Does no one check anything at the BBC any more?

I'm interested in what happened in the episode, did she find out she had an unknown sibling?

on the poor standards of teaching in the seventies.

Teachers could only teach how they had been trained to teach. It's just unfortunate that the methods of teaching reading and spelling that were then fashionable were incorrect and deeply damaging for some children.

Kate54 With you, why bother teaching English nowadays.

Curtaintwitcher

I'm glad this annoys others too. The BBC especially has really gone downhill. Many foreigners rely on the BBC to learn correct English, so it's vital that standards are kept up.
It's also vital for people to complain and point out errors. If no-one says anything, these mistakes will become the norm.

I'm also concerned about American spelling creeping in. Britain is not an annexe of the USA, and we must keep our (correct) version of the English language.

I read somewhere recently that when America was just a fledgling country , they were very particular about correct standard English , It was suggested that correct English should be offered as a course to people in England who spoke lots of "incomprehensible "dialects Pity they didn't teach them any geography as someone asked ME where England is.

Many of you are commenting on the teaching on the poor standards of teaching in the seventies. I was at school throughout the seventies, having started school in September 1969. I was fortunate enough to go to an outstanding primary school, where we were given an excellent foundation. In common with many schools of the era, we learned to read and with Peter and Jane; the Ladybird reading scheme. This was very much a mix of look and say and phonics. It worked. I think the very dry approach of exclusive phonics, including made up words, could be soul-destroying and hold many children back, especially bright children. The accelerated reading that is popular in key stage two is loathed by many able children as it is so proscriptive. It is good to see that grammar is back in fashion but it is such a Gradgrind way of teaching. A lot of the fun has gone out of education, particularly primary education in the last ten to fourteen years and many friends who are around the same age as me are happy to retire.

I find myself cringing at the numerous grammatical errors that seem to be everywhere these days. I was reading an article yesterday which said that the pain so many of us feel at these mistakes is real and visceral as well as extremely distracting. We pedants are vindicated. By the way, Germanshepherdsmum, l was educated in Norfolk at a very good school, thankfully. I think things have gone downhill since the seventies, though.

Well Kate, standards of writing and speech have indeed gone South in the last decade or 3? Thanks to shows like the wretched Eastenders (etc) how often do you hear people say something like "myself and me sister would of gone down the shops . . ."? Etc etc, orright, innit?

People all too often get their, they're and there muddled up, and I presume that folk writing it's and its toss a coin to decide which to use, as all too often it's the incorrect version for that context wot gets put, innit?

Oh, and the BBC is a huge corporation, and most such entities employ some folk who make mistakes -- ever had a chat with something like British Gas lately?!

Bella23

MaizieD

Floradora9

Oh we recorded this and I was just the same shouting out to the TV . Local newspapers are just as bad. I cannot believe that people on Facebook ask " Dose anyone know ....?" So many spell "does" like that .

It's because spelling was so badly taught for a long time when teaching good phonics went out of fashion. Once someone has an incorrect spelling established it's really difficult to change it. Children were taught to remember the letters in a word but they couldn't always remember the order the letters should be written in.. They didn't even know that there was any connection between the letters and the sounds in a word.

This was called the "Look and say",way of teaching reading. The children were encouraged to look at the shape of the whole word and the initial letter it started with. They were then given a short list of words to remember and recognise by sigh which was gradually added to. Rather than laboriously teaching the sound of a letter to aid phonics. Which if you did a letter a week as most schools did you were lucky if they could read anything by Easter. It was better to run the two concurrently. The bank of sight words gave them the confidence to try and sound out the other words they did not know by sight.
We all do it as we read we don't
sound out every letter in our head we see the shape quickly assess the letters and know the word.
Only if like me and many others you never remember how the word is spelt, when you write you come unstuck.

I'm very much afraid, Bella23 that research evidence says that you are wrong.

If we all used RP in our everyday language life would be boring and not sound so friendly, maybe the written word should be correct when in newspapers, books or on T.V. .
Taking one word Throw go to different parts of Britain and people say chuck,scop and hoy and I am sure there are many more.
I've made workmen laugh when I describe the small gravel around my drive as shillies, lived where they were called chuckies again there are many more.
At home I don't even use the received names when I am counting, one is yan and four is fower, I wouldn't say it in a shop.

I am irritated by people on TV not knowing whether to say 'You and I" or "You and me". I am eighty years old and still remember being taught in primary school that you take away the other person and then try out the sentence with "You" or "I". It's simple! I did write to the BBC asking them to teach this rule to John Torode and Greg Wallace!

Ilovedragonflies

I would just like to say that not all people in Norfolk are stupid and I am a little fed up with reading the 'normal for Norfolk' trope. Please stop.

I live in Norfolk too but always find the expression amusing. The people I come across here are no more stupid or inbred than anywhere else I know of.

Germanshepherdsmum

Not according to my OED. Being in common usage doesn’t make something correct.

According to my big fat Oxford, ‘anymore’ is a “chiefly US variant of any more”.
To me it certainly doesn’t belong on this side of the pond.

Still, not as bad as what Wilko used to have emblazoned on the side of its lorries - ‘Everytime!’ 😱

Yes and some pronunciations too.

I was sent an email from Currys recently, advertising some of their "amazing deals". Near the bottom of the email, there was another section entitled "more amazing deals from Curys". Whoever wrote that needs to learn the name of the store they represent!

I would just like to say that not all people in Norfolk are stupid and I am a little fed up with reading the 'normal for Norfolk' trope. Please stop.

M0nica

*AreWeThereyet*, broadly agree but subtitles on live programmes are rather different

DD used to be a television subtitler, working mainly on live programmes like the news, sub titling as the programme went out. To do this she spoke the subtitles into a computer that she had spent 6 months training (like a dog) to recognise her voice her pronounciation, spacing etc etc.

Despite that every so often the computer would just go potty and even though she repeated the word(s), stuck to its first interpretation, The classic one she always quotes was subtitling the late Queen's 60th jubilee thanks giving service in St Pauls. As the Prince of Wales and Prince William, entered the cathedral the commentator said; 'Here come 2 future Kings' . DD repeated this into the computer and up on screen came the words 'Here come too few chickens'. She repeated the text a couple more times, but then had to move onto the next comment. the computer remained obdurate and refused to change it!

So with subtitles, if it is a live programme, blame the computer, not the subtitler.

Too few chickens........this has literally made me and my DH cry with laughter. Or should that be DH and I

Just spotted this, in an online article about Boots stores closing, 'An AI tool was used to add an extra layer to the editing process for this story.'
And so, human sub editors will become increasingly rare.

Can you provide an authority for your statement nahsma - one which isn’t American?

I was a lecturer and teacher here and abroad and speak several languages. So I too cringe at lots of things and especially the american creeping in. However I am a singer and wince at the supposed translations used in many editions of music and at the supposed translations shown in programmes. When you are translating sung words the precise meaning of the individual words are not as important as getting the cadence and the sense of the overall verses, in my view. But of course the really important thing is that we communicate with each other. Better that the sense of a conversation is conveyed, even if some of the words make you feel that someone has scraped their nails across a blackboard!!

Germanshepherdsmum

Not according to my OED. Being in common usage doesn’t make something correct.

“Anymore”, one word, means “any longer”. “Any more”, two words, is used for quantities. But doubtless Germanshepherdsmumwill claim she knows better.

I have commented on two recent articles in the Mail app recently - both guilty of the same thing. They were describing a slice of a food item as a SLITHER when it should be SLIVER!!!
It really got my goat.

MaizieD

Floradora9

Oh we recorded this and I was just the same shouting out to the TV . Local newspapers are just as bad. I cannot believe that people on Facebook ask " Dose anyone know ....?" So many spell "does" like that .

It's because spelling was so badly taught for a long time when teaching good phonics went out of fashion. Once someone has an incorrect spelling established it's really difficult to change it. Children were taught to remember the letters in a word but they couldn't always remember the order the letters should be written in.. They didn't even know that there was any connection between the letters and the sounds in a word.

This was called the "Look and say",way of teaching reading. The children were encouraged to look at the shape of the whole word and the initial letter it started with. They were then given a short list of words to remember and recognise by sigh which was gradually added to. Rather than laboriously teaching the sound of a letter to aid phonics. Which if you did a letter a week as most schools did you were lucky if they could read anything by Easter. It was better to run the two concurrently. The bank of sight words gave them the confidence to try and sound out the other words they did not know by sight.
We all do it as we read we don't
sound out every letter in our head we see the shape quickly assess the letters and know the word.
Only if like me and many others you never remember how the word is spelt, when you write you come unstuck.

There is no excuse for not trying. I’m not asking for perfection, just an effort to integrate.

English can be a difficult language to learn.

I would say the current age of education was an excellent one. The education my DGC have had in the state sector over the last 10 years and continuing is streets ahead of the education my children got in the 1970s and 80s