A book I am reading cited a 2004 NYT article on the corporate disability with language, and thanks to Google, I was able to find it online.. You will need to register (free) if you'd like to read the article. I found it rather disturbing. Business is spending $3.1 billion annually on remedial writing for their employees...including their own CEOs! Here is an example of a request a professor received from a prospective student:

"i need help," said the message, which was devoid of punctuation. "i am writing a essay on writing i work for this company and my boss want me to help improve the workers writing skills can yall help me with some information thank you".

Here is another example, of a completely incoherent message that a systems analyst sent her supervisor at a high-tech firm:

"I updated the Status report for the four discrepancies Lennie forward us via e-mail (they in Barry file).. to make sure my logic was correct It seems we provide Murray with incorrect information ... However after verifying controls on JBL - JBL has the indicator as B ???? - I wanted to make sure with the recent changes - I processed today - before Murray make the changes again on the mainframe to 'C'."

As the article says, these confused messages set up cycles of e-mails as people seek clarification, thus clogging computers and taking valuable employee time.

What a sad situation!

My friend Tim Albert (who was in Chicago recently although I didn't know until he came back) makes a very good living running writing skills courses for doctors. Much needed, I fear!

I surely didn't want to be accused of being a "grammar policewoman" or a "prescriptivist" when I wrote this. But what struck me was that poor use of language can cost companies a lot of money. The second instance that I cited was a good example of that.

There was a third example that I thought was interesting because I, too, use exclamation marks too frequently, I fear. However I mostly use them when I am happy or excited, not when I am angry. In the third example, a writing consultant talks about an incident that should have been a minor business snarl, but instead it had escalated so that the parties were near litigation. The issue was that some parts hadn't been received on time, and in reviewing the correspondence the consultant was appalled at the hostile tone of the e-mails. She says that people often use multiple exclamation marks to make their point forcefully. Instead, she tells her clients that they are allowed 2 exclamation marks in their lives! Boy, I have used half of mine up in this post alone.

I agree that exclamation marks are overused, often by people who tend to use other punctuation far too sparingly. In particular, putting two or more exclamation marks at the end of a sentence doesn't make the point any more forcefully. It just lowers my esteem for the author.

However, an allowance of just two exclamation marks in your life is going a little too far in the other direction, I feel.

I played competitive chess for a while, and in chess notation, you would put an "exclam" next to a particular move if it was especially strong. Awful moves warranted a question mark, or more depending on how awful it was. Often, it was difficult to tell what a move was going to do, but it was such an interesting move that it warranted the "?!" or "!?", or possibly "??!".

Sometimes this carries over into my grammar, and when writing emails or posting, I'll use bizarre punctuation like that. Still, any more than one exclam ending a sentence is annoying. Still, this rule, like, "don't use emoticons in every sentence of a post" and "don't post a smiley as your entire post" fall on deaf ears.

Yes, I agree about not using more than one exclamation mark, but I do think we need to let people be themselves. I tend to be an emoticon (not in every sentence) and exclamation mark user...so what! I also like ellipses. If we don't all some individuality in writing, how boring.

quote:

Originally posted by Seanahan:
I played competitive chess for a while, and in chess notation, you would put an "exclam" next to a particular move if it was especially strong. Awful moves warranted a question mark, or more depending on how awful it was. Often, it was difficult to tell what a move was going to do, but it was such an interesting move that it warranted the "?!" or "!?", or possibly "??!".

Quite correct, and this is just one more interesting little factoid that I've come across while doing research for The OEDILF. The result was the following:

In chess notes, a " !? " move is cute
But it might not be all that astute,
Where a " ?! " is a move
On which most could improve,
Yet it still could be hard to refute.

According to Wikipedia, "(Punctuation marks) are currently used in algebraic chess notation with '!?' showing an interesting move that may not be the best, and '?!' showing a dubious move that may nevertheless be difficult to refute."

For the purposes of this limerick only, !? should be pronounced "Huh!?" and ?! should come out as "Wha?!"

That's a great limerick Chris. I read it, and I got all the rhymes and such, but my brain just sort of paused on pronouncing the !? and ?!.

Mine, too, Sean. He has probably put the pronunciation in an author's note. Nice limerick, CJ!