Jump to content
Science Forums

Interpretation


pljames
 Share

Recommended Posts

As bad as I want to be a linguist I can't because the reader (interprets every word for it's perfect sematic meaning). Is there one? I do not use ambiguous words, but try to use unambiguous words for a clearer understanding. Each paragraph is devoted to the subject alone and not changed in each paragraph. I like editorial writing plain and simple. How can I make myself more understood without making the piece more complexed by the interpretation of the reader? Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it help if I dissected some of your posts and explained where, if anywhere, I fail to understand your meaning? If this fails to assist, or offends in any way, let me know and I shall stop.

 

My reading of your OP is as follows. I should like people to cleary understand me and to this end I try to write simply and avoid ambiguity. Despite this readers still seem to misinterpret what I write.

 

Let me know if that captures all the salient points of your thought. If so, then you are writing clearly at a strategic level; it's the tactics that are a bummer.

 

As bad as I want to be a linguist I can't

What do you mean here? I am not sure whether you mean you want to be a student of language, which would be the correct use of the word, or if you simply wish to communicate clearly, which would be incorrect usage. The balance of the paragraph suggests you mean the latter, so you are using a word incorrectly.

 

.... because the reader (interprets every word for it's perfect sematic meaning).

By introducing uneccssary and irrelevant brackets you destroy the correct sentence structure that is present without the brackets.

Its as a possessive pronoun has no apostrophe.

Semantic meaning appears redundant and incorrect at the same time. Semantics is about meaning and each word, phrase, sentence, etc can have more than one kind of meaning.Is there one?

 

 

I do not use ambiguous words, but try to use unambiguous words for a clearer understanding.

Even words whose meaning is thought unambiguous may be rendered ambiguous by context. Stating a clear falsehood (I do not mean lie) raises doubts in the mind of the reader.

 

 

Each paragraph is devoted to the subject alone and not changed in each paragraph.

Excellent objective. A cornerstone of good writing.

 

I like editorial writing plain and simple.
Editorials are opinion pieces in newspapers and journals. I suspect you may mean edited writing. At any rate there is ambiguity here. Also the sentence itself is inherently ambiguous. It could mean:

 

I like editorial writing, a style of writing that is plain and simple.

I like editorial writing when it is plain and simple.

 

These could have been conveyed by

 

I like editorial writing, plain and simple.

I like editorial writing to be plain and simple

 

Does any of the foregoing help?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MacPhee

Would it help if I dissected some of your posts and explained where, if anywhere, I fail to understand your meaning? If this fails to assist, or offends in any way, let me know and I shall stop.

 

My reading of your OP is as follows. I should like people to cleary understand me and to this end I try to write simply and avoid ambiguity. Despite this readers still seem to misinterpret what I write.

 

Let me know if that captures all the salient points of your thought. If so, then you are writing clearly at a strategic level; it's the tactics that are a bummer.

 

 

What do you mean here? I am not sure whether you mean you want to be a student of language, which would be the correct use of the word, or if you simply wish to communicate clearly, which would be incorrect usage. The balance of the paragraph suggests you mean the latter, so you are using a word incorrectly.

 

 

By introducing uneccssary and irrelevant brackets you destroy the correct sentence structure that is present without the brackets.

Its as a possessive pronoun has no apostrophe.

Semantic meaning appears redundant and incorrect at the same time. Semantics is about meaning and each word, phrase, sentence, etc can have more than one kind of meaning.Is there one?

 

 

Even words whose meaning is thought unambiguous may be rendered ambiguous by context. Stating a clear falsehood (I do not mean lie) raises doubts in the mind of the reader.

 

 

Excellent objective. A cornerstone of good writing.

 

Editorials are opinion pieces in newspapers and journals. I suspect you may mean edited writing. At any rate there is ambiguity here. Also the sentence itself is inherently ambiguous. It could mean:

 

I like editorial writing, a style of writing that is plain and simple.

I like editorial writing when it is plain and simple.

 

These could have been conveyed by

 

I like editorial writing, plain and simple.

I like editorial writing to be plain and simple

 

Does any of the foregoing help?

 

Doesn't your sentence: "I like editorial writing, plain and simple", actually convey this meaning: "It's plain and simple - I like editorial writing". That's to say - it's a plain and simple fact, that I like editorial writing?

Edited by MacPhee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eclogite,

Excellent. It would seem my style of writing is horrible. I have a fanaticism about being understood. I do not understand verbs and nouns, but Grammarly helps me with that problem. I love sentence structure more than verbs and nouns. I think the words should relate to the sentence and vice versa. I lean toward editorial writing or short and plain. With Grammarly if the word is underlined one just's right clicks it and a definition is given.

 

I cannot write perfect English, because as a human being, history has proven they have flaws. Why I resort to parentheses, I think is to make a point within the sentence, when a comma would work? It would seem I have a serious problem with "being understood without question". I do have a reading comprehension problem associated with a writing comprehension one as well. Please critique this writing. pljames

 

 

 

 

Would it help if I dissected some of your posts and explained where, if anywhere, I fail to understand your meaning? If this fails to assist, or offends in any way, let me know and I shall stop.

 

My reading of your OP is as follows. I should like people to cleary understand me and to this end I try to write simply and avoid ambiguity. Despite this readers still seem to misinterpret what I write.

 

Let me know if that captures all the salient points of your thought. If so, then you are writing clearly at a strategic level; it's the tactics that are a bummer.

 

 

What do you mean here? I am not sure whether you mean you want to be a student of language, which would be the correct use of the word, or if you simply wish to communicate clearly, which would be incorrect usage. The balance of the paragraph suggests you mean the latter, so you are using a word incorrectly.

 

 

By introducing uneccssary and irrelevant brackets you destroy the correct sentence structure that is present without the brackets.

Its as a possessive pronoun has no apostrophe.

Semantic meaning appears redundant and incorrect at the same time. Semantics is about meaning and each word, phrase, sentence, etc can have more than one kind of meaning.Is there one?

 

 

Even words whose meaning is thought unambiguous may be rendered ambiguous by context. Stating a clear falsehood (I do not mean lie) raises doubts in the mind of the reader.

 

 

Excellent objective. A cornerstone of good writing.

 

Editorials are opinion pieces in newspapers and journals. I suspect you may mean edited writing. At any rate there is ambiguity here. Also the sentence itself is inherently ambiguous. It could mean:

 

I like editorial writing, a style of writing that is plain and simple.

I like editorial writing when it is plain and simple.

 

These could have been conveyed by

 

I like editorial writing, plain and simple.

I like editorial writing to be plain and simple

 

Does any of the foregoing help?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't your sentence: "I like editorial writing, plain and simple", actually convey this meaning: "It's plain and simple - I like editorial writing". That's to say - it's a plain and simple fact, that I like editorial writing?

Quite possibly. I considered doing a second post in which I deconstructed my own first post in order to demoonstrate the difficulty of wrtiting clearly and umabiguously in English. (I cannot speak with authority for the difficulties in other languages, though one suspects similar issues exist.) Your example is a good illustration of this.

 

 

pj james, there is no way in which the sentence you rendered as As bad as I want to be a linguist I can't because the reader (interprets every word for it's perfect sematic meaning). should have a bracket, comma or any other punctuation between reader and interprets. It is wholly wrong to place one there. You could have placed one before because and possibly, though I doubt it, after word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Eclogite,

Excellent reply. But when one has a reading and writing disibility one has to do the best they can. I don't understand nouns and verbs. I desperately try to stay within the sentence structure. And edit the whole piece words and all. I am beside myself as why the reader interprets every word. The tone of the piece should be stated before the tone doing the tone or after the tone placement. I cannot write orderly or within a method or style of writing.

 

I am getting disgusted with why my writing has to be interpreted even if I edit all of it for meaning syntax and grammar, except this post, no editor. pljames

 

 

 

 

 

Would it help if I dissected some of your posts and explained where, if anywhere, I fail to understand your meaning? If this fails to assist, or offends in any way, let me know and I shall stop.

 

My reading of your OP is as follows. I should like people to cleary understand me and to this end I try to write simply and avoid ambiguity. Despite this readers still seem to misinterpret what I write.

 

Let me know if that captures all the salient points of your thought. If so, then you are writing clearly at a strategic level; it's the tactics that are a bummer.

 

 

What do you mean here? I am not sure whether you mean you want to be a student of language, which would be the correct use of the word, or if you simply wish to communicate clearly, which would be incorrect usage. The balance of the paragraph suggests you mean the latter, so you are using a word incorrectly.

 

 

By introducing uneccssary and irrelevant brackets you destroy the correct sentence structure that is present without the brackets.

Its as a possessive pronoun has no apostrophe.

Semantic meaning appears redundant and incorrect at the same time. Semantics is about meaning and each word, phrase, sentence, etc can have more than one kind of meaning.Is there one?

 

 

Even words whose meaning is thought unambiguous may be rendered ambiguous by context. Stating a clear falsehood (I do not mean lie) raises doubts in the mind of the reader.

 

 

Excellent objective. A cornerstone of good writing.

 

Editorials are opinion pieces in newspapers and journals. I suspect you may mean edited writing. At any rate there is ambiguity here. Also the sentence itself is inherently ambiguous. It could mean:

 

I like editorial writing, a style of writing that is plain and simple.

I like editorial writing when it is plain and simple.

 

These could have been conveyed by

 

I like editorial writing, plain and simple.

I like editorial writing to be plain and simple

 

Does any of the foregoing help?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eclogite,

I am disgusted with readers interpreting my word meanings. I try to edit all my writings. Grammarly is the only hope in hell I have to try to communicate with others. We do exist, the ones who know and understand our disibilities. Why try to understood what the writer meant by dissecting the piece? I like to get a word I do not understand and underline it and see the dictionary meaning of it. Could that work just a well? I envy you, but will never be able to come up to your level of understanding. We all have our own way of learning and understanding, what we have learned. That in itself might be the blind side of learning. I write to learn and learn from reading.

 

I do have Grammarly for my editor which I am happy with. It means even the dysfuntional can try to communicate with others. Thanks for your patients. Paul

Edited by pljames
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eclogite,

I am disgusted with readers interpreting my word meanings.

Do you think disgust is a helpful emotion in this situation? Why do you think they are interpreting your word meanings? Indeed, what do you mean by word meanings? do you mean the overal meaning you have tried to communicate with words, or do you mean the specific menaing of individual words? Or both? Or something else? Writing clearly isn't easy. Do you think it ought to be?

 

I try to edit all my writings. Grammarly is the only hope in hell I have to try to communicate with others.

Spell and grammar checkers are useful. They can ensure correct structure to your communication, but the problem you may be having lies with the content. Perhaps you need to spend more time thinking about what the central message you are trying to convey is.

 

Why try to understood what the writer meant by dissecting the piece?

Because that is one way of trying to understand what the writer meant. You seem to be offended when people dissect what you have written. Instead you should welcome their interest in seeking to understand what you have to say.

 

I like to get a word I do not understand and underline it and see the dictionary meaning of it. Could that work just a well?

That is a good practice, but it only gives you the menaing of individual words, not the thought conveyed by the sentences paragraph, or document.

 

We all have our own way of learning and understanding, what we have learned. That in itself might be the blind side of learning. I write to learn and learn from reading.

I don't know what you mean by "the blind side of learning".

 

Do you learn from writing, or from the reactions to your writing? If both, which is more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think disgust is a helpful emotion in this situation? Why do you think they are interpreting your word meanings? Indeed, what do you mean by [word meanings[/i]? do you mean the overall meaning you have tried to communicate with words, or do you mean the specific meaning of individual words? Or both? Or something else? Writing clearly isn't easy. Do you think it ought to be?

 

My biggest fault is I won't to write perfect, pride comes to mind.

Individual words with overall meanings.

 

 

Spell and grammar checkers are useful. They can ensure correct structure to your communication, but the problem you may be having lies with the content. Perhaps you need to spend more time thinking about what the central message you are trying to convey is.

 

The central meaning is the subject itself total meaning for the whole piece.

 

 

Because that is one way of trying to understand what the writer meant. You seem to be offended when people dissect what you have written. Instead you should welcome their interest in seeking to understand what you have to say.

 

 

That is a good practice, but it only gives you the menaing of individual words, not the thought conveyed by the sentences paragraph, or document.

 

Thought. I do not look at the words as thought?

 

 

I don't know what you mean by "the blind side of learning".

 

The blindside of learning is my disibility of writing (my way).

 

Do you learn from writing, or from the reactions to your writing? If both, which is more important.

 

I learn from a feedback. Thanks excellent post. Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it I can totally understand without interpreting, the news, worldly and local? Could it be you are (focused) on what you thought the writer meant and not what he said, word for word or the whole sentence? Is any language written to be interpreted as written or interpreted as what the reader thought the writer meant, like the bible? We cannot communicate because as a linguist looks at what they think the writer meant and not what he said.

 

Is all language a mystery imposing ones own interpretation? If the core word is ambiguous why can't the reader use the core word for all the synonyms related to the word? Pride? If that is the case I plead ignorance. Debate anyone? Paul

 

 

 

 

 

As bad as I want to be a linguist I can't because the reader (interprets every word for it's perfect sematic meaning). Is there one? I do not use ambiguous words, but try to use unambiguous words for a clearer understanding. Each paragraph is devoted to the subject alone and not changed in each paragraph. I like editorial writing plain and simple. How can I make myself more understood without making the piece more complexed by the interpretation of the reader? Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You continue to be obsessed with words, when words are only a part of the communication. The structure of writing is arguably more important than the words. That was why it was possible to understand Lewis Carrol when he wrote, "Twas brillig and the slithey toves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe. All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe." He inserted new and unknown words into a familiar structure.

 

Beyond that we need also to consider context. If you insist upon limiting your reading to the meaning of individual words, rather than their meaning when combined and placed in a specific context, then you will continue to be confused and dismayed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I write to inform, nothing less nothing more. And when I do I also learn from the feedback. I am a social and not technical writer. This is how I learn. My first mistake was to assume I was being understood by another social and not technical person. For that I apologize. I now understand why linguists do what they do.

 

Study what the writer inferred. But the word inferred causes me to ask why. I do not present this writing as technical but social only. I am slow of understanding, and this is my only way of understand.

 

I will not bother you again. But you have been more help than you know by your patiences alone. Thank you again. Paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eclogite,

I might have a clue of an answer to my problem of writing. You interpret my writing as technical and I mean it as social. Does does social writing involve structured writing or technical writing? To a point I would argue. But that's like apples and oranges, two different fruits.

 

How many premise points does it take to have a conclusion? Thank you for your patient's. Paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eclogite,

Do you see language as math? (2+2=4) type arrangement. Agreed one has to have all the components to arrive at the answer (4). But with words the only thing I can understand is there is two parts to a sentence, the introduction of a premise and the conclusion of that premise. How many premises would screw up the conclusion? Could the subject be the argument for the whole piece and the sentence be in an logical order per sentence? It would seem each sentence is a forgone conclusion in itself. Without some method like some kind of orderly list from the subject to the end of a paragraph it would seem the message would be garbled.

 

"What does their meaning defined mean?Paul

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You continue to be obsessed with words, when words are only a part of the communication. The structure of writing is arguably more important than the words. That was why it was possible to understand Lewis Carrol when he wrote, "Twas brillig and the slithey toves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe. All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe." He inserted new and unknown words into a familiar structure.

 

Beyond that we need also to consider context. If you insist upon limiting your reading to the meaning of individual words, rather than their meaning when combined and placed in a specific context, then you will continue to be confused and dismayed.

Edited by pljames
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...