
From: kkurze_swc@yahoo.com (Kristen Kurze)
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 19:21:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Eng328 - Strunk and White
Message-ID: <20030127032157.40021.qmail@web20803.mail.yahoo.com>
For me, the first part of Strunk and White's book "The
Elements of Style" was challenging. Having been away
from English classes for a few years now, it took a
while for me to get used to the jargon. In the
introduction, White says that Strunk "uttered every
sentence three times" as to fill up the time he saved
by omitting needless words. It seems to me, however,
Strunk realized that his students needed to hear the
rules three times before they grasped their full
meaning. Had I paid more attention to the "Contents"
page, I would have noticed the glossary at the back of
the book, and the reading would not have been so
arduous.
I found the "omitting needless words" rule to be my
"Golden Nugget" of the book. It's so easy to slip
into a casual/conversational style of writing and not
notice those extra little words that take up so much
space and cloud good writing.
"The Elements of Style" contains a lot of great tips,
but I'll need consult the glossary and read book two
more times before it all sinks in.
-Kristen Kurze
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Mon Jan 27 13:21:51 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Steven D. Krause)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 08:21:51 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Writer's Memo/Tuesday's Class
In-Reply-To: <3045277.1042687639861.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Message-ID: <4BFEBF9C-31FA-11D7-BB57-000393090C40@emich.edu>
Hey folks--
I just wanted to post a message reminding everyone about what you need
to hand in on Tuesday as part of the first writing assignment and to
also remind you about what we'll be doing in Tuesday's class.
First, what you need to hand in: bring with you (stapled or
paper-clipped together, please, and in this order, from top to bottom):
* A writer's memo (see below for more details).
* The final draft of your essay (be sure that it's clear that this is
the version you want me to closely read and grade).
* The rough draft of your essay (what you talked about in last week's
class-- marginal marks are fine, so don't worry about that).
By a "writer's memo," I mean a very brief "memo" or letter from you to
me discussing and introducing your essay. This is your chance to speak
directly to me about anything that you are concerned about with your
essay. For example, you might want to note things you were
particularly happy about with your essay, or, conversely, things that
you were particularly unhappy about with the essay or the process.
This doesn't need to be very long-- maybe a paragraph or so.
I'll ask you to hand these in first thing Tuesday night and then we'll
proceed with discussing Strunk and White and the next writing project.
See you Tuesday night!
--Steve
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Mon Jan 27 13:54:44 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Maggie K)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 05:54:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk & White
Message-ID: <20030127135444.58880.qmail@web14806.mail.yahoo.com>
I used The Elements of Style as an undergraduate, but
after I graduated I somehow misplaced my copy. I'm
glad to have another to use now. This book would have
been of great help in an English class I had last
semester where the professor told me I was "too
chatty". I revised my style to take care of my
"chattiness", but didn't REALLY understand the entire
problem until I read #16 in Principles of Composition:
Use definite, specific, concrete language and also #9
in Approach to Style - Do not affect a breezy manner.
My reasoning is that I love to write, and usually
have the opposite problem of most people in that I
write too much and have trouble cutting down my
papers. I think this book will help me do that
because I'm learning that too many words can cut my
message out and bore the reader. While something
makes perfect sense to me, it may not to someone else.
I think that this handbook really draws the line
between what I THINK sounds good, and what writing
well really is. All of the rules were a bit
overwhelming, but I realize that Strunk & White's
intent was to give a guide to answer questions when
I'm sitting at 3:00am writing a paper and get stuck on
whether a comma, colon, or dash is most appropriate
for my work (yes, I have no life!). This book is
definitely an invaluable tool.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Mon Jan 27 14:09:28 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Maggie K)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 06:09:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reply to Rebecca's post - Strunk & White
In-Reply-To: <3504628.1043620515365.JavaMail.rshirk@emich.edu>
Message-ID: <20030127140928.80029.qmail@web14807.mail.yahoo.com>
I agree with you 100%!! I also like the concise way
this book is written. I really like what you said
about knowing the rules before we break them. This is
an excellent point. I think it's too easy to say
"well that's just my writing style" when given
criticism. I can't tell you how many English classes
I've had where this is said during peer reviews.
Style is something that is developed, but I think only
after the basic rules are learned.
I also agree that the rules CAN be broken. I know
there are staunch writers who feel that English is
only English if it is PROPER English with all the
rules enforced. I think that experimenting with the
written word will surely open up new avenues of
writing.
Maggie Koller
--- Rebecca J Shirk wrote:
> Strunk and White's manual on style is unlike any
> that Ive read before.
> I do like that it is concise, straight to the point.
> As I read I
> wondered how many times Ive broken these rules in
> the countless papers
> Ive written. Using our language correctly is very
> important - not that
> I believe it has to be followed 100 percent, but
> perhaps writers should
> know the rules before they choose to break them.
> For myself the most valuable section is about using
> an active voice
> versus a passive one. The book simplifies it and
> makes it easier for
> me to understand. Reading this book will surely
> force me to take a
> closer look at my writing.
> This book is a great for reference for any writer,
> its also very easy
> to read. Although I feel content should take
> precedence over style -
> correct grammar, etc. is essential in creating a
> powerful essay.
> _______________________________________________
> Eng328a mailing list
> Eng328a@list.emich.edu
> http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Mon Jan 27 17:41:54 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Steven D. Krause)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 12:41:54 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] FYI: My Office Hours for Today and Tomorrow (1/27-1/28)
Message-ID: <9FF1810C-321E-11D7-8DF3-00039348EA7C@emich.edu>
Hey all--
Just wanted to let you know that my office hours will be a bit "spotty"
the next two days. I have meeting this afternoon, but I will be around
3-ish or so until 5 pm. Tuesday 1/28, I have a 1 o'clock appointment
that will *probably* make me late for my office hours Thursday afternoon
(hopefully not so late that it interferes with my 3:30 class though).
After that, it's back to normal.
Hope that helps a little!
--Steve
Steven D. Krause
Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature
614G Pray-Harrold Hall * Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, MI 48197 * 734-487-1363 * http://krause.emich.edu
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Mon Jan 27 23:54:04 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Michelle Wisher)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:54:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] reply to Maggie's comments on Strunk and White
Message-ID: <20030127235404.1545.qmail@web14809.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-1553302449-1043711644=:745
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I can totally understand where you're coming from when it comes to being chatty or wordy. I have always been the type of person to write more than I need to. If I am assigned a 5-7 page paper, my paper will most likely be 8 pages long. In elementary school english class when book reports were assigned, I was always the dork who used the front and back of three sheets of paper and had to sharpen my pencil twice.
I think that I know which class you are talking about from last semester that you could have used this book for; I was in that class too. I remember when we got our first papers back and the comments written on mine were, "you're re-telling the story" and " too conversational". I definitely could have used this book during that class. Strangely enough, I think my writing did benefit from that class.
The part of Strunk and White that I think I will use the most is the Words and Expressions Commonly Misused section. In reading over that section, I think I make some of those mistakes.
Anyhow, this assignment was not exactly the most exciting read, but definitely useful. :-)
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1553302449-1043711644=:745
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I can totally understand where you're coming from when it comes to being chatty or wordy. I have always been the type of person to write more than I need to. If I am assigned a 5-7 page paper, my paper will most likely be 8 pages long. In elementary school english class when book reports were assigned, I was always the dork who used the front and back of three sheets of paper and had to sharpen my pencil twice.
I think that I know which class you are talking about from last semester that you could have used this book for; I was in that class too. I remember when we got our first papers back and the comments written on mine were, "you're re-telling the story" and " too conversational". I definitely could have used this book during that class. Strangely enough, I think my writing did benefit from that class.
The part of Strunk and White that I think I will use the most is the Words and Expressions Commonly Misused section. In reading over that section, I think I make some of those mistakes.
Anyhow, this assignment was not exactly the most exciting read, but definitely useful. :-)
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1553302449-1043711644=:745--
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 00:02:45 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Michelle Wisher)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:02:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <20030128000245.35819.qmail@web14802.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-1973472842-1043712165=:35254
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
First of all, let me just say that I know I will look back to this little book when I am writing my next paper. I could have used this in both of the basic level composition classes that I took when I first started school and I definitely could have used it since. I generally consider myself someone who has a decent grasp of punctuation, grammar, and composition rules, but I often find myself stuck on a procedural type question when writing a paper and this book will come of great use.
I think the section that I will use most is Words and Expressions Commonly Misused. In reading through that portion of the book I came upon several words and expressions that I realized I sometimes use incorrectly. Strangely enough, I don't believe I have generally been corrected on most of those misuses that I read about. I also took note in the section discussing the proper use of quotes.
With all that being said, I fell asleep twice while reading this book. Not the most exciting assignment, but totally useful.
Michelle Wisher
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1973472842-1043712165=:35254
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
First of all, let me just say that I know I will look back to this little book when I am writing my next paper. I could have used this in both of the basic level composition classes that I took when I first started school and I definitely could have used it since. I generally consider myself someone who has a decent grasp of punctuation, grammar, and composition rules, but I often find myself stuck on a procedural type question when writing a paper and this book will come of great use.
I think the section that I will use most is Words and Expressions Commonly Misused. In reading through that portion of the book I came upon several words and expressions that I realized I sometimes use incorrectly. Strangely enough, I don't believe I have generally been corrected on most of those misuses that I read about. I also took note in the section discussing the proper use of quotes.
With all that being said, I fell asleep twice while reading this book. Not the most exciting assignment, but totally useful.
Michelle Wisher
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-1973472842-1043712165=:35254--
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 00:31:22 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Sarah C)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:31:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] S & W
Message-ID: <20030128003122.25905.qmail@web40910.mail.yahoo.com>
I first ran across this book in high school. I had a
great English teacher that tried to prep us for
college the best ways he knew how. I have to say that
this book has been a great help and I'm glad to see it
again. Being an aspiring English prof, myself, I'm
sure it will be a book I'll use far into the future.
My favorite part of this book is "Elementary
Principles of Compostition," because I think that a
lot of times it's the "Elementary" things that get
skipped over. I have found in a number of my classes
where there is a lot of confusion, it is because
someone neglected to explain a basic step. It's nice
to see the basics in the light sometimes.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 00:40:37 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Sarah C)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:40:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Response to Michelle's Response to Maggie
Message-ID: <20030128004037.97795.qmail@web40906.mail.yahoo.com>
I think I will find myself using the "Commonly Misused
Expressions" section a lot, too. I wish I could catch
some of that "too chatty" from you guys. I always cut
out huge chunks of my papers. I find myself coming up
short everytime I write a paper. It's not because of
lack of topic or interest, I just chop everything up
until it's almost too cut and dry. I'd rather write
too much and then go through and cut it down than go
through with filler when I'm already done.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 02:01:13 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Ann B Holland)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:01:13 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reply to Michelle's Strunk and White
Message-ID: <4575106.1043719273430.JavaMail.aholland2@emich.edu>
Like Michelle, I had trouble remaining attentive while reading this
book. Even so, I think this will be a handy resource to have around.
After I read Michelle's comment I went back to the "commonly missued"
section for a review. I, too, found some surprising and helpful tidbits
of information. I was so happy that the authors cleared up the whole
"care less" thing. I had always thought I was supposed to say "I could
care less" because that is what I've always heard. Finally, my
suspicions have been confirmed by Strunk and White: It is supposed to
be "I could NOT care less," which makes much more sense. Ahh, I can
sleep soundly now.
Michelle Wisher wrote:
>
>First of all, let me just say that I know I will look back to this
little book when I am writing my next paper. I could have used this in
both of the basic level composition classes that I took when I first
started school and I definitely could have used it since. I generally
consider myself someone who has a decent grasp of punctuation, grammar,
and composition rules, but I often find myself stuck on a procedural
type question when writing a paper and this book will come of great use.
>
>I think the section that I will use most is Words and Expressions
Commonly Misused. In reading through that portion of the book I came
upon several words and expressions that I realized I sometimes use
incorrectly. Strangely enough, I don't believe I have generally been
corrected on most of those misuses that I read about. I also took note
in the section discussing the proper use of quotes.
>
>With all that being said, I fell asleep twice while reading this book.
Not the most exciting assignment, but totally useful.
>
>Michelle Wisher
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 02:22:46 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Ann B Holland)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:22:46 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <1002641.1043720566218.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
"The Elements of Style" is not exactly a page turner, but I was happy
to get my hands on a manual that contains almost every writing do and
don't. Many of my writing practices are based on instinct, so having a
resource like this will safe me some time and effort. I really
appreciated the examples provided in many of the sections, But I wish
there had been examples in more of the "Approach to Style" section. For
example, I wanted greater illustration of how writers should "place
themselves in the background." How is tone different than the temper of
the writer coming through? I think I get it, but an example would make
me sure.
-Abby Holland
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 06:21:13 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Nicholas S Polifroni)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:21:13 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] (no subject)
Message-ID: <7411825.1043734873925.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
------=_Part_10422_376883.1043734818322
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Well I'd have to say that I'm a terrible writer, according to this book
>that is. I'm not sure as though I agreed with a lot of what it was
>saying, especially the first part. I had a lot of trouble trying to
>understand what was going on at the begining, but I caught on after
>about twenty pages. Some of the examples it was giving out were pretty
>strange. I would look ata lot of them and wonder about the context they
>were pulled from. Some of the sentences seemed as if they could have
>been constructed even beter than the first two times. Other times it
>was like the first sentence was more natural, and sometimes it would be
>the second.
>I'd have to say that when I got to the final part I was relieved
>because it started to talk more about how it didn't really matter. You
>could chose not to follow a lot of the rules, or a few, or none.
>Reading this was very informative though, I really enjoyed the chapter
>that was more like a dictionary of words commonly misused. I'm sure it
>will probably come in handy some time in the near future, and maybe
>even in the long run. All in all I felt somewhat scrutinized throughout
>the book until the end, but was satisfied with it's final chapter. My
>favorite parts are when he talked about writing working like sound or
>music, and when he said that the best writers write to an audience of
>one. I like to think that I structure papers like that; not as much as
>I used to, but probably still more than others.
>I'm not much for reading anything that makes sense, I like Bill
>Burroughs and Harmony Korine, but it was still a good read. It moved
>quickly, and I learned a lot. It reminded me of Writing Down the Bones,
>it shared a lot of the same ideas. Like, "Don't marry the fly." Don't
>fall so in love with describing an object that you're writing isn't
>about the main topic anymore, it's about the interruption. People
>should read both of these books, and I'm sure there's more out there
>like them. Maybe if I keep reading these and writing essay's, I may not
>be so terrible after all.
n i c k
------=_Part_10422_376883.1043734818322
Content-Type: message/rfc822; name=forward.cpm
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=forward.cpm
Message-ID: <6526466.1043734763515.JavaMail.npolifron@emich.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:19:23 -0500 (EST)
From: Nicholas S Polifroni
To: Eng328a@list.emich.eu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Well I'd have to say that I'm a terrible writer, according to this book
that is. I'm not sure as though I agreed with a lot of what it was
saying, especially the first part. I had a lot of trouble trying to
understand what was going on at the begining, but I caught on after
about twenty pages. Some of the examples it was giving out were pretty
strange. I would look ata lot of them and wonder about the context they
were pulled from. Some of the sentences seemed as if they could have
been constructed even beter than the first two times. Other times it
was like the first sentence was more natural, and sometimes it would be
the second.
I'd have to say that when I got to the final part I was relieved
because it started to talk more about how it didn't really matter. You
could chose not to follow a lot of the rules, or a few, or none.
Reading this was very informative though, I really enjoyed the chapter
that was more like a dictionary of words commonly misused. I'm sure it
will probably come in handy some time in the near future, and maybe
even in the long run. All in all I felt somewhat scrutinized throughout
the book until the end, but was satisfied with it's final chapter. My
favorite parts are when he talked about writing working like sound or
music, and when he said that the best writers write to an audience of
one. I like to think that I structure papers like that; not as much as
I used to, but probably still more than others.
I'm not much for reading anything that makes sense, I like Bill
Burroughs and Harmony Korine, but it was still a good read. It moved
quickly, and I learned a lot. It reminded me of Writing Down the Bones,
it shared a lot of the same ideas. Like, "Don't marry the fly." Don't
fall so in love with describing an object that you're writing isn't
about the main topic anymore, it's about the interruption. People
should read both of these books, and I'm sure there's more out there
like them. Maybe if I keep reading these and writing essay's, I may not
be so terrible after all.
------=_Part_10422_376883.1043734818322--
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 06:35:29 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Nicholas S Polifroni)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:35:29 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] reply
Message-ID: <4154660.1043735729150.JavaMail.npolifron@emich.edu>
reading a lot of these comments and reply's it seems obvious to me that
a lot of people in this class think they write too much. Papers that
are too long, with too many words that aren't needed. I think that's
kind of funny, or interesting actually. I feel I've always had this
problem myself, but I've never had aclass where anyone else did. I
remember one time in western civ class at my old school when I turned
in an 8 page paper for a three page assignment. I got graded down for
every page, but that's beside the point.
It's a good feeling to know I'm not the only one. I'm used to art
majors who don't sleep or eat. I just took this class because I like to
write for some neurotic reason, some people think I'm good at it. Maybe
I am maybe not, but at least now I have the sense that I'm not alone. I
like this book more than Writing Down the Bones, probably because it
has more of a how to structure to it. I can definatly see myself using
it as a reference, and hopefully next time I have to write a three page
paper I won't be such an ass about it.
n i ck
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 14:38:41 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Rebecca J Shirk)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:38:41 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] (no subject)
Message-ID: <2229785.1043764721202.JavaMail.rshirk@emich.edu>
I understand Nick's frustrations while reading this book, as I read my
writing that I thought to be OK at one time was not so much according
to Strunk. However, the book is really dated, Strunk is no longer
living - its very rare you find a english teacher in high school or
college nowadays who is the gramar policeman he was. I too liked the
last chapter better than all the rules, I even found him funny at
times. In his defense I believe he is sympathetic with the reader, he
comments that these mistakes are very easy to make and common.
Nicholas S Polifroni wrote:
>
>>Well I'd have to say that I'm a terrible writer, according to this book
>>that is. I'm not sure as though I agreed with a lot of what it was
>>saying, especially the first part. I had a lot of trouble trying to
>>understand what was going on at the begining, but I caught on after
>>about twenty pages. Some of the examples it was giving out were pretty
>>strange. I would look ata lot of them and wonder about the context they
>>were pulled from. Some of the sentences seemed as if they could have
>>been constructed even beter than the first two times. Other times it
>>was like the first sentence was more natural, and sometimes it would be
>>the second.
>>I'd have to say that when I got to the final part I was relieved
>>because it started to talk more about how it didn't really matter. You
>>could chose not to follow a lot of the rules, or a few, or none.
>>Reading this was very informative though, I really enjoyed the chapter
>>that was more like a dictionary of words commonly misused. I'm sure it
>>will probably come in handy some time in the near future, and maybe
>>even in the long run. All in all I felt somewhat scrutinized throughout
>>the book until the end, but was satisfied with it's final chapter. My
>>favorite parts are when he talked about writing working like sound or
>>music, and when he said that the best writers write to an audience of
>>one. I like to think that I structure papers like that; not as much as
>>I used to, but probably still more than others.
>>I'm not much for reading anything that makes sense, I like Bill
>>Burroughs and Harmony Korine, but it was still a good read. It moved
>>quickly, and I learned a lot. It reminded me of Writing Down the Bones,
>>it shared a lot of the same ideas. Like, "Don't marry the fly." Don't
>>fall so in love with describing an object that you're writing isn't
>>about the main topic anymore, it's about the interruption. People
>>should read both of these books, and I'm sure there's more out there
>>like them. Maybe if I keep reading these and writing essay's, I may not
>>be so terrible after all.
> n i c k
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: forward.cpm
forward.cpm Type: message/rfc822
Encoding:
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 14:44:25 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Marnitta Harris)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:44:25 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] strunk and white
Message-ID: <20030128144425.BF48DE568@xprdmailfe29.nwk.excite.com>
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__e487dbefafe3c7406cada1ad35546a51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The Elements of Style is a good book to keep close to the computer. Since an English major is constantly writing something it is nice to have something to refer to when something may sound completely ridiculous. I especially enjoyed the Approach to Style section. It gave helpful hints to make a writing better. The reasons that he listed are not our mandatory rules of grammer or anything, but they are what he has noticed will make or break a writing. They are helpful and I am sure they will be used often.-Marnitta Harris
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__e487dbefafe3c7406cada1ad35546a51
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The Elements of Style is a good book to keep close to the computer. Since an English major is constantly writing something it is nice to have something to refer to when something may sound completely ridiculous. I especially enjoyed the Approach to Style section. It gave helpful hints to make a writing better. The reasons that he listed are not our mandatory rules of grammer or anything, but they are what he has noticed will make or break a writing. They are helpful and I am sure they will be used often.
-Marnitta Harris
|
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__e487dbefafe3c7406cada1ad35546a51--
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 14:54:42 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Marnitta Harris)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:54:42 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] reply to Michelle's post
Message-ID: <20030128145442.6CB16E569@xprdmailfe29.nwk.excite.com>
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__410351db31fa32952911ff683b1462be
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I agree that the book isn't the best read, but it is very helpful when it comes to rules that are sometimes altered or simply just unknown. I also agree that the misused words and expressions section was helpful as a quick guide when needed. It is very easy to misinterpret any of these words.-marnitta
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__410351db31fa32952911ff683b1462be
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I agree that the book isn't the best read, but it is very helpful when it comes to rules that are sometimes altered or simply just unknown. I also agree that the misused words and expressions section was helpful as a quick guide when needed. It is very easy to misinterpret any of these words.
-marnitta
|
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
--EXCITEBOUNDARY_000__410351db31fa32952911ff683b1462be--
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 14:58:46 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Marissa Johnson)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 06:58:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] response to Nick
Message-ID: <20030128145846.27634.qmail@web41002.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-264415409-1043765926=:26538
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I thought what Nick said about getting graded down for writing papers too long was great. I used to have the same problem, but after a year of college I kinda got the hang of concise writing. I always thought that teachers should like long papers; it shows the student researched and understood the topic. But Strunk and White argue that short, to-the-point writing is more effective. I still don't fully agree with marking down papers over the page limit. I'm sure this rule exists because professors don't want to spend any more time than necessary grading extra long papers. So NIck, you're not alone, and I hope you don't get points taken off anymore!
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-264415409-1043765926=:26538
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
I thought what Nick said about getting graded down for writing papers too long was great. I used to have the same problem, but after a year of college I kinda got the hang of concise writing. I always thought that teachers should like long papers; it shows the student researched and understood the topic. But Strunk and White argue that short, to-the-point writing is more effective. I still don't fully agree with marking down papers over the page limit. I'm sure this rule exists because professors don't want to spend any more time than necessary grading extra long papers. So NIck, you're not alone, and I hope you don't get points taken off anymore!
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-264415409-1043765926=:26538--
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 15:05:49 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Marissa Johnson)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 07:05:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <20030128150549.21590.qmail@web41015.mail.yahoo.com>
--0-991456374-1043766349=:20187
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
This manual brought up every writing rule that I can imagine. There were many things mentioned that I had never really thought about before, just did. I was happy when I found something that professors in the past have taught me. In this book there were a couple instances where I did not agree with the authors. They make an extensive example of the fact that phrases on page 24. I use those phrases they reject in my writing to either make it longer or make it a little more exciting to read. I really liked the "Misused Words and Expressions" chapter. I failed almost all of those tests! This manual will be handy in this class and others.
-Marissa Johnson
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-991456374-1043766349=:20187
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
This manual brought up every writing rule that I can imagine. There were many things mentioned that I had never really thought about before, just did. I was happy when I found something that professors in the past have taught me. In this book there were a couple instances where I did not agree with the authors. They make an extensive example of the fact that phrases on page 24. I use those phrases they reject in my writing to either make it longer or make it a little more exciting to read. I really liked the "Misused Words and Expressions" chapter. I failed almost all of those tests! This manual will be handy in this class and others.
-Marissa Johnson
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
--0-991456374-1043766349=:20187--
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 16:16:32 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (LeRoy E Myers Jr)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 11:16:32 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk & White
Message-ID: <1964807.1043770592659.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
I was a bit nervous when I first found out about this assignment. I was
not looking forward to reading a style guide but I was pleasantly
surprised. I thought it was a quick and easy read, though definitely a
bit dry. I used to rely upon another manual entirely, but I think that
this one will join my traveling library.
I had a really hard time sticking with it through the list of grammar
rules. Still, I know I'm going to be re-reading this book in the
future. I was really impressed by the brevity and breadth of the
material. For its size, the book really is useful and more so because
it's easy to carry anywhere.
My favorite section is "An Approach to Style." I found the advice
helped fill out some of the areas that I felt a bit sketchy on before.
I found it refreshing to read that "the true writer always plays to an
audience of one." Most valuable to me are rules 6, 7, and 9.
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 16:55:06 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (LeRoy E Myers Jr)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 11:55:06 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <779251.1043772906312.JavaMail.lmyersjr@emich.edu>
I agree that more examples there would have been better. The rules in
this section contain thoughts that require much more reader investment
than their brevity suggests. I will probably revisit them many times to
consider how I might apply them. For whatever it may lack, this book
does provide many useful guideposts to point writers in the right
direction.
Ann B Holland wrote:
>"The Elements of Style" is not exactly a page turner, but I was happy
>to get my hands on a manual that contains almost every writing do and
>don't. Many of my writing practices are based on instinct, so having a
>resource like this will safe me some time and effort. I really
>appreciated the examples provided in many of the sections, But I wish
>there had been examples in more of the "Approach to Style" section. For
>example, I wanted greater illustration of how writers should "place
>themselves in the background." How is tone different than the temper of
>the writer coming through? I think I get it, but an example would make
>me sure.
>-Abby Holland
>_______________________________________________
>Eng328a mailing list
>Eng328a@list.emich.edu
>http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
>
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 17:51:20 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (eng328a@list.emich.edu)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 12:51:20 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <433A020A.3887442C.00722A92@aol.com>
I was fasinated with the section on elementary principles of composition,as many times I come across essasys or papers that lack good composition, yet have a great subject. In order to get your idea or point across cleary and meaningfully, you must compose your words, sentences, thesis, etc., in a meaningful way that ties all the elements together. Great section ,and I love how Strunk places so much emphasis on finding your own voice, putting statements in positive form, and using definitive, concrete language.
I appreciate writing styles that are bold, up-front, and confident, and it seems that Strunk loved this type of composition as well.
I also like section 5, as it speaks about where and what the author intended to get across to the reader. Where did the interest in a topic come from, and why. What drives a person to research a topic, while others could care less about it.
How an author puts the information across to the reader is unique and usually follows certain patterns. These patterns translate back to the reader a feeling of revulsion, boredom, excitement, and joy, just as different types of music brings about certain emotions. I think style is an important and overlooked component in writing, at least in my schoolastic career, as past teachers did not stress personal writing style and finding your writer's in comparison to grammar,punctuation, and word usuage. This is probably because you cannot teach students to find their own style, it just happens with repetition and experience of writing.
It's a great book because it's a pracitcal tool for anyone who needs to write a paper.
David Majchrzak
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 17:54:53 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (eng328a@list.emich.edu)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 12:54:53 -0500
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <00C7DE62.427B98DB.00722A92@aol.com>
The one thing I agree on, with almost every other response, is that this book is very usueful and I will be using it for many other writing projects in the future. For 6 dollars, this book has more practical information than many textbooks that are required for classes today.
David Majchrzak
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 18:40:17 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (David E Horchem)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 13:40:17 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] strunk & white
Message-ID: <436161.1043779217653.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
I'll be honest. This is the first time I've read an entire book,
granted it was only about 90 pages long. I've never used a manual when
writing, but I might now. This book appears to serve a good purpose
for writers. I'm glad to have read it.
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 20:01:56 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Sean W Morrow)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:01:56 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk & White
Message-ID: <1065442.1043784116303.JavaMail.smorrow@emich.edu>
Leroy,
I can definately empathize with you on this book. Very very dry
reading!! The grammer rules also struck me as dry and boring but I can
see how they apply. I do agree that the book was quick and easy to
read as you state. I myself was not looking forward to reading a
"style" guide as the term seems to be an oxymoron.
LeRoy E Myers Jr wrote:
>I was a bit nervous when I first found out about this assignment. I was
>not looking forward to reading a style guide but I was pleasantly
>surprised. I thought it was a quick and easy read, though definitely a
>bit dry. I used to rely upon another manual entirely, but I think that
>this one will join my traveling library.
>
>I had a really hard time sticking with it through the list of grammar
>rules. Still, I know I'm going to be re-reading this book in the
>future. I was really impressed by the brevity and breadth of the
>material. For its size, the book really is useful and more so because
>it's easy to carry anywhere.
>
>My favorite section is "An Approach to Style." I found the advice
>helped fill out some of the areas that I felt a bit sketchy on before.
>I found it refreshing to read that "the true writer always plays to an
>audience of one." Most valuable to me are rules 6, 7, and 9.
>_______________________________________________
>Eng328a mailing list
>Eng328a@list.emich.edu
>http://list.emich.edu/mailman/listinfo/eng328a
>
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 20:34:09 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Erin C Treece)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:34:09 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] reply to Maggie's comments on Strunk and White
Message-ID: <1928145.1043786049613.JavaMail.etreece@emich.edu>
I agree with you, I have made many of the errors in the Common Mistakes
section myself. I have the opposite problem when I write my papers
though; sometimes I stick to the bare-bones of what I want to say and
end up struggling to flesh it out later. I wish my first comp
professor had assigned us to buy this book; I am a senior now, oh well!
I will definately hand it down to my sister, who's a freshman this
year!
Erin
Michelle Wisher wrote:
>
>I can totally understand where you're coming from when it comes to
being chatty or wordy. I have always been the type of person to write
more than I need to. If I am assigned a 5-7 page paper, my paper will
most likely be 8 pages long. In elementary school english class when
book reports were assigned, I was always the dork who used the front
and back of three sheets of paper and had to sharpen my pencil twice.
>
>I think that I know which class you are talking about from last
semester that you could have used this book for; I was in that class
too. I remember when we got our first papers back and the comments
written on mine were, "you're re-telling the story" and " too
conversational". I definitely could have used this book during that
class. Strangely enough, I think my writing did benefit from that
class.
>
>The part of Strunk and White that I think I will use the most is the
Words and Expressions Commonly Misused section. In reading over that
section, I think I make some of those mistakes.
>
>Anyhow, this assignment was not exactly the most exciting read, but
definitely useful. :-)
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 20:38:42 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Erin C Treece)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 15:38:42 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] (no subject)
Message-ID: <6503644.1043786322139.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
first of all, although it was short, reading this book took me forever
because I kept falling asleep. I think that it is good to keep as a
reference, but I would never read through it like that again, or make
anyone else, for that matter.
Almost every time I write a paper, I start cursing and wishing I had
some kind of handbook to help me with my grammar and usage. If someone
had given me this book in high school, I think I'd be a much better
writer.
Every teacher has different expectations for essays, but the
information presented in this book could be applied to any kind of
essay.
I liked the misused words and phrases section, because that is my pet
peeve when I am reading someone else's paper.
When I am a teacher, I will make sure all my students know aboiut this
book before they leave for college!
Erin
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 21:06:19 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Nicole E Printz)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:06:19 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk and White
Message-ID: <5087195.1043787979418.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Even though I wasn't excited to read The Elements of Style, it did
provide a lot of useful suggestions. It answers a lot of questions
that I've never thought to ask, and I am sure it will be a handy
resource to use when writing. The elementary principles of composition
section was probably the most helpful part of the book. Instead of
providing simple grammatical rules, that section actually gave
situational advice that can be used in all writing. My friend taking a
basic composition course has been asking me millions of questions
because she is typing up her first big paper. I let her look at this
book, and she said it helped her more than the MLA guide to
documentation that was required for her course. Even though The
Elements of Style didn't provide excitement in my life, I am glad that
I have it to reference.
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 21:20:43 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Nicole E Printz)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:20:43 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Response for Sarah C
Message-ID: <609435.1043788843303.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
Sarah,
Even though your e-mail was the second I read, I really did want to
respond to what you wrote. It's good to here that there are high
school teachers that know about this book. My friend who is in her
first year at college picked up this book and ended up using it to
format her first big paper, and I think this could be a good resource
for students even younger than that. It seemed like as long as you
wrote something in high school you would get credit. This book could
help students be more prepared. Thanks for letting us know this book
is around in more areas than this class, and I'll see you tonight.
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 21:21:34 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Ann E Schucker)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:21:34 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Strunk Response
Message-ID: <3615369.1043788894320.JavaMail.aschucker@emich.edu>
When I
began to read the introduction to this book, my initial reaction was,
"I already know this stuff." I really didn't think I would find much
new information in the text. After only about ten pages, I had marked
several things that I did not know or that were unfamiliar grammar
rules to me. I was really surprised about how much I did not know.
One thing that I took particular note of was the section in the
beginning about semicolon use. I think that as far as grammar goes,
this is one topic that confuses a lot of people. I now have a better
idea of when to use semicolons verses commas. I really liked the way
Strunk outlined this book and gave lots of examples. It was easy to
follow and understand. I agreed with most of what he wrote except for
the section called, "Write in a way that comes naturally," in the
approach to style chapter. Strunk talks about using words and phrases
that come readily. I disagree with this idea. I always have a
dictionary and thesaurus next to me when I write. The purpose of this
is not to use an overly advanced vocabulary but to find new ways to
say the same thing(which is often necessary when writing a paper). I
don't see any problem doing that as long as you know what you are
saying. Also, by doing this, it is possible to increase the
vocabulary you already have. Next time, you may not have to look up a
replacement word
From eng328a@list.emich.edu Tue Jan 28 21:32:40 2003
From: eng328a@list.emich.edu (Ann E Schucker)
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:32:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Eng328 Sec. 5] Reply
Message-ID: <7739424.1043789560219.JavaMail.cpmgr@my>
I agree with Michelle about the timing of this book. I too would have
liked to be exposed to this book in high school rather than now. It
would have saved me a lot of time revising papers because of grammar
errors.
I also agree that this book was a little dry but very, very useful. I
too have never been corrected about many of my grammar and word use
errors either. I wonder if it is because not too many teachers are
aware of these strict rules. I also think maybe, by todays standards,
some of the points Strunk makes may be outdated. Grammar, writing and
phrase use have evolved and become lax since this books original
publication and some people may feel it lacks relevance. I found it
refreshing to see that strict speech and grammar are still considered
important. Although English is only my minor, if I teach it, I would
like to have a class set of this book. Like Michelle said, seeing this
book sooner would have been better.