An old picture, on the back a description written in cursive-Kids can't read it

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: grainofsand

Ok, but kids still can't read simple cursive.

But all can learn it if their parents want that, and some always will be interested in doing so.
Think of scholars who read olde English as easily as print.

Cursive had its place when we produced documents by pen, but we don't now.
Waste of resources in my opinion but then as I said earlier, my son went to a selective school and writes beautifully in a cursive style.
I cannot write in cursive although I can read it but I went to a crap school.

Lack of cursive writing skills has never caused any challenges in my life.

originally posted by: missed_gear

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: SaturnFX

I think we are losing these skills due to computers, electronic devise's..etc, we are handicapped to them. It's more of a general statement. I ran across a manual for shorhand the other day..that would be probably an obsolete thing.
I think cursive has style and art to it and should be taught..maybe I'm just a dinosaur

Year after year "Teaching to the Standardized Testing" became more and more important and now, this is about all that is taught.

Language and writing skills took the biggest hits.


mg

As a proofer, I can agree with this.

We were taught the Palmer Method back in the day.
I was the only kid in my class to fail the course.
While everybody else drew those damned circles, I drew pictures of horses.
Got my hair pulled and my face slapped a plenty.
But that old white woman could never make the Indian cry.

en.wikipedia.org...

Buck

a reply to: ketsuko

Agreed with spelling and grammar, but how many handwritten documents do you proof read each week?
I guess none.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: seasonal

Ever tried reading olde English?
Should we teach that in the UK so kids can read Charters and acts of Parliament from the 1500's?
Ridiculous.
All your old acts have been in additional printed format since the invention of the typewriter.

I think you just have some romanticised idea of cursive because aside from being slightly faster I see no need for it.

Not everything translates perfectly into modern language. Often, you are missing out on shades of meaning and intent by not taking the time to read and parse through a text in its original form. Yes, that applies to Olde English too.



This maybe helps illustrate my point. Here's Star Wars translated from English -> Chinese -> English again. Make sense to you?

As for the old documents of government, you do realize they are soaking off pieces of papyrus with such mundane things as shopping lists because it lends insight into Egyptian life and culture. One day, yes, people WILL very much care about all those old government documents that survive for the same reason. They do now in fact.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: ketsuko

Agreed with spelling and grammar, but how many hand written documents do proof read each week?
I guess none.

Seeing as how I am a mother with a child who is now in school and writes a bunch and has homework. You'd be wrong.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: SaturnFX
My point was that everything previously written in cursive is going to be a closed book, if people find themselves unable to read it. But I suppose anything written before 2000 has no value?

Everything has been digitized online to print.

a reply to: seasonal

Blame it on the printing press and the typewriter! They are what made handwriting obsolete.

a reply to: ketsuko

Oh sorry, I thought you meant proof reading as a profession, press releases, legal documents and such like.

a reply to: jellyrev
Everything? No. Overstatement. There must be a lot of material which nobody has bothered to digitise, which will vanish into oblivion once the relevant reading skill disappears.
My old college diaries, for example. As it happens, they HAVE been typed up, but they so easiiy might not have been.

a reply to: ketsuko

This thread is not about language, spelling, or grammar, just handwriting style.
Big difference.

My daughter learns joined up at school. Has done since 4yrs.

a reply to: seasonal

Many schools no longer teach cursive. I think it is detrimental, because cursive helps the brain make connections in ways that typing and printing do not. This Ted Talk discusses it:

Jake Weidmann "Why Write? Penmanship for the 21st Century"

www.youtube.com...

I can't get the link to work. If someone with more technical expertise could help, I'd appreciate it.

a reply to: Pillywiggin

I'd rather have the child do woodshop class for the time they could learn cursive. which would cause super duper brain connections.
A personal finance class is better time spent. Teach them a signature in that class.

There is only so much time in school. Everything helps, what helps the most is what matters.
Children nowadays should be taught extensively on the computer, as many will be on a computer as an adult.

a reply to: jellyrev

Unless your child is doing wood shop when they like 4, 5 or 6, too late for wood shop to form brain connectivity.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: markovian
If nobody learns it, how is it not going to be forgotten? Then everything that was hand-written before computers came along is going to be a closed book.
There does remain a practical purpose, because cursive is about speed. People still need to be able to write with a pen, for those times when a keyboard is not available. How can people write with any fluency if they're laboriously putting down one letter at a time?

Cursive isn't any faster, this is a myth, you're also still plunking down one letter at a time. It's also not really different than print other than just a few characters -- which means anyone intelligent should be able to deduce the word, provided it's not chicken scratch and it's actually legible. More over, if you need to write something down, you can just record it in spoken word on your smart device [which more people have than a pad and a pen in 2017] or you can "jot it" down with voice to text and save it as a note.

The idea that anyone really needs to write with a pen in today's age is pretty much ludicrous. I haven't used a pen in over 10 years for anything other than filling out a deposit slip. Obviously, machine shop jobs/fabrication will still use them for markings on measurements, but as for writing? If you write with a pen it's because you want to, not because you need to. There is a keyboard everywhere, or a voice recorder/microphone everywhere -- legal documents and signing your own name [which is slowing being replaced by E-Signing] are basically the only uses left for pen and paper.

I.E.

It's not a big deal, cursive is stupid and was more about class than anything. Upper class people had better educations and wrote in script/calligraphy, lower class people wrote in print or couldn't read/write. There is no tangible benefits to cursive, and any that might have existed certainly don't really anymore with the advent of technology.

P.S.

Speed on writing has to do with size of print. The smaller you write, the faster you write. Lifting the pen off the paper doesn't slow you down, not lifting it off the paper doesn't speed you up.... just doesn't. I refused to write in cursive because it bleeds your characters together and makes it more difficult to read if you're writing fast and I never had a problem keeping up with my notes.

originally posted by: Pillywiggin
a reply to: seasonal

Many schools no longer teach cursive. I think it is detrimental, because cursive helps the brain make connections in ways that typing and printing do not. This Ted Talk discusses it:

Jake Weidmann "Why Write? Penmanship for the 21st Century"

www.youtube.com...

I can't get the link to work. If someone with more technical expertise could help, I'd appreciate it.

Your link doesn't work -- and who cares what some guy said during a ted talk, you know there is nothing stopping me from giving a ted talk right? So not learning cursive changes the connections made in your brain, but not learning/learning anything will change the connections in your brain. Learning how to type will form connections that cannot be had by learning to write cursive -- in fact, one might argue that it's more pertinent to learn typing -- it teaches you dexterity, writing in cursive does nothing but give you a cramp -- I can't see how not learning cursive would have any significant impact on brain development.

Literally has nothing to do with it.

Why is this in skunkworks??????? It's a fact, MANY young people can't read cursive, I have posted this in the past. Where I worked for some time, none of the high schoolers that also worked in the same department could read (or write) cursive and quickly stated so. Some gave a hap hazard attempt but gave up after only a few seconds. Since computers and electronics weren't used in that job, I had to start writing all my directive notes in print which took quite a bit more time than if I could have written in cursive. Most of the young people couldn't do simple arithmetic either. Tch, tch! I was aghast that these were juniors and seniors limited in basic intellectual skills.

The simple fact that even a little imagination could decipher cursive but there seems to be absolutely no gumption in the young people to do so is bothersome to me. The fact that the child couldn't read the info on the back of an old photograph is disturbing. It's not like it's hieroglyphics. It is a blocked mind that can't read cursive. It's necessary to be able to read it because there are so many things written in cursive.

Thinking that not needing to read cursive is similar to not needing to learn math since calculators are everywhere. Technology really can make the brain a very unused part of the body.

originally posted by: StoutBroux
Why is this in skunkworks??????? It's a fact, MANY young people can't read cursive, I have posted this in the past. Where I worked for some time, none of the high schoolers that also worked in the same department could read (or write) cursive and quickly stated so. Some gave a hap hazard attempt but gave up after only a few seconds. Since computers and electronics weren't used in that job, I had to start writing all my directive notes in print which took quite a bit more time than if I could have written in cursive. Most of the young people couldn't do simple arithmetic either. Tch, tch! I was aghast that these were juniors and seniors limited in basic intellectual skills.

The simple fact that even a little imagination could decipher cursive but there seems to be absolutely no gumption in the young people to do so is bothersome to me. The fact that the child couldn't read the info on the back of an old photograph is disturbing. It's not like it's hieroglyphics. It is a blocked mind that can't read cursive. It's necessary to be able to read it because there are so many things written in cursive.

Thinking that not needing to read cursive is similar to not needing to learn math since calculators are everywhere. Technology really can make the brain a very unused part of the body.

As I said above and as you said here -- Cursive should be able to be deduced, so if you can't read it -- you're just not trying. That said -- I can read/write cursive, and I can't tell you the last time I've even seen it, so why is it necessary?

Books are printed in print. The only things that are cursive anymore are historical documents.... which really isn't necessary, because I doubt your child has the original bill of rights in front of him, no -- he has a copy, in Print.

Also, technology doesn't make the brain unused, it just frees up it's usage. Rather than have to be able to crunch numbers, all we have to do is figure the logic -- which is the most important part of anything. Mathematics are nothing with out formula, formula is created with logic. That said -- I don't think calculators are going to replace basic math skills -- but they definitely will truncate advanced maths, and I see nothing wrong with that.

By the by, comparing calculators to math is not even close to the same thing as comparing typing on a keyboard to Cursive. Cursive is actually a useless skill.

originally posted by: SRPrime
Cursive isn't any faster, this is a myth, you're also still plunking down one letter at a time.

I've tried both systems, so from personal experience I can confirm that the speed of cursive is not a myth.
It comes from not having to lift the pen between letters.

There is a keyboard everywhere, or a voice recorder/microphone everywhere

A dangerous assumption. What happens on the day when it isn't true, when you want to make a quick note of something that you've seen, and you happen not to have a laptop in your pocket?

Upper class people had better educations and wrote in script/calligraphy, lower class people wrote in print or couldn't read/write.

Nonsense. You're getting confused with special types of script, like Italics. Ordinary cursive used to be taught in state schools on a universal basis (my classmates were farmers' children). "Being able to do joined up writing" became a rite of passage and a metaphor, indicating that someone had graduated from the semi-literacy of their infant years. Social class had nothing to do with it.

a reply to: seasonal

just for context - can you 11 YO child read ANY cursive - ie a line you write for him just to see

i ask only because i have a book that belonged to my mother [ she was born in the 30s ] and its title is " how to read old script " - or some similar ] - and she needed it - because she did geanealogy reserch and 18th century records - she could not read - thus she got the book

but she only got a computer in 1992 - and that was because i bought it for her with my bonus from a contract job

cursive has changed down the years - and so - i has to ask ?