Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Donald Trum grammar 'typical of 11 year olds

Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 2:27:50 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Why was any sort of research done on this? He favors small words and short sentences, this is obvious.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 3:01:29 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Trump is savvy to his target audience.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 4:21:41 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Very good point skep
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:05:37 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

It's not like Trump started out as an especially eloquent speaker before running for the nomination and then had to tone down the level of his rhetoric when he went on the campaign trail. As far as I can tell, nothing has changed in the way he speaks, and I'd be surprised if you could pull up evidence of him sounding much more eloquent than the level of rhetoric he brings to the campaign trail (his book The Art of the Deal honestly reads like a Children's book). I don't think Trump is stupid; he's probably a good bit above average. It's just that he's inexperienced and unpolished, and it shows in the way he speaks. There's nothing else going on here.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:08:26 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yup, couldn't have said it better myself. It's a smart move on his part.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:12:20 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.

I got here first
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:14:17 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:12:20 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.

I got here first

lol beat me to it, huh
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:24:57 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
http://www.slate.com...

lol Just look at the video in that link. Anyone who actually thinks Donald Trump deliberately bastardizes his English is engaged in the worst kind of self-delusion. He clearly speaks in the same manner, whether he's being interviewed by a journalist in a formal setting or speaking to the masses. There's also no evidence of hesitation or careful forethought that would support the argument that he's modifying his natural way of speaking.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:29:17 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.

Lol, I don't think that I'll have any luck convincing you and a Langan fan that a big vocabulary and complicated syntax have nothing to do with understanding or intelligence. Hemingway and Faulkner both have their strong points, and Trump is good at communicating a point clearly (The Art of the Deal) without having to use ten-dollar words. Linguistic snobbery is just a distraction from any discussion, and a rather tiresome one.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:33:52 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:29:17 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.

Lol, I don't think that I'll have any luck convincing you and a Langan fan that a big vocabulary and complicated syntax have nothing to do with understanding or intelligence. Hemingway and Faulkner both have their strong points, and Trump is good at communicating a point clearly (The Art of the Deal) without having to use ten-dollar words. Linguistic snobbery is just a distraction from any discussion, and a rather tiresome one.

No, see now I didn't ask you to convince me that Trump is intelligent in spite of the fact that he's completely inarticulate. I asked you to justify your insinuation that he's capable of speaking articulately (and hence deliberately altering his speech), by producing an example. Can you do that? Or will you find a new diversion?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:43:39 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:33:52 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:29:17 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.

Lol, I don't think that I'll have any luck convincing you and a Langan fan that a big vocabulary and complicated syntax have nothing to do with understanding or intelligence. Hemingway and Faulkner both have their strong points, and Trump is good at communicating a point clearly (The Art of the Deal) without having to use ten-dollar words. Linguistic snobbery is just a distraction from any discussion, and a rather tiresome one.

No, see now I didn't ask you to convince me that Trump is intelligent in spite of the fact that he's completely inarticulate. I asked you to justify your insinuation that he's capable of speaking articulately (and hence deliberately altering his speech), by producing an example. Can you do that? Or will you find a new diversion?

I'm challenging your ridiculous definition of 'articulate', which seems to be 'circumambulatory WASP-speak'. No, Trump doesn't talk like an erudite professor. He isn't, to quote Faulkner, known to use a word that would send one running to the dictionary. But he does communicate very competently, which is the fvcking purpose of language. If you're going to criticize Donald Trump's language, then go rap Sojourner Truth's knuckles while you're at it. 'And aint I a woman?' ATROCIOUS SYNTAX! The HORROR! Somebody shoo that ill-bred negress from the podium before I faint at her flagrant use of double-negatives!
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 5:51:17 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:43:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:33:52 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:29:17 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.

Lol, I don't think that I'll have any luck convincing you and a Langan fan that a big vocabulary and complicated syntax have nothing to do with understanding or intelligence. Hemingway and Faulkner both have their strong points, and Trump is good at communicating a point clearly (The Art of the Deal) without having to use ten-dollar words. Linguistic snobbery is just a distraction from any discussion, and a rather tiresome one.

No, see now I didn't ask you to convince me that Trump is intelligent in spite of the fact that he's completely inarticulate. I asked you to justify your insinuation that he's capable of speaking articulately (and hence deliberately altering his speech), by producing an example. Can you do that? Or will you find a new diversion?

I'm challenging your ridiculous definition of 'articulate', which seems to be 'circumambulatory WASP-speak'. No, Trump doesn't talk like an erudite professor. He isn't, to quote Faulkner, known to use a word that would send one running to the dictionary. But he does communicate very competently, which is the fvcking purpose of language. If you're going to criticize Donald Trump's language, then go rap Sojourner Truth's knuckles while you're at it. 'And aint I a woman?' ATROCIOUS SYNTAX! The HORROR! Somebody shoo that ill-bred negress from the podium before I faint at her flagrant use of double-negatives!

Your claim: Trump is simplifying his language.
Implication: He is capable of speaking in a more sophisticated manner

My claim: Okay, then show me.
Your response: "asdfkjlhee linguistic snobbery! werrjksd WASP-speak!"

Even you should be able to identify what's wrong with your own replies when framed with such clarity.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 6:21:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Simple language garners more supporters.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 6:27:28 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:51:17 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:43:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:33:52 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:29:17 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 5:11:22 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

Yeah, why don't you show us some evidence that Trump is capable of expressing himself more articulately than he does in his stump speeches. I find it hard to imagine that "we won bigly,... and they lost bigly" is not his natural manner of speech.

Lol, I don't think that I'll have any luck convincing you and a Langan fan that a big vocabulary and complicated syntax have nothing to do with understanding or intelligence. Hemingway and Faulkner both have their strong points, and Trump is good at communicating a point clearly (The Art of the Deal) without having to use ten-dollar words. Linguistic snobbery is just a distraction from any discussion, and a rather tiresome one.

No, see now I didn't ask you to convince me that Trump is intelligent in spite of the fact that he's completely inarticulate. I asked you to justify your insinuation that he's capable of speaking articulately (and hence deliberately altering his speech), by producing an example. Can you do that? Or will you find a new diversion?

I'm challenging your ridiculous definition of 'articulate', which seems to be 'circumambulatory WASP-speak'. No, Trump doesn't talk like an erudite professor. He isn't, to quote Faulkner, known to use a word that would send one running to the dictionary. But he does communicate very competently, which is the fvcking purpose of language. If you're going to criticize Donald Trump's language, then go rap Sojourner Truth's knuckles while you're at it. 'And aint I a woman?' ATROCIOUS SYNTAX! The HORROR! Somebody shoo that ill-bred negress from the podium before I faint at her flagrant use of double-negatives!

Your claim: Trump is simplifying his language.

I wasn't referring to syntax or vocabulary, but to his use of repetition and buzzwords in campaign speeches, which leads to a low score on these sorts of tests.

Implication: He is capable of speaking in a more sophisticated manner

My claim: Okay, then show me.

I did. Read one of the books which he's published. Or his wikiquotes page. It's not erudite, but it's better than his stump speeches.

Eventually, correcting willful ignorance gets tiring.

[On "You're fired!":] There's a beauty in those two words. When you utter those words, there's very little that can be said. There's a succinctness to those words.

Armstrong, David (28 March 2004), "Trump TV / 'The Apprentice' takes realistic inside look at corporate world", San Francisco Chronicle

There's also the fact that Trump never reads from prepared speeches. So comparing him to other candidates is an apple-and-oranges situation to begin with; everything that Trump says is off the cuff.

If we're talking about efficacy and emotional impact, Trump's 9/11 response to Cruz was one of the most devastating statements of the campaign, and his typical meandering style of speaking didn't undermine his point at all; it highlighted it and made it personal. Most 9/11 references fail precisely because they are scripted and mechanistic.

'And just so " if I could, because he insulted a lot of people. I"ve had more calls on that statement that Ted made " New York is a great place. It"s got great people, it"s got loving people, wonderful people. When the World Trade Center came down, I saw something that no place on Earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely than New York. You had two one hundred, you had two 110-story buildings come crashing down. I saw them come down. Thousands of people killed, and the cleanup started the next day, and it was the most horrific cleanup, probably in the history of doing this, and in construction. I was down there, and I"ve never seen anything like it. And the people in New York fought and fought and fought, and we saw more death, and even the smell of death " nobody understood it. And it was with us for months, the smell, the air. And we rebuilt downtown Manhattan, and everybody in the world watched and everybody in the world loved New York and loved New Yorkers. And I have to tell you, that was a very insulting statement that Ted made.'

Your response: "asdfkjlhee linguistic snobbery! werrjksd WASP-speak!"

Even you should be able to identify what's wrong with your own replies when framed with such clarity.

Did I touch a nerve? The reflex to brush off people who don't speak like you as inherently inferior is a cultural vestige of racism and xenophobia; is that disconcerting?
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Jean-Paul_Blartre
Posts: 10
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 8:57:29 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

This article was written at the speaking and vocabulary of an 11-year old. Now I'm laughing really hard.

http://i.imgur.com...
If I became a philosopher, if I have so keenly sought this fame for which I'm still waiting, it's all been to seduce women basically.
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 1:31:12 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 2:39:38 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

Language is a tool. When going for broad appeal, it makes sense to simplify it. If the implication here is that Trump has the intelligence of the average eleven year old, well, anyone who believes that is (frankly) a moron. He speaks at that level because its an effective manipulation tactic. Most politicians, when run through these sorts of tests, score lower than average; Trump is just extrapolating an already proven tactic to the extreme.

^My thoughts exactly.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 1:37:36 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:24:57 AM, 000ike wrote:
http://www.slate.com...

lol Just look at the video in that link. Anyone who actually thinks Donald Trump deliberately bastardizes his English is engaged in the worst kind of self-delusion. He clearly speaks in the same manner, whether he's being interviewed by a journalist in a formal setting or speaking to the masses. There's also no evidence of hesitation or careful forethought that would support the argument that he's modifying his natural way of speaking.

Maybe that's just because it is his normal, colloquial style of speaking. That doesn't imply he is incapable of switching to a more formal style; he simply has no intention to do so because he wants to appeal to the masses.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 1:41:54 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 8:57:29 AM, Jean-Paul_Blartre wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

This article was written at the speaking and vocabulary of an 11-year old. Now I'm laughing really hard.

http://i.imgur.com...

To be fair, I think the popular indices should be taken with a grain of salt - they are not exactly known for their accuracy. The extent to which the indices disagree with each other on the page you've shown us is evidences of that...
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 2:14:34 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 1:41:54 PM, Diqiucun_Cunmin wrote:
At 3/18/2016 8:57:29 AM, Jean-Paul_Blartre wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

This article was written at the speaking and vocabulary of an 11-year old. Now I'm laughing really hard.

http://i.imgur.com...

To be fair, I think the popular indices should be taken with a grain of salt - they are not exactly known for their accuracy. The extent to which the indices disagree with each other on the page you've shown us is evidence of that...
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 4:10:01 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 8:57:29 AM, Jean-Paul_Blartre wrote:
At 3/18/2016 2:01:03 AM, Hayd wrote:
"In the study, 'A Readability Analysis of Campaign Speeches from the 2016 US Presidential Campaign', researchers from Carnegie Mellon University"s Language Technologies Institute (LTI) wanted to establish the reading level of the candidates' speeches. They analysed a number of transcripts for each candidate, including campaign trail speeches, victory speeches and defeat speeches...Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio - although he has now dropped out of the race - both used grammar corresponding to children aged between 11 and 14 - students between grades six and eight in the US...The grammar used by Donald Trump in his speeches as he campaigns to become the Republican presidential candidate corresponds to that used by students aged 11 and under."
http://www.independent.co.uk...

Anyone else lmao'ing right now?

This article was written at the speaking and vocabulary of an 11-year old. Now I'm laughing really hard.

http://i.imgur.com...

lmao
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,065
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 4:41:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Heh. I'd you type in "circumambulatory WASP-speak" using the Bing browser, this thread is the first thing that pop up.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,212
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 4:49:00 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 5:43:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:

I'm challenging your ridiculous definition of 'articulate', which seems to be 'circumambulatory WASP-speak'. No, Trump doesn't talk like an erudite professor. He isn't, to quote Faulkner, known to use a word that would send one running to the dictionary. But he does communicate very competently, which is the fvcking purpose of language. If you're going to criticize Donald Trump's language, then go rap Sojourner Truth's knuckles while you're at it. 'And aint I a woman?' ATROCIOUS SYNTAX! The HORROR! Somebody shoo that ill-bred negress from the podium before I faint at her flagrant use of double-negatives!

I had to look up curcumambulate. What an amazing word. Almost as amazing when you used the word Solera to describe a policy.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,212
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 4:52:49 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Well when you posted this. (about judicial appointments)

That's a bad argument. 'Some' is not 'most'. There may be someone with an unnatural talent for brain surgery; that doesn't mean that I want an untrained surgeon operating on my brain. Systems of promotion exist for a good reason in most cases: because obliging the exceptions often isn't worth the risk, and isn't even necessary. As I said, we have enough good candidates that we can run the equivalent of a judicial solera system with better results for everyone.