Straight to the point
You know, there's a very great misunderstanding of what becomes 'good English', over here in my side of the world. And this isn't something to laugh about really.
See the SPM is next week, and I just felt it was timely for me to bring this up.
Several years ago, when I first entered varsity, and people were still talking about how well one did in the SPM examinations, during a time when the 1119 examination was still considerably challenging, we oft spoke about how teachers graded papers, and how best to score in the examinations.
A friend, I can't quite recall his name right now, told me, that
1119 was no joke. I had to study the dictionary several times, to pick up as many bombastic words as possible. the A1s went to the essays that were flowing with bombastic words, you see, and everyone wants an A1.
Oh sure, looking up the dictionary to pick up bombastic words is NOT a joke, aye. I can try not to laugh at that.
Now pardon me for being arrogant, please. I wish to remind some people again that I deal with the subject every day, and I meet people who still think like that. I'm quite sure that some teachers and employers get impressed when they see apparent fluency in spewing out exquisitely difficult-to-pronounce syllables. However, I'd strongly advise parents and teachers to take the easier route.
Go for easy readability. That's far more exciting to read, and definitely more engaging than malapropism.
I've asked Yu Ming, who has been so kind as to allow me to cite his blog as an example. I've told him I'll be candid, maybe a little cruel, but seriously it's hard to come across such prime examples in recent times. But here goes, thank you Yu Ming for allowing me to use your blog to explicate (oh this is a bombastic word, my bad) why it is so important to be easily understood, than to cause nerve-wrecking returns to the drawing board, wondering, 'What on earth is he trying to say?'
When I was a fifth former, a friend wrote this line in her papers,
'I heard the tintinabulation of the chime bells and was very soon adrift in my journey to the mystical plaza of dreamland, the grateful gesture of appreciation attributed, no less, to its soothing ting-a-ling-a-ling.
MAHAI. But don't swear yet. My take is: wouldn't it be far simpler to say, 'I hear the ringing of the bells and was soon asleep.'
Sure, that friend had a fantastic command of English, no doubts to that, but when she came back to me cursing the teacher for giving her a less-than-expected C3, it was very hard to sympathize with her.
Simply put, I thought she 'tried too hard'.
I first came across Yu Ming, after I was 'flamed' on 'You're All Idiots'. Don't mind me, Yu Ming, I find the blog entertaining with a purpose. Flaming is a purpose, and I happen to find that site funny. Maybe I'm a masochist also lah but wtf, that post about minisotsux sent me off in guffaws. But I digress and back to you.
From that site I went to Yu Ming's blog, who was one of the victims of the two-girls-and-a-guy team. Well. I must say that baga-fym is certainly far too profound for my simplistic mind. The first word I saw on the site was 'gestation', near the tagboard, and immediately in my mind, I saw a very ugly scene of pregnant hamsters in labour. With blood all over the shavings. Nabeh. Disgusting vision, I tell you.
So here, it's true that to 'gestate' means to think of an idea, HOWEVER, I find 'gestations' far too absurd a word to be used in a situation when obviously, 'your thoughts' would be so much easier to digest, for sure.
I pointed out to Yu Ming that his English was amazing, the command is quite fantastic. I mean, how many blogs you read can actually come up with this fatalistically shocking line:
As complicated as the business web can get, so can the constantly fluctuating human heart. To give, receive, console, take, forget…it takes a gargantuan effort of desire, sacrifice and above all else? Love. In a vastly diversified, rapidly developing world, monumental to success would be this cushioning network…something that we can turn to in times of descendency.
I thought it was rather too 'geng chao' for my pea brain, and at the same time I'm amazed that students do write like this. I'm quite sure there are some teachers who will mark the kid as an A-grade, at the same time, I personally know some examiners who will plunk this into the B3 grade box for the heck of it being OTT.
I'm not famous for being 'nice' at all, and obviously I feel Yu Ming can write, however, I feel he tries a tad too hard. The presentation feels constipated. So I very candidly asked him whether he spoke the way he wrote. After which I requested the permission to use his blog in a blog post, namely, THIS post.
Incredibly, and understandably, some readers are quick to praise Yu Ming as a 19 year old with a lot of humility. On my part, I find Yu Ming's posts rather hard to follow, because the variety of vocabulary available on show seems almost as if he had carefully considered every single possible thesaurus alternative there is for each noun, verb, adjective and adverb before he decided to employ them. So no, I wouldn't be so hasty to call all that humility. Besides, he IS a blogger after all, and I've yet to come across a blogger who is truly humble. I'm definitely NOT humble myself. Heh.
I feel that perhaps, baga-fym has a gross misunderstanding of what good English involves. I don't think it's Yu Ming's fault really, his English is very good, no doubts about that.
A tad too good, perhaps, and the notion that 'too much is not good 'is not exactly easily explained to many young students out there. They hardly realize that it is far more economical to be simple and understood.
Shall we then throw the blame upon the many teachers, parents and senior friends who encourage a young and gullible generation that Good English = Bombastic Words? Maybe, but let's just keep this post a personal, highly opinionated blog post, shall we? And not crack knuckles over it.
Now please understand it was not my intention to put up rules as to HOW to blog well and be famous, here. Today, my concern is purely educational, and hey, SPM is coming, and I have f0ur students sitting the exam next week, and I am concerned. They can't write as well as Yu Ming can, and they do not have his exacting command of English that will enable them to differentiate between the meanings of 'exuberant', 'exited' and 'joyous'. To them, 'being happy' is 'being happy', and that's about the best way to describe 'being happy' (and why not).
My concern is the fact that I do not want students who do not have a 20k-word vocabulary to mull over unnecessary concerns as to whether one knows enough difficult words or not. As far as I'm concerned, I don't bother about lengthy, difficult to understand texts. As long as you call a spade a spade, and I like the honesty that breathes from your words, I like you. And that's that.
November 1st, 2005 at 4:35 pm
Well I guess high vocabulary isn’t without the content which it’s spoken in. Otherwise you’re going to end up with an essay that essentially gives the same points in many many ways for example:
I used my fork to eat a potato.
I utilized a multi-tined tool in order to process a starch like resource.
Not exactly A1 when the essay ends up with redundant sentences with no points now right?
November 1st, 2005 at 4:40 pm
Simple metaphor.
Big vocabulary is like big dick, okay? Just because you have big dick doesn’t make you popular with the ladies, you know?
There’s that thing that’s called, oh, you know, technique.
November 1st, 2005 at 4:42 pm
well, let me be the first minishorts, if you don’t mind.
honestly, maybe i do sound abit too flirtatious when i write, but i can call a spade a spade with no problems at all. I used to do that, just that some people couldn’t take the bare naked truths. So i turned to more, how should i say…”gentle” language? And yea, i do not look up the thesaurus to replace words, vocab is something that i pick up along the way.
anyways, my blogroll does contain a few blogs that have even better wordplay, both sarcastic and gleeful. and these are no strangers but great buddies of mine. so perhaps it’s the influence? haha…
Anyways, all the best to your students for their SPM! And yes, you’re right when you say they don’t need to waste their time mulling over words. They simply cannot afford to do that.
Cheers lady!
November 1st, 2005 at 4:52 pm
edrei: eh. that one memang lebih lah.
t-boy: oh hoh hoh.. *technique* isn’t something quite easy to pick up. unfortunately, ppl with big dicks think too highly of themselves and like to coincide size with style and erm, ‘good wordplay’. padahal this is not the case lah, obviously.
baga: i don’t drink online, eh. and urm. i maintain that malapropism is not good wordplay.
November 1st, 2005 at 4:58 pm
I find his posts quite hard to follow too, but I admit that his command of English is really good.
November 1st, 2005 at 5:01 pm
Darling, like any other communicative endeavour, writing and fucking have one thing in common—if you refuse to consider your audience, it doesn’t matter what size dick you have, you’ll still suck at it.
November 1st, 2005 at 5:28 pm
First thing I thought when I read your post - Shit, I’m reminded about my SPM again …
but anywayz, I agree with what you’ve said.
November 1st, 2005 at 5:34 pm
T-boy:-
haha size does not matter !
November 1st, 2005 at 5:35 pm
I second what minishorts say. Then again, I have no idea what malapropism means, but I like to think I agak-agak know what she’s talking about lah.
Dropped by baga-fym, and I have to admit, I admire his fantabulous (see, I know bombastic words too) command of English. Problem is that my english not so powderful, and I find myself having to often reread sentenses just to catch his drift. And so, I click away.
It’s like coming across an encrypted advertisement. Placed in public view, but by the form that it was written it, discriminates against who it’s readers should be. I don’t see anything wrong with that, I just personally find it irritating. (Unless I can read it, then i’ll think it’s cool!)
November 1st, 2005 at 5:54 pm
First, if you will excuse me for being a pedant, but the first sentence:
“As complicated as the business web can get, so can the constantly fluctuating human heart.”
Doesn’t ring true to English. It should have the word ‘TOO’ in there. Like this:
“As complicated as the business web can get, so too can the constantly fluctuating human heart.”
BUT, after saying that, his command of English is better than some people I know who are native English speakers. So I must congratulate him on his efforts in learning the language.
Second, allow me to quote a relative of mine from Scotland who is long dead, Robert Louis Stevenson.
“Write to be understood.”
This is the primary focus of any reason to write. Soem of it requires us to write to our audience. If we are writing for primary school kids, then ‘One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish Blue Fish’ is probably the level we need to be aiming at.
Most average people in Australia communicate on a Year 9 English level. I know this, as I’ve seen the stats. It was with this in mind, that one of my old lecturers wrote a Physics text book aimed at that English level. It was by far the BEST school text book I’d ever read. It was easy to understand and Winston (my old lecturer) was a great lecturer too.
After saying this though, it also depends on the audience that Yu Ming is targeting. If he is deliberately trying to make his writing inaccessible to lesser minds, then he is probably succeeding. After all, there is no better way to exclude people that to speak in jargon or above their heads.
If he is deliberately doing it in order to make himself seem intellectual, then I would suggest that he try to do that in the content of what he writes rather than with big words.
The purpose of communicating is to get a message from yourself to others. If you are failing to do this due to big words, then the problem lies with the communicator not those the message is intended for.
Regardless of how intellectual you may want to seem, if the reader is spending a lot of time and effort looking up large words, then they are likely to give up and go read something else.
As they say in a lot of creative/artistic industries, ‘more is less’.
I should also add, that it’s not just over your side of the world either Minishorts, it also happens in Australia.
Oh, and I am a humble blogger - they gave me a T-Shirt which said ‘Humblest Blogger Ever’. I ran around doing a victory lap. Then they took the T-shirt off me as they said it was self defeating!
[Yes, I made that up!]
November 1st, 2005 at 6:51 pm
there was once i helped my school mag editor pick out articles to publish and we came across an essay written by a junior. it was about globalisation. we knew that cuz the title of the essay was “globalisation”. but if we didn’t have the title to guide us, all the article said was “haha-i-can-put-10-bombastic-words-in-one-sentence-can-you?”
gawd.
we didn’t publish it.
but then, he went on to win truckloads of awards and is now on his way to med school, so…*shrugs*
hey didn’t you write something similar to this some time ago? it was a “how to write well” kinda post thingamajig.
November 1st, 2005 at 7:09 pm
Well said, Dabido. There are many literary masterpieces out there where a more ‘minimalist’ approach in their prose was employed, not because of their authors are incapable of using fancy big words, but more because they moderate their own choices of words carefully in order not to make everything sound too bloated or over-the-top, to sustain a careful atmosphere for their works.
So what if you have a massive vocabulary that surpasses anyone else’s when you cannot even express something from your own heart properly? Of course, you can always make an argument that what you write is intended to stimulate the mind, an intellectual exercise instead of something that is from the heart. But what happens if the layers of flowery prose employed to improve the aesthetic qualities of your writings are peeled away and all we see is nothingness? Nothingness like the achievements of a forgotten King of Pop after his complicated entanglement with children? Then your writing is nothing more than a pathetic masquerade. And yes, the last few lines was a masquerade too.
In the past, especially during my SPM, I DID attempt to write like that, and yes, it rather easily got me an A1, but I did feel rather underwhelmed with what I wrote then because it wasn’t ‘honest writing’, it was me utilizing certain technical methods just to get a goddamn A1. I can still remember it. It kinda sounded like the following:
“Death hovered over him, observing him methodically, its cold lingering touch barely inches away from the pale wrinkled skin of the old man. Yet the old man was oblivious to its presence, how could he be aware of his own harsh predicament when he was struggling hard to stay within the realm of consciousness? It was impossible for him to ignore the piercing agony he felt when his ruptured lungs scraped at his broken ribs, inflicted upon him by his venomous torturers.”
It’ll probably impress little kids aspiring to be writers, but to the mass populace, I’m sure it looked pretty shitty and over-the-top eh?> Hate it when what I write lacks authenticity.
November 1st, 2005 at 7:42 pm
Words from the thesarus are useful for what you call a descriptive composition (akin to what those Sec3/4 students need to write) only.
Definitely not very smart to use bombastic words to discuss issues cos it only serves to confuse the readers and totally not get your point across.
November 1st, 2005 at 7:55 pm
In defence of Yu Ming
Let me first say that I agree with Minishorts and Dabido for pointing out that lnaguage needs to be understood, for after all the primary function of language IS communication and should not be solely a personal ‘wanking’ exercise (forgive the vulgarity), BUT…
I think Yu Ming is not wrong for attempting to write in a high-fluting manner, because judging from the little that I have seen n his blog and his comments here, his outburst of ‘bombastications’ and ‘floweriness’ stem out of a genuine love and pleasure of language, hence his use of language is an expression, outflow of his very own self (and soul). People like Yu Ming have a natural flair with language that others don’t, and should have the freedom to explore this creative and artistic side of himself. Indeed, language in the hands of language stylists become an art in itself, carrying with it the voice, the tone, the intricacies of the ‘artist’.
However, if a person intentionally choses to use high-variety language as a sign of superiority to condescend on others, then language degenarates into snobbery. Indeed, the common vernacular or the language of the street is as poetic and as beautiful as such ‘flowery’ language, especially in the hands of people like Hemingway (again) and Mart Twain who gave American literature distinct voices of its own.
November 1st, 2005 at 8:02 pm
Sometimes I am also guilty of using highly bombastic words, such as “dipshit”, “fucktard” and “barfbucket”. A simple “idiot” should have sufficed. No wonder those simple minds can’t understand me. Nabeh….
November 1st, 2005 at 8:04 pm
wah, i wrote a rather pushy comment then just deleted the whole thing. i don’t see what’s wrong with baga-fym’s blog, nor do i see anything wrong with his posts.
if he has flights of fancy and let’s his need to express overcome his “good, grammatical sense” whatever that means, then he can only be accused of over-writing.
all this questioning of his “sincerity” or honesty is, frankly, bewildering. does he have a good command of the language? in my opinion he generally does, and he generally does make grammatical errors, if not semantic slip-ups (if the word “semantic” doesn’t incite the already-raging mob, that is..).
sure, we should all aim for brevity, less over-writing and all of that, but we’re not all Stunkians, and we’re not all as brilliantly sparse as Hemmingway, so what gives?
see, this is where it really gets my goat: it’s not his *content* that you’re disagreeing with, it’s with his *mode of expression*, from which so many conclusions are drawn about the kind of person he is, or the kind of person he thinks he is.
all this talk of big dicks and fluency is just so much fluff in the end, lah.
now i very BLUR liao why this is happening!
November 1st, 2005 at 8:20 pm
Yeah, couldn’t agree less that YM’s got a very good command of English. Well, I used to browse the dictionary back when I was still in secondary school (to learn a few new words a day). Trust me, it works
November 1st, 2005 at 8:26 pm
Yu Ming?
The perfidious prolixity of this antipodean auto-didact augurs awfully for his forthcoming foibles. For fancy-fangled fustian frippery, fitfully fetching, fails fantastically to arouse my awe. Such sesquipedalian silliness seems suspect. Instead, the po-faced puerile prosodic pabulum prompts a piss-take.
-Justin
November 1st, 2005 at 8:26 pm
I remember my 1119! I went to the exam not having a clue what the format was like, wrote an essay on falling in love, and came back with an A1… teeheehee. gloat gloat gloat. brag brag brag. WOOT!
November 1st, 2005 at 8:44 pm
MSguests, Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo, don’t they?
November 1st, 2005 at 9:15 pm
Oh shit, I forgot to log off from Minishorts’ when I was using Justin’s computer back then, thus his name appeared as ‘MSGuests’.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:35 pm
“Go for easy readability. That’s far more exciting to read, and definitely more engaging than malapropism.”
Hmm…1119…I remember not getting an A for that
The thing is….I’ve always written very simply, but for grades here it might not be the best thing 
Then again, I also remember handing in some 20 minute essay.
*shrug*
November 1st, 2005 at 10:38 pm
nice one, eliar…hehehehe….
November 1st, 2005 at 10:39 pm
Aiyoh…tak faham at all the excerpt. My brain somehow shuts down when I know I’m reading a blog, maybe, so I never absorb the way I would if it was printed in a book.
Nanowrimo now! Write woman write!
November 1st, 2005 at 10:47 pm
(sorry mini, for flooding)
I think..in the end…Language should just be loved
As long as people can tell you love it, it doesn’t matter how you say it.
But if language comes off used and abused for a purpose beyond that of communication / literature…but ego, then…….yeah. Sad.
Does this make sense to anyone asides from me?
November 1st, 2005 at 11:56 pm
I’m a firm believer in ‘writing for your audience’. If your readers are the intellectual sort who tend to use profound and bombastic words as well, then by all means write that way. If your readers can’t er.. read or understand what you’ve writen, then it defeats the whole purpose.
MY personal rule of thumb when it comes to writing ANYTHING is this: “If I myself don’t understand the sentence or word I’m writing, then I won’t use it. When in doubt, DELETE.”
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:11 am
minishorts, what about at the other extreme? when i was in university, we were required to take a compulsory english paper in each year of our courses. the level III (highest level required) used a textbook that was part of the british school curicullum for 10 year olds.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:12 am
oops… what i wanted to add was that the passing rate was under 80% for undergraduates completing 3 or 4 years of university degree studies. i would rather a society that ‘tries too hard’ as opposed to one that cannot write simple english.
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:07 am
1119 is nothing compared to overseas english la… i am an average student and did my last essay in 15 minutes and got an A2… thats when i know how crappy it is…
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:56 am
There’s a difference between having a good command of the English language and having a good writing STYLE.
To me, someone who has a good command of the language is one who has an extensive vocabulary and whereas one who can write well is someone who manages to twist the language to his/her desires, to make the language work for the author and to find the perfect words which slides into place, so the completed piece of writing is a flawless jigsaw puzzle.
Someone who has a good writing style does not have to try to insert as many bombastic words into their writing to show off their vocab.it is inherent from their skilful play of words that they already have that, and more.
basically, having a good command of the english language is easy. another who knows how to read and memorise a dictionary can do that, but to be able to write so well that you leave your readers feeling goosebumps without once using a bombastic word? that’s a gift.
not too mention, writing a post which consists of bombastic words comes across as being too technical and boring.
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:05 am
Blah. No wonder I got a C6 for my 1119. Was damn pissed off because I thought I aced it. Maybe I used too many big words.
November 2nd, 2005 at 6:11 am
i do not write well but to have yu ming’s writings criticized by someone with your lacklustre grasp on the language is nothing short of a travesty.
your supposed english is but a translation from chinese- a mistake that most people, myself included, make out of habit.
yu ming’s writing will not appear to be pretentious if you care to read more non fiction books that put emphasis on intellectual discourses thru critical analysis. you will find that is how ’serious’ writers write on ’serious’ issues that matters, atypical of your daily dosage of non sensical bad english psychobabbles that you get out of malaysian blogs.
with all due respect, you DESERVED your C6.
November 2nd, 2005 at 8:42 am
FF: aiyah 1119 is a hoax… from a 1200 word comprehension stimulus, to a sudden combination of the common spm WITH the 1119, then to the 800-word stimulus to the current 650-word stimulus… which part of 1119 tells you that it really grades good english?
the part in the 1119 that’s defining is the 350 word free-writing exercise, and i must say that it is important that students aim for readability rather than putting up a show. we all know that examiners get bored reading 300 scripts a day, and it’s very important to catch his/her eye by being straight-forward.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:16 am
Big words don’t turn me on; it’s how creatively you use plain words that do. Like T-boy said, ‘technique.’ Humour, especially, is something that works with the latter and hardly ever the former.
The line between OTT and ‘excellent’ is a fine one. Great already if you’re a walking thesaurus, but staying on the preferred side takes experience. When I re-read my old planks of writing (like the ones from when I was Yu Ming’s current age, which I hear is 19) I cringe at some of what was bloated and overdone. And I’m only a couple of years older now. Yu Ming will learn this too; and sure, he will go far once he does.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:22 am
agreed. and this was a highly opinionated personal post. for some reason some people think i was attacking yu ming. now that is not the case. we’re game for discussions of writing styles, which is, of course, coinciding with my participation in the nanowrimo competition.
and why not?
i’m more concerned for my students more than anything else, and i get extremely agitated when i get into debates about how to grade students. truth be known, not many people understand this.
it was a good example for discussion and the discussion is over.
November 4th, 2005 at 6:55 pm
[...] a post by xpyre prompted me to write this. xpyre, prompted to write after reading this and this, said that writers are entitled to their opinions and “a person shouldn’t be castigated for his opinion, however wrong or wrong-headed”. i do agree with the stuff he says (especially pertaining to baga-fym (yah lor, he writes in fancy english and his character kena analysed until jialat jialat). [...]