The Written Word vs The Spoken Word.

[DanaC]

Alternatively, there may be cultural differences leading to slightly different associations around some of the words, phrases or concepts.

I remember one discussion around 'smacking' children, which highlighted some distinct differences in attitude between British and American posters, as well as some distinct meanings to words. So, Americans were talking about 'spanking' a kid being ok as a responsible parent, and us Brits were a little shocked by that. Because the word means different things on each side of the pond. What you call spanking, we call smacking. To us, spanking suggests very heavy handed discipline. Old fashioned, humiliating and frankly not done these days.

The difference in meaning didn't come through clearly in the posts at first, so things got a little heated at one point (as these things often do). It took a little while to become apparent we were coming at things from very different places.

That's just one example that springs tomind. Butthere have been a few. We speak the same language, but not entirely.

[henry quirk]

The schism and the 'heatedness', I'll wager, were the direct result of a lack of care in writing by some, many, or all, of those involved.

Again: 'A *lousy writer surely invites (mis)interpretation.'









*by way of laziness, or stupidity.

[classicman]

.. or lack of education.
Different words also have different connotations, sometimes negative, which may or may not be known to the writer. And let us not forget social, regional and language differences between the writer and the reader.

Oh hell, lets also toss intention and perception in as well, while we are at it.

[jimhelm]

or maybe you don't pick up the sarcasm, or a reference to something else...

the point was that when you're interacting, you're able to alter your course, choose to rephrase, etc on the fly. whereas with writing, it's purely one way, and left to the interpretation of the reader. No matter how clear you THINK you're being, you can not be sure the reader is smelling what you think you're cooking.

[Aliantha]

There have been many very important speeches delivered to listeners which have inspired not only the listeners, but for generations since. The most startling one that comes to mind is 'I Have A Dream'. The message there was clear and concise. It doesn't seem to have ever been muddled to me, and it wasn't when it was first delivered. Yes it caused controversy because some people didn't like the idea of 'coloured folks' having dreams of better lives, but they still got the message.

[DanaC]

In fairness though, the speech was captured on film, allowing it to be revisited many times.

[Aliantha]

Yeah, but it was still the spoken word.

If you want to go your route one could argue that the speech is now available in all sorts of books which have preserved it and its meaning, due to the inspirational quality of the words and the profound effect those words, when delivered, had on a nation if not in fact the whole world.

[jimhelm]

A speech delivered to a crowd is more akin to the written word, imo.

[Aliantha]

In what way?

[jimhelm]

In that a speech is composed prior to delivery, and the speaker seldom receives pertinent feedback like facial expression and body language that tells him how it's going over. One way communication.

[Aliantha]

I guess you could argue that rousing speeches do receive pertinent feedback when there's cheering and yelling.

I get what you're saying though. I just don't think that it's a black and white example maybe.

[classicman]

I'm pickin up what you're puttin' down there.

[Ibby]

Diggin' it, jim. Written word is better for one-way exchange of information - journals, studies, articles, speeches, novels; spoken word is better for dynamic conversation with two-way immediacy and feedback.

[DanaC]

Just to step back to the culturally distinct understandings of English for a moment:

I've just read an interesting wiki page discussing the differences between British and American English. It's really quite fascinating.

A couple of bits struck me in particular as being relevant to this discussion:

The word also is used at the end of a sentence in AmE (just as as well and too are in both dialects) but not so commonly in BrE, although it is encountered in Northern Ireland. Additionally, the sentence-ending as well is more formal in AmE than in BrE.

Now then, however careful I might be in my written communications I would not have known that ending a sentence with 'as well' would be considered formal in American English. To me it is not remotely formal. So, if I end a sentence with 'as well', whereas a Brit reading that would consider it just as informal as the rest of my post, an American reading it would think I was being quite formal. That could totally change the tone of my post, imbueing it with an unintended degree of formality (pomposity even?).

Words such as bill (AmE "paper money," BrE and AmE "invoice") and biscuit (AmE: BrE's "scone", BrE: AmE's "cookie") are used regularly in both AmE and BrE but mean different things in each form[citation needed] although bill is also regularly used in AmE as "invoice". As chronicled by Winston Churchill, the opposite meanings of the verb to table created a misunderstanding during a meeting of the Allied forces;[59] in BrE to table an item on an agenda means to open it up for discussion whereas in AmE, it means to remove it from discussion, or at times, to suspend or delay discussion.

Classic example of the same words having entirely different meanings.

Sometimes the confusion is more subtle. In AmE the word quite used as a qualifier is generally a reinforcement: for example, "I'm quite hungry" means "I'm very hungry". In BrE quite (which is much more common in conversation) may have this meaning, as in "quite right" or "quite mad", but it more commonly means "somewhat", so that in BrE "I'm quite hungry" can mean "I'm somewhat hungry". This divergence of use can lead to misunderstanding.

Use of qualifiers can trip us up at times.

In both areas, saying, "I don't mind" often means, "I'm not annoyed" (for example, by someone's smoking), while "I don't care" often means, "The matter is trivial or boring". However, in answering a question such as "Tea or coffee?", if either alternative is equally acceptable an American may answer, "I don't care" while a British person may answer, "I don't mind". Either sounds odd to the other.

Not odd, so much as rude.

There is potential for even careful wording to give the wrong message.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...ritish_English