Ironically, most of them are communications majors...

Wait, what? Phonics is a system by which people learn to pronounce words based on how they are written, and perhaps half of the words in the English language actually follow phonetic rules (unlike, say, Italian, where nearly every word can be pronounced based on spelling). How many of these spelling mistakes are people trying to spell words they rarely, if ever, see written down? Things like "common" when they mean to write "come on", or "rediculous" or "exersize", all happen because people try to spell out words by how they sound. This has nothing to do with phonics, and more to do with people simply not seeing these words spelled correctly, or insufficient instruction in the importance of proper spelling.

In the spirit of the technicalities of legal writing and this thread, I saw a homeless person last night holding a sign:

"Please help two kids for food."

Sadly I could not find two children to help. I could have used that food.

 

I can be a grammar Nazi at times, but most of the time I don't care. If it's obvious that you spent the time to proofread your shit and just happened to miss an error, I'll either give constructive criticism or just ignore it.

Ninja focus: It frustrates me when I see people write poorly. Thanks to Internet forums like this one, I can write fluently and well because I do it every single day. I have trouble realizing that a lot of people just don't write. And just like I can't play basketball to save my life because I only play once a month, these people can't write well because they just don't have the practice.

Again, this has nothing to do with the occasional grammatical error; it's when someone's e-mail is filled with homophone problems and spelling errors that I feel like I just had a stroke.

What amazes me is that people who are perfectly good at writing English papers will go home and write e-mails to their friends with these errors. Don't they know that they sound like complete retards when they write like that?

 

My biggest pet peeve with writing is people who do not know how to structure a god damned argument. Set forth your premises and your conclusion, then present evidence supporting your premises, and if necessary, explain why your conclusion follows.

I think this problem comes from the way students are taught to write essays in school. Start with a big topic, then narrow it down to a more specific thesis statement. After that, present 3-10 paragraphs which are related to the topic, but not organized in any sort of rational structure. Finally, declare you have proven your thesis.

It's the difference between having a functioning clock, or just a pile of gears.

I found legal writing generally to be pretty easy. I never drafted documents like contracts or wills which I can see being a pain in the ass. I did almost nothing but internal memos (for the non-lawyers, it's a rather formal document that goes to your boss and eventually a client, advising them on the law).

The structure is basically provided for you. Will NY courts treat an out-of-state civil union as a marriage? Provide the standard for recognizing marriage in NY, discuss the legal status of the civil union, find out if there are any court cases on point, and that's it. The research is a pain in the ass, but the writing is easy-peasy.

Creative writing by comparison is tough. You have more freedom, but that's mostly freedom to write poorly. It's even more difficult with comedy. One too many syllables and you've just thrown off the rhythm and ruined the joke.

 

One of my teachers compared it to selling a car, in an analogy I found helpful.

Introduction: You should buy this car because it's attractive, safe and affordable.

Section 1: This car is attractive. Look at the paint! Look at the shape! Look at the leather seats!
Section 2: This car is safe! Look at these brakes! Look at these airbags! Look at these tires!
Section 3: This car is affordable. Look at this price! Look at this financing! Look at the prices of these other cars!

Conclusion: I told you you wanted to by this car. Who wouldn't want an attractive, safe, affordable car! This is going to be a great car for you.


Pretty simplistic, but I've found that it helps me structure even more complicated arguments.

 

Admittedly, I learnt phonics in 1981 and 1982 in Australia, so maybe it means something different now. But, when I was taught, we learnt what those sounds were and how they were used - plus colouring in. By learning the components of words, and later the rules that apply to their use, we were able to spell better.


In terms of legal writing, we used the acronym ISAAC for written examinations. I'm not sure how prevalent it is, having never discussed how to answer legal questions with the greater legal fraternity.

ISAAC stood for:

Issue
Statement the law
Apply the facts
Apply the law to the facts
Conclusion

Not a bad, if rather dry, way of approaching argumentative writing.

 

Fuck that, anyone who's anyone knows that to argue in writing YOU NEED TO USE CAPITALS!!!! SEE WHAT I DID THERE???? So like, asking rhetorical, dramatic questions is also effective! That way no one can question the seriousness of your argument and make sure that you insult the person you are trying to convince as well, you PIECE OF SHIT!!!!!! GO SUCK YOUR DAD'S DICK!!!! EXCLAMATION POINTS AND REPETING VOWELS FOR EMPHASIIIIIIS!!! WHAT ARE YOU, CRAZY???? JUSTIN BIEBER SUX!!!!


Everytime I read Youtube comments I want to kill myself.