We know that nothing is better able to warm the hearts and bring to life the most heated debates on Internet, because the minutiae of grammar. One can write all he wants, nowadays, there is freedom of expression. So it has come to accept almost quietly even more outrageous opinions, provided they are set in an Italian formally and semantically correct ("the blacks that we take away the women and work, I say we need to do a clean sweep", "aargh , what a anacoluthon? and then do not say Negro ").
Why, what evil does, in essence, ignorance of the language? Well, it depends. The grammar nazi people are pretty obnoxious, and almost always more detestable than those who criticize, why divert attention from what should be the topic of a discussion to be obstinate, so too dogmatic and intolerant, about things of no account such as the position of an accent or an apostrophe. It also appears that the level of hatred unleashed by an error is directly proportional to its insignificance, or its ambiguity.
Often those who are referred to as errors are inexcusable even if you take the trouble to check carefully. He writes "What" or "what is" (without the apostrophe)? Every year thousands of unfortunate people are condemned to social death for using the first spelling. The reason is that this is a case of truncation of the word (as you would say "in this case), and elision of a vowel before another vowel (" another "instead of" an other ") . But the same distinction between truncation and elision is actually quite smoky. Spelled "what" has survived only in relatively rare cases in our language (as opposed to the very common "a" instead of "a"), which makes the expression "what is" the word is still felt, subjectively as a whole and Elisa, rather che troncata. Se "qual" sparisse del tutto dall'uso e sostituito ovunque da "quale", sarebbe difficile giustificare ancora la regola. In definitiva, la maggior parte delle grammatiche normative indica "qual è" come espressione da usarsi, e solo per questo motivo è giusto attenervisi, ma non per questo l'altro uso è da considerarsi un abominio.
Qualcosa di simile avviene con la regola del "sé", che perde l'accento davanti a "stesso". Perché mai? Perché, si dice, l'accento serve a risolvere le ambiguità, mentre non può esserci ambiguità possibile nel caso di "se stesso". Ma quando mai si usa l'accento solo per risolvere le ambiguità? ma chi l'ha say? the "self" is different from the conjunction "if", and consequently a different word, written in a different way, that's all. There is no rule that says "tea" (the drink) loses focus when it is not likely to be confused with the pronoun "you", and it would be absurd (not to mention that in the case of "themselves", the misunderstanding it is possible). Yeah, but to explain the range of those fussy people, now.
say nothing of the fact that often you would like to abolish certain expressions not so bad but because they are considered unfair by an ethical point of view. For example, someone proposes not to precede never an article before a name, even when the name is that of a woman. That is not "Gasparri and Carfagna," but "Gasparri and Carfagna, simply in order to remedy an odious discrimination and a prejudice hidden in the folds of the language. This silent because of things like I talked . Silent and of the fact that often these people are captivated by the language seriously believe that a particular language is "superior" to another, richer or more expressive, except not being able to indicate a unit of measurement for the richness and expressiveness a language (beyond the anecdotal).
In short, it's not that bad that the speaker thinks evil. That said, however, Nanni Moretti is also right: words are important. Where are they? If ignorance is a good rules of spelling which can easily be forgiven (and easily remedied, for that matter) and if the error can happen, especially when writing in haste and in informal settings (such as a chat), whereas the are too many errors you can not deny that what makes a bad impression.
A person who gives you ever bother to check whether at least put spaces between the words and the other, or some vestige of punctuation in a long time, a person who makes little effort to be understood, to be easily readable by all. It's like a badly built website, or scritto tutto in comic sans: non c'è nulla di essenzialmente sbagliato nell'uso di un font al posto di un altro, salvo che alcuni vengono a noia molto presto, o addirittura limitano la leggibilità del testo. E $3 $(r1v373 (0$ì, pr1m4 0 p01 qµ4£(µn0 v1 m4nÐ3rà 4 ƒ4n(µ£0.
Poi c'è quel tipo di espressioni che si fanno detestare solo per il loro abuso, e denotano una certa pigrizia, una propensione alle frasi fatte, al luogo comune. Magari sono espressioni originariamente innocenti, o che al loro apparire erano pure intelligenti, ma sono come battute umoristiche che ripetute centinaia di volte non fanno più ridere: "a prescindere", "ma anche no", "piuttosto che", "nella misura in cui", "per certi versi".
Peggio di questo, c'è quel tipo di errore che è sintomo non tanto di ignoranza, ma di una reale confusione mentale. Chi non riesce a completare una semplice frase soggetto-verbo-predicato, chi sbaglia continuamente i tempi verbali, chi non sa concordare i soggetti con i verbi e gli aggettivi, beh, è qualcosa di più che poco pratico con i magici arcani della nostra lingua, e con le sue sottigliezze. È confuso, nella migliore delle ipotesi. E questo comincia ad essere un problema di sostanza, non solo di forma.
Noi censori dovremmo combattere di più per questioni di sostanza, for trifles on accents, but I do not see many people around who work hard for an Italian well-written, in the sense that is understandable and correct from the standpoint of logical analysis. I say more. In reality we should be indignant for the wrong reasons, for the fallacies that people let slip with ease in their speeches. These are the things we should not forgive, and these are the real dangers to society.
John Allen Paulos has written a book, Innumeracy on numerical illiteracy, in which he denounces the fact that there is much more forgiving (and self-indulgence) to be severe and ignorance total more elementari nozioni matematiche, che per la scarsa dimestichezza con la lingua. Nessuno vi escluderà mai da un salotto perché non sapete che il diametro di un cerchio sta circa 3,14 volte nella sua circonferenza, o che il lato e la diagonale di un quadrato sono incommensurabili. Anzi, la gente se ne compiace. "Io quando vedo un'equazione mi va in tilt il cervello, ih ih".
Ma questo è un genere d'ignoranza (e non parlo solo della matematica, ovviamente) che produce danni seri, produce Sandro Roberto Giacobbo per dirne una. Produce una cultura di professori di greco e latino che passano il tempo libero a scrivere deliranti pamphlet contro le scie chimiche. Produce persone apparentemente colte (Who claim to be cultured and educated, at least), but write things like that.
produces journalistic distortions that go unnoticed, as some speakers when you let slip that die every day one million people homeless in the streets of America, and nobody blinks not realizing that it is unpacking the scale (for most people , "one million" simply means "a very large number, a bit 'as the natives of the Amazon who can not count more than two). We remain fascinated when people say that every minute in the Amazon are deforested four football stadiums, but do not we ever count how many football stadiums contains the Amazon. We get enchanted by numerical hocus-pocus, continuously, without ever alerting the critical spirit.
I have some respect for the grammar nazi, at the bottom in their little play them even a meritorious work. Only when I meet one, I want to ask how to calculate the area of \u200b\u200ba trapezoid, or solve a simple quadratic equation. Or the chemical formula of salt. Do not expect much, I think. But if you do not know, golly, go back to school.
0 comments:
Post a Comment