Punctuation sometimes makes a huge difference. Today on BoingBoing a great dialogue rages on regarding the dangers of careless punctuation. I dream of the day when I get dialogue like that on one of my blogs. But be warned - at least one comment is off color.The first comment correctly punctuated is wholesome, but the slightest slip and it implies something obscene. Examples like that illustrate the richness and the fun of language, and could forestall embarrassing mistakes by students, but could a discussion like that get me in trouble?
Punctuation has real world implications - for example the time conservative California judges had to allow same-sex marriage because the lawmakers who passed legislation against it misplaced a semicolon.
My question, can and should we have these discussions? What is acceptable language? Is it about topics, ideas, or merely about word choices? Many students this semester go to church regularly and characterize themselves as devout. How (or should) we filter dialogue?
I went to catholic school 6 yrs., and have taught in at least 2 church colleges/universities. Religious schools counter-intuitively allow discussions that might get a teacher in trouble at a public institution. What's the consensus with our group(s)?
The most correct definition of acceptable language, in my opinion, is the method of effectively relating ones ideas to a given audience. This encompasses all topics. If you are able to put your thoughts into words that are understandable to all, then you are using acceptable language.
ReplyDeleteFor example, if you start talking about religion and there are differences in beliefs, the most acceptable language to employ is one of respect and empathy. If you start using vulgarities and/or a patronizing tone, you lose that common ground of comunication, which in this case is respect, and they will stop trying to listen to you and instead attempt to argue.
Arguing is not an effective way of discussing a topic because nothing gets resolved and both parties come away with a bitter attitude towards the other, especially with religion.
I like the way you are starting to define language in a "meta" sorta way. We may need to collectively define the word, "argument." Perhaps current public discourse has deteriorated. What once may have meant rhetoric and logic may now mean to the majority mere bombast, gainsaying and ridicule.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if decorum has really slipped, or if we just live in a world where EVERYTHING gets recorded and shared. We may have to live more transparently than did past generations.