[lit-ideas] Re: Translation Problem
- From: John Wager <jwager@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 20:52:43 -0500
Walter C. Okshevsky wrote:
Interesting. Young people's disregard of correct grammar may generalize to a
disregard for other normative expectations, including moral requirements.
"Normative" refers to the possibility of right and wrong, and thus of being
mistaken. But if young people today are unaware of a grammatical distinction
between "what is correct" and "what seems correct to me" or "who cares what is
deemed to be 'correct'" then their conception of the "normative" is already
askew at the git-go.
On the other hand, this skepticism about grammar might mean a
recognition of the difference between "convention" and "morality."
Where an apostrophe goes, or whether there is an apostrophe at all, is a
conventional standard that can be modified without destroying the
ability to communicate. Lots of students see other students who are
"deficient" in grammar being able to communicate well enough to obtain a
degree of material success, so they recognize that language skills are
not absolutely necessary. Other students don't really recognize how
"conventional" a lot of our standards are, and see morality and grammar
as equally binding, accepting the conventional in both as completely
normative. The skeptics may be able to see how a rational standard of
morality is not just a conventional standard better than the more
traditional student.
We would then not expect them to understand at the
meta-cognitive level that, like you know, there are certain imperatives that
are categorical for all rationally autonomous agents.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
