Because now I know the long words *and* the short ones - sometimes you just
need the right word either for precision or because they are more
interesting. I don't think the use of long words is what makes language
complicated - it's usually the sentence construction or the ideas not being
clear in the first place.
Lesley
-----Original Message-----
From: GP-UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Julian Bradley
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: His Dark Materials - Philip Pullman
At 19:03 21/02/2008, you wrote:
>But the aim of writing novels isn't just to communicate - I've learned most
>of the long words I know from working it out from their context and
puzzling
>about them...one of the really fun things in Harry Potter is seeing how JKR
>plays with words and invents new ones, also with the Asterix books
>understanding people's names - many only when I re-read them as an adult
>Lesley
Lesley,
I see what you mean in way, but I'm not sure what to make of it other
than recognizing that children rarely understand all that is in
childrens' books.
Shakespeare and others have invented new words where that was needed,
and at least some of them have helped communication. Playing with
words and understanding allusion and reference is rather different.
Still what is the advantage to you or anyone from having learnt long
words where short ones will do? Is it not better to know and stick
to the short ones and enlarge our vocabulary with new ideas?
The most intelligent people (wish I could emulate them) encapsulate
complex ideas in simple language eg. Lord Denning.
Perhaps if those who wrote the books we read consistently tried to
set an example in this area we'd all find it a little easier?
Julian
|