HOW TO WRITE EFFECTIVELY?

[buddhist punk]

from Wikipedia: it's a lung condition brought about by inhalation of silicon laced smoke/fumes coming from a volcano.        

Longest place name (Maori, New Zealand):
"Tetaumatawhakatangihangakoauaotamateaurehaeaturipukapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu" named for a hill found south of Hawk's Bay in NZ.

Followed by the old name of Bangkok given by King Buddha Yodfha Chulaloke and later edited by King Mongkut:
"Krung Thep Mahanakhon Amon Rattanakosin Mahinthara Yuthaya Mahadilok Phop Noppharat Ratchathani Burirom Udomratchaniwet Mahasathan Amon Piman Awatan Sathit Sakkathattiya Witsanukam Prasit"

[lahat ng words dito ay pangalan ng mga kalye sa BKK and CNX, watchu tink?]

[Sayang-Pinoy]

yes BP

[erick]

Arguments

In the last couple of days, this forum and its adherents, posters and fans have witnessed several arguments going around the block on certain issues and concerns. I therefore found it relevant to shed light on argument and debate. For the sake of clarity [and in case this thread gets infected by a certain vitriolic virus making the rounds, ehe!] arguments here will mean classical rhetoric or the art of persuasion. It will exclude personal attacks or insults; more importantly, it will not refer to street level bitch slapping brawls. In discussing arguments, the word "opponent" will sometimes crop up; we therefore want opponent here to mean the person/s/ages who hold the opposite view or stand from yourself, not an enemy per se, NOR Pacquiao's punching bag.

Why discuss arguments? One aspect of effective writing is arguing to persuade your opponent. This is usually done through debate, of which there are classical rules and techniques. Some of the techniques have outdated Latin names that sound frighteningly like diseases, for example: "reductio ad absurdum" or "non sequitur" and the famous "argumentum ad hominem". Debate is essential because people need to see both sides of any issue. And owing to the assumed high moral ground of debate, there are two very important keywords to keep in mind as we debate: HONESTY and CLARITY. This is where facts are important and come in handy. One cannot just drop a conjecture or opinion into a debate without rational. logical, and factual evidence.

The first step to persuasive writing is to isolate or crystallize an issue.
Questions to reflect on: is there an act to be considered? how serious is this act? how does one define it? how should this be done in an orderly way? this is why clarity is important.

The next step is to organize your appeals or rational arguments.
Describe an example of the act or issue, tell a compelling story, or an ideal. Show cause and effect, list consequences of failture to act, appeal to an authority on the subject, compare and contrast, use an effective analogy,

The last step is to think about and prepare "rebuttals" to counterarguments.
One may also use the rational appeals listed above in presenting rebuttals. Quote your opponent fully before arguing the point. Quote a valid point from your opponent  before countering. Otherwise your arguments will be unbalanced and your thinking clouded.

Oftentimes, HONESTY and CLARITY suffer cuts and bruises even in formal oral debates. These are called fallacies in debate. A fallacy is a statement that is not only false but also deceptive. The most common types are red herrings and using straw men.

A strawman fallacy works like this: it's the Pacquiao-Marquez fight. Pacquiao comes out of the ring to face Marquez. Marquez drags an effigy of PacMan on stage, attacks it until it falls, and claims victory. All the while PacMan is still standing there, wondering why Marquez is delirious. Red herrings on the other hand is leading your opponent to a completely different direction other than the original problem or issue. For example, one poster calls for a meeting to discuss certain problems or issues. Another poster opposes this meeting, arguing that holidng strikes is unproductive. The second poster has led the discussion away from the original thought, which was to identify problems or issues.

Again, it is important to be clear when stating your case (argument) and also to consider valid claims of your opponent to balance your views. This makes for more persuasive arguments to win more adherents, than being extreme and completely ignoring or dismissing outright valid claims. If one is unable to follow the rules of classic debate, this means they're ripe for street level bitch slapping brawls.

I remember my DEBATING days when I was in college....

Nice one...very informative!

[lengradwilson]

Arguments

In the last couple of days, this forum and its adherents, posters and fans have witnessed several arguments going around the block on certain issues and concerns. I therefore found it relevant to shed light on argument and debate. For the sake of clarity [and in case this thread gets infected by a certain vitriolic virus making the rounds, ehe!] arguments here will mean classical rhetoric or the art of persuasion. It will exclude personal attacks or insults; more importantly, it will not refer to street level bitch slapping brawls. In discussing arguments, the word "opponent" will sometimes crop up; we therefore want opponent here to mean the person/s/ages who hold the opposite view or stand from yourself, not an enemy per se, NOR Pacquiao's punching bag.

Why discuss arguments? One aspect of effective writing is arguing to persuade your opponent. This is usually done through debate, of which there are classical rules and techniques. Some of the techniques have outdated Latin names that sound frighteningly like diseases, for example: "reductio ad absurdum" or "non sequitur" and the famous "argumentum ad hominem". Debate is essential because people need to see both sides of any issue. And owing to the assumed high moral ground of debate, there are two very important keywords to keep in mind as we debate: HONESTY and CLARITY. This is where facts are important and come in handy. One cannot just drop a conjecture or opinion into a debate without rational. logical, and factual evidence.

The first step to persuasive writing is to isolate or crystallize an issue.
Questions to reflect on: is there an act to be considered? how serious is this act? how does one define it? how should this be done in an orderly way? this is why clarity is important.

The next step is to organize your appeals or rational arguments.
Describe an example of the act or issue, tell a compelling story, or an ideal. Show cause and effect, list consequences of failture to act, appeal to an authority on the subject, compare and contrast, use an effective analogy,

The last step is to think about and prepare "rebuttals" to counterarguments.
One may also use the rational appeals listed above in presenting rebuttals. Quote your opponent fully before arguing the point. Quote a valid point from your opponent  before countering. Otherwise your arguments will be unbalanced and your thinking clouded.

Oftentimes, HONESTY and CLARITY suffer cuts and bruises even in formal oral debates. These are called fallacies in debate. A fallacy is a statement that is not only false but also deceptive. The most common types are red herrings and using straw men.

A strawman fallacy works like this: it's the Pacquiao-Marquez fight. Pacquiao comes out of the ring to face Marquez. Marquez drags an effigy of PacMan on stage, attacks it until it falls, and claims victory. All the while PacMan is still standing there, wondering why Marquez is delirious. Red herrings on the other hand is leading your opponent to a completely different direction other than the original problem or issue. For example, one poster calls for a meeting to discuss certain problems or issues. Another poster opposes this meeting, arguing that holidng strikes is unproductive. The second poster has led the discussion away from the original thought, which was to identify problems or issues.

Again, it is important to be clear when stating your case (argument) and also to consider valid claims of your opponent to balance your views. This makes for more persuasive arguments to win more adherents, than being extreme and completely ignoring or dismissing outright valid claims. If one is unable to follow the rules of classic debate, this means they're ripe for street level bitch slapping brawls.

Gotcha!

[ajarn_ph]

hello,

Tips:
1. Find an  interesting topic that catches everyone's attention.
2. Gather the thoughts and your views.
3. Start writing your issue.
4. Read and re-read to review.
5. Make changes and correction for final posting.

ajarn_ph

[lengradwilson]

Be imaginative and feel what you are writing....

[buddhist punk]

Painfully transliterated sentences
Ang sakit mo naman magsalita....literally

Much as it hurts my eyes and causes a dull ache somewhere in the soles of my feet, I am posting here sentences that have been literally transliterated from Tagalog to English. And hopefully will be able to suggest alternatives to help correct these.

What is wrong, you say, with transliterating? Why does The Punk keep harping on the subject? Well, here’s a secret: when NES’s [you know who they are] hear us Pinoys transliterating from our native language to theirs, it’s their cue to say they don’t understand us. This is why they look down their noses at us and say we have horrid English. We may agree or disagree with their assessment, but that is beside the point; remember that our hosts are beholden to these NES’s and their word is gospel to them. Excuse the analogy, there are no gospels in Buddhism, but you get what I mean. It's gotten so bad that when the NES says jump, they ask: how high?

[buddhist punk]

1. “...it's actually the battle of the Bs (Blue/Bingbing, and Buddhist Bunk) ... It's not good to have a B start....”
Improved: "All the contenders's names start with “B, which can't be a good thing”…or…”the battle of the B’s tells us it's not good to start your nick with B”. Araguy! Ang ibig sabihin nitong nagsulat, ay hindi maganda na letrang B and simula ng pangalan. Please, never leave your sentence hanging this way.

2. “I will contain facts and logical opinions in all my posts…”
Umm, some women can be containers of somethings but we are not going there right now. While human brains can contain information, we need to improve the sentence to describe what you will do to and in your posts: “I will [include, incorporate, allude to, insist on, reference] facts and logical opinions….”

3. “I will never write/speak Filipino as I would like others to know Filipino ability in English (written) debates…”
Improved: “…will never write/speak in Filipino….know the Filipino's capacity for written English debates…”
Ummm, this is what happens when we think in Filipino and write in English.

4. “for the preliminaries, you have already shown yourselves.”
Bakit, naglalaro ba sila ng hide n seek? Ah, eh ang ibig sabihin po ng nagsulat, “sa umpisa pa lang, nabibisto na kayo”. Improved: “You’re showing your true colors from the get go” / “ooops, your slip is showing” / “for preliminaries, you have already shown yourselves to be [stupid, arrogant, gentlemanly, kind, etc.].

5. “I am still not in the mood to be pricked by UNTIL I have the information I need.”
Kindly refrain from using the word “prick” in front of NES. Ibig sabihin po kasi nun ay…penis. So kung babasahin po ito ng literal, "wag muna daw siyang "tutuhugin" ni hanggang wala akong impormasyon”. Nabitin ang sentece dahil sa "by". Baka ang ibig sabihin ng nagsulat ay: "I am still not in the mood to be picked on until...“ or yung kululitin siya.

[buddhist punk]

6. “They are actually worth puking for….”
“Sila ay kasuka-suka”…See what I mean by transliterating? It’s horrid. If you think about things that are actually worth doing…this ain’t wunna them. Again, “worth” = positive, uplifting, valuable, appealing; Ex. "The Filipino is worth dying for", "I hope this activity is worth my time". Improved: “...they are puke-worthy” or “they are not worth my puke”. Bongga…

7. “The other one I suppose has hidden and tailed away under a pretentious newbie.”
What I imagine is someone hiding underneath a prone person. Actually, parang wala nang magagawa pa dito sa sentence na ito. Nakasira kasi yung “tailed” away. Di kaya “sailed away”? Medyo bulol nga lang? Improved: “The other one I suppose had fled with his tail between his legs and returned under a pretentious newbie name.”

8. “I was just asking for a simple assistance and you started to talk in the other way.”
Transliterated from: Humihingi lang ako ng simpleng tulong, iniba mo yung usapan. Improved: “I was just asking for assistance….” – cannot use article “a” coz assistance is not quantifiable. “…and you started (talking trash, talking nonsense, talking off topic)"

9. "It is really sad that dening that my head aches when I talk to Filipino teachers in Thailand who cannot express themselves well in English."
Improved: "It's just sad that Filipino teachers in Thailand cannot express themselves well in English.....". Original melodramatic sentence has just too many things going on to be effectively understood. Cut sentences down to bite size. This expresses ideas more effectively.

10. "I don't blame them just my head aches; but I always tell myself why they don’t polish up first before plunging in the teaching world."
Improved: "...but I always ask myself why they don't improve their English first before.....

Be careful of leaving phrases hanging: "...why they don't polish up [what?] first before..." <---- see the "what?"; what don't they polish? themselves? Also, "polish" is awkward in this sentence. If you must use it, try "...why they don't polish their skills first..."

"I always tell myself..." - reminding or rebuking yourself. Ex. "I always tell myself, 'this is Thailand, things are done differently here", "I always tell myself to keep calm during an emergency".

This is a common mistake. When you begin a sentence or title with "How to..." you are NOT asking a question, you are making a statement.
Ex, "How to get a US visa the easy way", "How to bake fondue", etc.

[:::OrnjirA:::]

from Wikipedia: it's a lung condition brought about by inhalation of silicon laced smoke/fumes coming from a volcano.        

Longest place name (Maori, New Zealand):
"Tetaumatawhakatangihangakoauaotamateaurehaeaturipukapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu" named for a hill found south of Hawk's Bay in NZ.

Followed by the old name of Bangkok given by King Buddha Yodfha Chulaloke and later edited by King Mongkut:
"Krung Thep Mahanakhon Amon Rattanakosin Mahinthara Yuthaya Mahadilok Phop Noppharat Ratchathani Burirom Udomratchaniwet Mahasathan Amon Piman Awatan Sathit Sakkathattiya Witsanukam Prasit"

[lahat ng words dito ay pangalan ng mga kalye sa BKK and CNX, watchu tink?]

taken from a subway in London  

[buddhist punk]

For the Love of Melodrama

"The cure? I rather let them think it over BY GETTING THE THOUGHTS OF MY POSTS. It would really be mean if I start bulletpointing the cure from their sides.  It would only show the idiocy of their existence as English teachers in Thailand. BUT THE CURE FROM MY SIDE, is rather huge and repelling.  I am not sure whether these inflicted Filipinos would like to hear it."

//end of quote

In addition to the "crime" of  transliterating, another bane of Filipinos, for whom English is a SL, is the tendency toward constructing overly dramatic sentences. In an effort to approximate depth, we string together words that we hope drive home our point in an authoritative manner. The above short paragraph is but a small sampling of this tendency. It comes off as a mindless rant whose sole purpose is to insult a group of people with perceived shortcomings.

[buddhist punk]

a few months back, may sinulat ako about proper arguments or debates and certain rules or guidelines we follow when arguing points. this age old tradition began in the west at a time when people were open about their opinions and shared even contradictory or conflicting ideas. liberalism was allowed as long as the society in which you operate all agreed on openness and fairness and if you could back up your claims. having listened to and participated in debate, i appreciated the concept a lot. while debating, what mattered was well reasoned and developed thought. it wasn't a matter of who shouted the loudest or who could insult the best (like "rap wars"?)

:::::: this is the point where I say negative things about Filipinos, so if you are sensitive, or prone to hysterics, or unable to take criticism of your nationality, stop reading :::::::::

many Filipinos, especially university and college educated individuals understand the concept of debate and successfully segue that into their personal and professional lives. sadly many others are unable to manage. we still witness in this forum how some resort to bombastic rhetoric and redirection, even if it made no sense, to appear to win an argument. personal attacks are still the favorite standby strategy, and so are misdirection and off tangent remarks that have little to do with the topic or issue.

one shocking example of tangential remarks is bringing up class or status.

what is shocking about it is this: in this forum, and I'm sure even in real life, many people agree that we who are here in Thailand to teach MUST improve or hone our craft in English. we agree that it is something that is key to competence due to certain 'preferences' of our host country and even take steps to assist ourselves and one another in this endeavor.

but a reality check will show that many among us continue to regard "yung mga pa-English Enlgish na yan" as individuals who are basically show offs, people who feel superior in some way, and are out to put other people in their place. certain divisive lables are used to show how class had something to do with a person's English proficiency level. one of these labels used has something to do with "elitist" schools. which i find hilarious because i personally know people from these so-called elite schools who cannot string together a simple English sentence to save their lives. is the reason for our poor English proficiency our lack of  consistency between what we wish for ourselves and our actual hidden (and imagined) class struggles?

on another note, while we say that Filipino teachers in Thailand must be on top of their game, must be well read and knowledgeable in many areas, at kayang humarap at kumausap kahit kanino. a reality check just in this forum alone shows that there are some people who think that sharing ideas, (or merely standing there in the marketplace of ideas), is yet another sign of yabang. hindi pa rin natin mahiwalay ang talakayan sa pagyayabang. because we, as a people, are complacent, pliant and agreeable in real life, not wanting to rock the boat, anyone that does not fit that stereotype is quickly dismissed as a blowhard.

it becomes especially difficult for the older and more traditional ones among us to be on online forums where there is a free for all (with regard to ideas). forums and bulletin boards are at its roots western style communication and we are just catching up with it. older, more traditional people are not accustomed to sharing their thoughts, or hearing others openly stating theirs or, shudder, contradicting them! and so online opinions are treated as personal threats to their belief systems.

[blubinginone]

Whew! I never saw this thread in the past.  Okay, points were well presented here, but transliteration should never be considered as a literary crime of sort.  Lots of writers, past or present, engage in this because they just want to be different, i.e. speaking from their own mind, and applying their own styles.  Being concise or direct really makes one seemingly more correct in terms of grammar or construction, BUT, wouldn't it be wonderful if one could twist the standard a bit and still come up appealing?  After all, literature has many scopes, so as education.  And if this will not hold true in the minds of others, we might as well start questioning those great men of English literature like Christopher Marlowe and the like.

Bragging aside, there is an advantage with "going around the bush" to express yourself in writing, but you must do it comprehensively not at all confusing.  Stick with the rules but never go so much away to the point where readers become confused with what you are talking about.  I have been following this kind of style eversince and it has given me awards and citations worth remembering.  It even made my students won national speech contests.  In the end, even with the NESs' loud remarks about how Philippines use English, they cannot argue with success when students of a Philippine teacher beated theirs.

[buddhist punk]

Agreed.

In writing, first, learn the rules. Then break the rules.

[blubinginone]

And once the rules have been broken, make sure you stay substantial and profound...

...Everything then turns favorable with gusto. 

[Ms Demi Noor]

If you posted something on this forum and it contained some reaaaallly bad English, you have the option to modify your post using your edit key.

If you left your unpolished post as it is, could we assume that you did not see the mistake or that you could not tell the difference?

If we pointed this out to you magagalit ka ba? (Sorry as this duplicates another thread).

[buddhist punk]

How do you say "Ayoko ng ganyan" in English?

(Context: "Ginamit niya ang password ko. Ayoko ng ganyan.")

Some of us say "I don't like that one." It is a transliteration and is, therefore, incorrect.

The better alternative is: "I don't like that habit" or "I don't like this line of questioning" or "I'm not comfortable with [X]".

Reason: "I don't like that one" refers to a specific person, thing, place when presented with an option. But if you are referring to an uncountable object (ugali, habit, saying, etc.) "I don't like it" seems more appropriate.

[Darfur]

a few months back, may sinulat ako about proper arguments or debates and certain rules or guidelines we follow when arguing points. this age old tradition began in the west at a time when people were open about their opinions and shared even contradictory or conflicting ideas. liberalism was allowed as long as the society in which you operate all agreed on openness and fairness and if you could back up your claims. having listened to and participated in debate, i appreciated the concept a lot. while debating, what mattered was well reasoned and developed thought. it wasn't a matter of who shouted the loudest or who could insult the best (like "rap wars"?)

:::::: this is the point where I say negative things about Filipinos, so if you are sensitive, or prone to hysterics, or unable to take criticism of your nationality, stop reading :::::::::

many Filipinos, especially university and college educated individuals understand the concept of debate and successfully segue that into their personal and professional lives. sadly many others are unable to manage. we still witness in this forum how some resort to bombastic rhetoric and redirection, even if it made no sense, to appear to win an argument. personal attacks are still the favorite standby strategy, and so are misdirection and off tangent remarks that have little to do with the topic or issue.

one shocking example of tangential remarks is bringing up class or status.

what is shocking about it is this: in this forum, and I'm sure even in real life, many people agree that we who are here in Thailand to teach MUST improve or hone our craft in English. we agree that it is something that is key to competence due to certain 'preferences' of our host country and even take steps to assist ourselves and one another in this endeavor.

but a reality check will show that many among us continue to regard "yung mga pa-English Enlgish na yan" as individuals who are basically show offs, people who feel superior in some way, and are out to put other people in their place. certain divisive lables are used to show how class had something to do with a person's English proficiency level. one of these labels used has something to do with "elitist" schools. which i find hilarious because i personally know people from these so-called elite schools who cannot string together a simple English sentence to save their lives. is the reason for our poor English proficiency our lack of  consistency between what we wish for ourselves and our actual hidden (and imagined) class struggles?

on another note, while we say that Filipino teachers in Thailand must be on top of their game, must be well read and knowledgeable in many areas, at kayang humarap at kumausap kahit kanino. a reality check just in this forum alone shows that there are some people who think that sharing ideas, (or merely standing there in the marketplace of ideas), is yet another sign of yabang. hindi pa rin natin mahiwalay ang talakayan sa pagyayabang. because we, as a people, are complacent, pliant and agreeable in real life, not wanting to rock the boat, anyone that does not fit that stereotype is quickly dismissed as a blowhard.

it becomes especially difficult for the older and more traditional ones among us to be on online forums where there is a free for all (with regard to ideas). forums and bulletin boards are at its roots western style communication and we are just catching up with it. older, more traditional people are not accustomed to sharing their thoughts, or hearing others openly stating theirs or, shudder, contradicting them! and so online opinions are treated as personal threats to their belief systems.

amen. hahahaha. nakakatawa nmn. look who's talking. d mo b gawain lahat ng mga pinagsasabi BP? hay naku nmn... mahirap talga magwalk the walk at talk the talk. d ko mapigilan mag comment i just find you too good to be true and you have this holier-than-thou attitude. asus ginoo!

[buddhist punk]

Listen......


Do you hear that?


It's the sound of a dead horse being beaten!   

[iSDa(GO PORTAL)]

Today's writing lesson: email jokes.

Instructions:
1. Read the email joke below.
2. Write an alternative version of the joke
3. Explain your alterations

X-MAS SPIRIT
A few days before Christmas, the Monsignor thought it would be a good idea if he solicited the
support of a number of schools to get together to create a Nativity Scene in time for the
Christmas Mass.  The day before Christmas, the Monsignor discovered that the Nativity Scene was
still incomplete so he made a few inquiries on why this was so.
Ateneo reported it could come up with only two and not three wise men.  ! La Salle reported it
could not come up with even a single wise man.  Maryknoll reported that it could not come up
with even a single virgin.  San Beda reported that it could only come up with three wise gays.
UP reported that they killed the three wise men.

i like this.



thanks BP.