|
antipode -> RE: Danger of being tied (4/5/2009 3:02:13 PM)
|
I was helping a psychology grad student with her thesis, years ago, and she was using (in a European language) a type of modern spelling that wasn't accepted, nor very legible - say, for the sake of explaining, she was replacing all hard c's with a k. This would have not only offended purists, but looked from strange to alienating to myself and to proofreaders.
What I asked her was a simple question: was the statement she made through her rebellious use of the language more important than the portent of her thesis, which had to do with socio-economic issues? Was the language renewal she advocated important enough to "drown out" the intellectual message she had, something she had laboured on for four years? Was alienating those who needed to assess her work, and putting them in a situation where they had to take a decision fully unrelated to her studies, relevant? I didn't tell her not to do that, but tried to help her understand that if you have something important to convey, it is best to use standard mechanisms to do that. There is little point in giving a talk and then alienating 70% of your audience - all you will have achieved is that you have satisfied your own oversize ego, and given a clear signal you don't give a toss what your audience think.
But if that is the case, why have an audience?
Anyway, that's what I told my intern. She went away and thought about it, went to talk to some other folks to get their meaning, and eventually decided to come back to standard language. That had me go back and start over in the proofreading and the formatting, but I didn't mind that. This was a bright kid, learning and listening - not because she followed my advice, but because she didn't say "too f****** bad, I do what I want". Graduated with all the bells and whistles, she is having a brilliant career, and doesn't need the Kevlar vest any more.
|
|
|
|
