Errors

I believe that “errors” is a very touchy subject. Throughout my whole life, I have had many different teachers and each teacher has their own style of what they think is correct. In reality, everyone has his or her own opinions on what is an error and what is not an error. Depending on how you learned, what was right and wrong can directly affect your judgment on what may be considered an error. I think that we try to conform, make claims that something is error free, and have a general idea of correct grammar. I personally believe that there is no right or wrong when dealing with grammar, as I believe it is subject to your opinion.

I think it is interesting how people can be so concerned with another person’s grammar to the point where they will pick little things out and analyze how they use grammar in different situations. I feel like in my writing I may not have the best grammar to some people, but others find it to be grammatically correct and flow. I have had to establish my writing style for many teachers and each of my teachers or professors seem to comment on everything a little differently. As I try to adapt my style to one professors liking, a different professor will not like it. Therefore, it is an ongoing battle, trying to figure out which words to use in what way and how things could fit together better. Ultimately, I believe that writing and grammar is always up for interpretation depending on the reader.

The Phenomenology of Error

I just don’t see how making errors in a paper is a phenomenon. People do it all the time that it seems almost regular, like it supposed to happen. I don’t get how some errors can excite him while others don’t. Most people don’t even know that they are making errors because they be to busy trying to get their thoughts down on paper before they forget them.

I think that some of the most common errors that people make when their writing a paper tend to be when they are talking about themselves and someone else. So I completely understand where he is coming from in the beginning of the article where he says that people use “such errors as different than, between you and I and so on.” When people talk like that in a paper it completely irks my nerves. I think that is annoying because people don’t usually talk like that in person.

Some errors bother people more because I feel like they understand language better than others around them. Sometimes I won’t see a mistake being made in a paper that I am reading unless someone points it out to me. I do agree that some errors are less serious than others because again we don’t pay that much attention to how a person is writing and if their spelling is wrong. I just want to read their paper and try to understand what they are talking about. I don’t think that their errors are that important if they are just little things that can be overlooked its really not that serious.

The Phenomenology of Error

The social error is so common and I agree with everything he is saying about it how we spill coffee in someone’s lap, and step on a toe when we get up. I guess I never thought of error being so broad of a word. Because when I think of error I think of mistakes, not accidents.

I guess that it’s a true statement when he says, “some errors are less serious than others.” Not all errors are the same but they do all have right and wrongs. Some teacher might think that an error is right, and some may think that the exact same error is wrong. So basically the mistakes that are made are up to the writer to decide where their guidelines are. Every writer has a specific type of creativity form, and that makes writing such a broad expansion on how to write. Writers obviously will also break their own rules as well, meaning that everyone makes grammatical errors in everything a they may write. We honor the fact when someone makes graded marks on our papers to make us become a better writer.

I feel that the more you write, and then more you understand the language of reading and writing and the logical sense of understanding the content that you will find yourself to making less grammatical errors, but in the end.. not everyone will be a perfect writer. In fact no one is.

Errors

Overall, the article made some very good points when it came to writing errors. Errors in the English language are so prevelant, it's impossible not to make mistakes, even when you are a well-known author. As long as the mistakes don't distract from the main intention of the piece, you, as the audience wouldn't even question the so-called mistake at hand. The truth is, writing in general is so subjective, that it doesn't really matter what mistakes are made. Writing is an art form that should be left up to the writer to break said guidlines. Rules are made to be broken, especially for the creative spirit. And as pointed out, some of the greatest authors of all time never really followed all the rules of writing. I personally find bad grammar irritating, but if it doesn't affect the overall themes of the piece, I can accept it. Writing, like many things should be judged on content, and nothing more. As long the author conveys their message effectively, then all the rest should be secondary.

Errors

In Williams' essay on errors he emphasizes the fine line between knowing what a writing error is, and actually being able to follow every single grammatical rule. In the beginning of the essay, Williams talks about a William Zinsser who apparently used words like "atrocity" and "horrible" when describing common grammatical mistakes, in which Williams makes light of by saying things going on in Afghanistan and Cambodia are "horrible atrocities", not grammatical errors. I think the main point of the essay was to question the strict rules of grammar, because writing's main purpose should be simply to communicate with a reader, and not follow someone's made up guidelines for correct writing procedure. The essay continues on to discuss the fact that the very people who make up rules in writing, such as E.B. White, author of The Elements of Style, constantly contradict themselves by breaking their own rules. He does this to show that it is, quite frankly, impossible to not make any grammar mistakes in any piece of writing. He also locates errors with both readers and writers, and brings up an interesting point that authors make mistakes and even their editors, the people paid to find any mistakes, miss them on a regular basis. At the end of the article he even explains that the very essay that he wrote contained at least one-hundred mistakes, proving that it is simply an inevitability.

ERROR

I think the whole "phenomenon "with error is that it is highly subjective. Different people and different contexts will elicit different responses (if any) to an "error." Williams talks about how some errors can be very infuriating and offensive to some people while other errors are merely overlooked. He pointed out that social errors require more apologizing and amending than grammatical errors, such as "an elbow bump," so why do readers place so much emphasis on seemingly meaningless errors found in a text? Williams mentions that it is far from an "atrocity" in the real sense of offensive. A social error requires an apology, an excuse, one may even be harshly reprimanded; a grammatical error doesn't require an "Oh, I'm sorry."

I really liked how Williams pointed out the difficulty in studying this concept of "error." He said that scholars will always have an answer and that answer will coordinate with what one thinks is right according to some handbook by some other scholar, even if society has been using a word/phrase in a particular way for centuries. He talked about how the rule maker makes trivial errors in his own writing, and no one (not even himself) notices. So why do we even question errors?
If we are asked to look for errors we will surely find them. Error exist in so many places but if the content is still understandable and the point has been made, why must one search for errors that will only make the writing seem less credible? If we are looking for something to be wrong we will find it! Error is "in the eye of the beholder." It is found in the writer, the reader, and the rule maker. Error can never be avoided but one can choose whether or not it is necessary to address.

Also, I now keep thinking about all the errors I am sure I have made.

Spam 3

The writer is trying to induce pity from the reader by telling the reader about her parents death and how her fathers death may have been plotted by other family members. The writer tries to make it sound credible. The typos make the writer sound somewhat uneducated. So we decided that the spam mail was Pathos because she is ovbiously trying to appeal to the readers emotions and make them feel sorry for her and in turn want to help her out.

Lindsey Todorov, Alyssa Brown, Ike Andrews

Spam 3 Rhetoric

Ethos is present in this article as the writer is trying to make herself as believe as possible. She gives much information about her personal life, background and the current situation at hand in order to make this letter as believeable as possible.

Pathos is very apparent in this article because the whole letter is emmotional, basically trying to get the reader to feel bad for her. Shes uses examples such as her mom dying at the age of six, also her dad mysteriously disappears when she is the age of 21. She uses very captivaling words that draw emmotion to her situation. She also uses very bad grammer, showing that she really is not very intelligent.

This letter mostly appeals to pathos.

Rhetoric Appeals

In the introduction, the writer trys to seem credible by saying that he is the Senior Staff in the File Department at the African Development Bank. This is an example of ethos because he is trying to show that he is an important and credible person. He also tries to appeal to the reader by saying that the operation is confidential. We think that this makes the reader feel important and more willing to cooperate. The writer mentions that this transaction would have no risk since he is an insider which makes the reader feel safe about going through with this. These are both examples of a pathos appeal.

Spam 2 - Rhetoric.

None of the rhetorical appeals are strong enough to make us feel like anything.

There is an aspect of pathos because he is asking for sympathy and help for the family affected by the accident, but it's not like he is asking for a million dollars or anything.

There is also a small aspect of ethos in the fifth paragraph when the writer says that there isn't any risk being involved, and that he is an insider, so he seems trustworthy.

Kylie.

Pearl.

Keisha.

Spam 2; Rhetoric

Pathos: He uses pathos by explaining how someone had passed away and how we should help them out by givin them your account, so that we can recieve money in return.
Ethos: By making himself sound like he has authority by telling us he works at a bank
Logos: There really isnt any logos in this piece of spam becuase the spelling sucks, and anyone who were to read this piece of mail would understand that it's not true.

Spam Rhetoric

The spam letter that we read was the Spam Rhetoric letter. The letter shows all three rhetorical appeals in trying to persuade the reader to participate in working with him. The author uses ethos by telling the reader that he is aa Audit Debt Manager for the Bank of Africa. He also uses pathos by telling us about the family who died in Iraq and asking the reader if he can trust you and if you are ready to work with him. Logos is used in the introduction when he opens his letter with "How are you." He makes it informal to sound more like a friend than a stranger. He also uses it when telling the reader about the sum of two million five hundred thousand united states dollars. Another part that shows logos is when he makes the letter sound confidential by telling the reader if he is not interested to delete the letter. Overall the letter is poorly written but shows all theree forms of rhetoric.

Error or Not?

Actually before reading Williams Phenomenology of Error I looked up the definition of error. According to dictionary.com definition #1, "Error - A deviation from accuracy or correctness; a mistake, as in action or speech: His speech contained several factual errors."

After having read Williams paper, I feel that the first few pages were simply describing the common misunderstanding of what an "error" is on a social level. Due to so many people seeing just the "seriousness" of error, it lacks that understanding that the definition of error itself is not a serious or unjustified action; simply just a "deviation from accuracy or correctness."

I feel that the main point Williams is trying to tell us is that even though he might see error one way(on a more proper professional level), us(general public) might see error another way, and when asking one another if there is an error in X we ourselves end up with more errors than we began with.

Williams goes on to show that people with fine grammar violate their own rules which I feel correlates to what I said in the paragraph above. It has to be seen as what the reader understands to be an error, and how that understanding of error got into them from it's origin. I see that Williams is more closely trying to explain error in the sense of the reader rather than the writer because error is physical on paper; but not physical when it come's from within ourselves.

Even after writing this post I noticed multiple errors in my preview in which I understand to be simple grammatical errors, but maybe to others something far more different.....

The Perception of Our Errors

In this weeks reading, Williams' "Phenomenology of Error" discusses in depth the severity of writing errors. He mentions how some errors are more profound than many others. He even shows how some authors who write about these errors do not always follow their own teachings. Williams also looks at who determines the errors that are acceptable or not acceptable. Every reader who looks at a writing will find many errors, but every reader will find errors in different places. Since every reader will find different errors it makes me think if there can ever be a perfect paper. Although the writer may believe it to be perfect there will always be someone out there to find something wrong with it. Williams looks at these errors in great detail, further than i could comprehend. In the end i'm sure authors will keep making these errors and readers will find more errors to fix.

Errors, not really that Phenominal

Well, first of all, I think errors are "wrong" depending upon who is reading the paper and their level of knowledge about the English language. My level of critical reading would certainly be lower in criticism compared to the author of this article, a professor, or perhaps even people in this class. We all view error on different levels and see things as being "wrong" in different ways. This is especially apparent when you compare what a person or ordinary knowledge's criticisms to that of an English professor, or like minded practitioner. I think William's main point about mechanical errors is that overall they are not all that important because everyone sees them in a different manner and light.

He shows the errors of the professionals to illustrate the futility of making abstract grammatical rules. Also, it shows the importance of differences between these experts theory and actual practice of the English language. I think that he is locating errors in both the readers and writers in this essay and is trying to show that everyone is at least guilty some of the time and that being super critical of simple mistakes is arbitrary.

The Phenomenology of Error

A few paragraphs into reading "The Phenomenology of Error", I could tell that it was a scholarly article and that it was meant for writing teachers. For me this reading selection was almost somewhat difficult for me to read and fully understand because of the way it was worded. At some point I found myself re-reading in many spots because after I would read a few paragraphs I would stop because I was not fully sure about what I had read because it almost was written too well for me to comprehend. Also it may just be me, but the selection sometimes seemed a little repetitive when he was trying to make his points.

I am not sure if this was his main point but he did state "The point is this: We can discuss error in two ways: we can discuss it at a level of conscoiusness that places that error at the very center of our consciousness. Or we can talk about how we experience (or not) what we popularly call errors of usage as they occur in the ordinary course of our reading a text". The way he worded this, in my opinion seems that he is saying that he can discuss where the origin of the error comes from, from our own knowledge and what we think is correct. Or he can discuss errors that occur in writing and why they are errors.

"The Phenomenology of Error" made me realize how common errors in writing are. He even makes it a point to show examples of grammarians making errors in their writings. It made me realize how easy it is to make errors while your writing, even when what your writing is on errors that other people make in their writing and how to correct them and then making the error a few sentences later. I think he shows these examples to show that even people who's job it is to check for errors and make corrections still miss some of them. There are so many rules for writing that it is hard for one person to remember all of them all the time, and that some errors sound gramatically correct or do not look wrong and these errors are just passed and not corrected.

I think that Williams locates the error in the reader and the writer but at the same time neither. The reader may be at fault because they might not be looking for specific errors while they are reading and therefore may miss some errors. Or the reader may just not know every single rule or be able to look for every kind of error that could be made while they are reading. The writer could also be at fault because when they are writing, they are writing their thoughts and even though something might be an error, it sounds correct.

The Phenomenology of error

In this article there is a lot of information that deals with so many different types of errors that some a lot of people would never think of. There are so many different kinds of rules in terms of usage and grammar that it is almost too overwhelming. We learn so many different and unique rules that I never would have ever thought of. The hard thing like he says is that some rules can get some people very upset at them while to others it is not a big deal to them at all. If every single person in the world spoke and wrote the most right way possible it would sound so weird to most people. Last year my college writing professor was like this and spoke in very proper English all the time during class and she even had some blog posts of her speaking like this. It was so different from the way I am used to hear people talk that it sounded like it was not very proper English to me. But actually it was so proper that it just seemed foreign to me. This is mainly because there are a very little amount of people who actually talked that way in their everyday life. I think that proper grammar is not as important in some things as in others. Obviously when talking to your friends the majority of people do not talk in the most proper English possible. But writing a paper or mainly a job resume, people should try to make it as proper as they possibly can because if their boss is a true grammar freak then their errors alone might keep them from getting that job.

Error of our ways or ways of our error?

After reading the first few paragraphs of The Phenomenology of Error, I thought it was dull and a bit dry in parts. I understand why we read this piece but felt that it complicated a somewhat straightforward idea by trying to oversimplify the point. Yes, it is important to understand what error is and even though it's difficult to pinpoint an overall consensus among everyone on what error really is, it is also important to understand and maybe even cater to one's audience. If they do not notice, understand, or even care then the error(s) in the writing as Williams demonstrated with excerpts from White and Orwell, are not so crucial. On the other hand, if one is checking for grammatical errors then, of course, it is important to be spot on with usage but again that cannot be done easily if everyone disagrees with what is error and what is not. I felt that this piece did not have to be so long or need every single example that was used to make his intent understood. I found his examples like "Can't nobody tell what be happening four year from now." to be funny at first but as he kept using more of them, it just became redundant (kind of like my post) and just made it more to read.

Electronic Writing

I have blogged on and off since 2005 and, fairly recently, in 11011 last spring. It wouldn't be too far of a stretch to say that in the last 10 years, I haven't gone more than 10 days without writing electronically. AOL instant messenger, email, Xanga, Myspace, Facebook, text messages, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint...All of those things I've used quite frequently at some point in the past or present.

I have written substantially more electronically than I have on paper, and spend more time writing electronically. Since high school, my main reason for pen-and-paper has been to write down my homework in a planner, make a to do list on a Post-it Note, or answer questions on loose leaf for homework assignments. I do prefer checking things off of a list with a pen because I physically have to cross it off the list and I feel more accomplished than if I just highlighted the word and pressed strike-through. Other than that, typing is the way to go for me. It looks cleaner, is more eco-friendly, and it's harder to lose things when they're on my computer or phone.

Writing electronically speeds up the writing process for me sometimes. If you don't like something you write, you just delete it. No messing with erasers or crossing it out. Although, I also edit as I go when I'm typing something out, which sometimes takes longer because you're not writing as much. Pen-and-paper isn't as good of a medium for editing as you go because there's just not enough space (at least with my large hand-writing). As far as getting my ideas down, I have the same thoughts whether it's pen-and-paper or typing it out. I guess I just use electronic writing more because I can't get away from it, and a lot of times, am required to use it.

John's Sideburns

Alyssa Brown
John Abersold
Lindsey Todorov
Ike Andrews

Someone who can’t grow facial hair or a stalker

Someone trying to make money off him because they believe he’ll be famous. Someone who needs his hair for a voodoo doll. Someone trying to make a fake beard, mustache or chest hair.

Half-Empty Mouth Wash

1. One possibility is a person who mistook it for an unopened bottle. Or, a person with low income and bad oral hygiene. Possibly a person just looking to help him out, or to do it for the thrill. Then again, it could have been an underage alcoholic.

2. It probably sold because people wanted to help him out. People may have bought it to brag that they have an item of this mans life.

The first item we looked at was the half-empty bottle of mouthwash. We assumed that the type of person that bought the mouthwash was most likely already following the website and wanted to be a part of the project. The buyer was probably intrigued by it because they thought it was a funny piece of memoribilia.

The T-4 Super and 50 photographs

a. We think that an art teacher could have bought this item for the photographs.
b. Some high school art teachers collect random photos or objects for students to use for projects. Since this camera came with 50 photos, this could appeal to the teacher.

all my life for sale item

We chose the $25 bill and 3 photocopies of it. We think the kind of person that bought this item was a random old guy who likes collecting bills and coins. We believe it sold because there weren't many of them made and they were never circulated so its a very unique piece of art. This guy must have a whole room devoted to his hobby and has many books filled with coins from all over the world and different time periods.

By: Bailey A. and Vince A.

All My Life for Sale - Mark's Christmas Gift

This item is simply an unopened present. Why would someone want to buy something and not even know what it really is?

Perhaps the person who bought this was a lonely person who didn't have family or friends around. This person just really wanted a present for Christmas that would be a surprise, and not something that they picked out and bought for himself.

Or, maybe the person who bought this was crunched for time and needed a present to take to a White Elephant gift exchange at work or another Christmas party. He didn't care what was inside it or how crappy it was because he didn't care about the person he was giving it to.

Why did something as random as this sell?

It sold because it was random. Some people just like having random things and think it's fun. Even if it was given to someone that the buyer cared about, he could explain the story behind the gift. I'm sure it would have been unforgettable.

-Pearl, Kylie, Keisha