MAN And MACHINE
Why you should one pay a journalist with a PhD in English and 25 years experience grading papers and teaching developmental English and more advanced courses to edit your work, PLUS a computer, rather than relying exclusively on MS Word or the supposedly almighty Grammarly? For now, let's just say that no matter how many algorithms machines can work at once, or how many millions of words and phrases they can crunch, they can't think as a person thinks. Computers are a bit like former President W: "We don't do nuance." How many of you, calling customer service, would rather speak to a human being rather than being given choices A-D by a mechanical voice?—especially when you want to talk about E. There. Also, the recipient or recipients of your text would rather hear from a human being as well. Writing involves not only being "correct," but communicating from the heart. Some geeks might disagree, but computers don't have hearts. If I haven't convinced you yet, consider
A Couple of Cliches.
(I know, English teachers are always supposed to be against cliches. True, it shows a lack of originality. But here are a couple of old maxims you might keep in mind, nevertheless.)
Ask yourself if you really want your paper to be perfect. A computer cannot and will not write the perfect paper for you. I (plus computer) might not each perfection, but I’ll do better than someone with significantly limited knowledge of grammar and rhetoric, plus computer.
A Couple of Cliches.
(I know, English teachers are always supposed to be against cliches. True, it shows a lack of originality. But here are a couple of old maxims you might keep in mind, nevertheless.)
- You get what you pay for.
- If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Ask yourself if you really want your paper to be perfect. A computer cannot and will not write the perfect paper for you. I (plus computer) might not each perfection, but I’ll do better than someone with significantly limited knowledge of grammar and rhetoric, plus computer.
Before we go on, let me mention that I'm just making an informal statement of opinion; this is definitely not a scholarly essay. As for always speaking in perfect Standard Edited English (SEE). I've read that in England, only something like 1-1.5 percent of the population speak “Received English.“ Or what we in America would call the King's English or "hoity-toity" English. Of course, in the U.S. we have all sorts of dialects that grow out of where we live. But at the level of the media, news, politics, and business, it's essential that speakers and writers use SEE. It promotes understanding amongst people's of different cultures who speak different dialects. Granted, purposely using non-standard English for rhetorical effect can be okay.
But usual business communications should be in SEE. And that means slightly formal, though not artificially inflated language. As to formal versus informal, consider that he term "busted"'is informal, and inferior to "broken" (more will understand the term "broken"). Similarly, the slang term, "busted" is inferior to "arrested." Context will determine your level of formality, however.
Okay, I've mentioned Word and Grammarly. I think by the year 3000 machines and software may have catch up with humans in terms of language. But they’re not there yet. In writing, it's probably prudent to use Word, and perhaps even Grammarly, even if your grammar background is fairly strong.
Just be wary of being overly reliant on technology.
