My first babysteps in the Mp3 car entertainment domain were made with a Neo35 player that I bought from carplayer.com in june 2001.

When the unit arrived on my doorstep, the UPS guy demanded an extra $170 of taxes. I hadn't expected this, but I went to the bank (with the UPS guy following me), got the money and payed him.

Since then I've received about three documents from UPS. I thought this was an invoice (because they looked like invoices). The first two times in Belgian Francs, the last one in Euros. I thought this was something their accountancy department did because of the francs to euro conversion.
Nowhere on this document was written that it was a reminder that I still had to pay $170. There also was no accompanying letter that said this. Also no form to wire the money (which is custom over here when you still owe a company money) was attached to the document.
Knowing that I fully paid everything I ever owed to UPS I didn't put much notice to the letters and forgot about them.

But today I received a new letter from them. For the first time an actual written letter an not some sort of invoice.
This letter states that I still have to pay them $170 and if I fail to do so within 10 days legal action will be taken.

I can tell you, this was quite the surprise! Almost TWO years later!!!

I've seached everywhere, but I can't find the receipt I got from the UPS guy (I don't even remember ever getting one). I guess if there ever was one it was thrown away when I got rid of the packaging of the Neo35, one year later when the warranty was expired!

My guess is that the UPS guy just put the cash in his pockets and never paid it to his company.

So that's it then. I have no proof that I actually paid that amount, so I guess I'll have to pay whatever they ask to avoid legal repercussions.

I hate UPS!

I'd say just phone them up and explain it to them. It's not that unusual to have lost or thrown the receipt away if it really has been two years!

Trouble with shipping companies is normal
DHL are normally quite reliable but I've had a few packages which seem to have been routed via a war zone and been kicked around a fair bit as well. I've had no trouble with Fedex but they did lose a package of mine for a few weeks but it turned out that I hadn't filled in the commerical invoice properly and they can't track stuff when it's in customs. UPS seem to enjoy telling me that I don't live at my address anymore and send stuff back...

- Trevor

I did phone them. I got a very non-interested person on the other side of the line who just told me bluntly that I had to pay, nothing to do about it.
He was so uninterested that I could actually hear him think : "oh god no, not another one of those freeloading bastards who wants to get away with not paying"
When I told him I had paid and signed for receiving the package and that surely they must be able to find a trace of that in their archives, he just told me that wasn't possible and that I just had to pay. He then just hung up.

I was practically fuming when that phonecall ended.

So I made a call the the juridical department of a consumer magazine (on which I'm subscribed), and they told me to just write them a letter in which I state that I don't agree with what they're saying and that I don't intend to pay twice for the same "service".

I've just written the letter. Am going to the post office now to send it by registered mail.

I've decided that there's no way that I'm going to pay that amount just because they either have a thieving staff or a lousy accountancy section. I will take this to court if I have to, if only because it's a matter of principle.

Yeah. If it was $10 or so then I would just pay it just to save the hassle but $170 is a fair bit.
Waiting over two years to notify you is also stupid.

- Trevor

Couldn't agree more! Like you say, if it were only $10 then it's not worth the effort. But $170 is worth fighting for!

Do you keep old bank statements? Could your bank have a record of the withdrawl? It might help a little to show that a transaction of the same amount they are claiming was carried on the day your package was delivered.

Yeah, I've also thought about that. I've actually found that bank statement back, for a withdrawl of $150. (I must've had $20 still in my pockets)

It shows the date and the time of withdrawl, so at least I have some sort of proof that within the first 15 minutes that the UPS guy came over to my house I made a withrawl of almost that exact amount of money owed.

In my opinion that's a bit too big of a coincidence and it will also be my biggest ace when/if this case actually goes to court.

That's good. Hopefully they won't take it that far and realize it wouldn't be worth it.

UPS is the biggest JOKE that I have seen. About 3 months ago I had my turntables sent down here to me. They arrived all busted up even though they were sent in a road case. This didn't bother me, they were insured... YEAH RIGHT.. UPS made all kinds of bogus claim and then finally said they couldn't insure it because the travel case itself didnt have 2-4" of foam around it. ITS A TRAVEL CASE! I told them. It made to be thrown around with no problems. I talk, argued, screamed (in that order) to just about every UPS department and the insurance company they used with no results. I still have not received any money to this day. They play a game with you and redirect you to another person after you have talked to them for a couple of hours and since there is no REAL number to reach someone who can do anything at the company I got [censored] out of luck. If anyone knows someone at UPS thats high up I would still like to recieve my insurance that, in what I see, they frauded me against. ::there is a lot more to the story but it would take pages to tell::

-Greg

I've had variously bad experiences shipping consumer electronics. I had one CD player destroyed by UPS and one destroyed by a moving company. The moving company pointed out some insane fine-print that basically said "we have no proof it was ever working beforehand, so too bad for you". UPS, as I recall (this was 1989, so my memory is fuzzy), came out, looked it over, and wrote me a check.

Hmmm. So before I move I need to get a witnessed notarized statement or something about everything I have working.

"We have no proof it was working." "You do now." "We can't honor that." "Talk to my lawyer."

While I did have my own negative experiences with UPS recently (Rob can attest to this), eventually they did pay out, to the mutual benefit of the shipper and myself

I now quite enjoy my new receiver

Rob can attest to this

It was a pain in the ass getting money out of them, and we are a business with a UPS shipping terminal! Luckily, I am not in charge of shipping and someone else had to deal with it. It took months to get DiGNAN's money back.

You've made me curious : what had actually happened? Did they loose a receiver you sent him?

Did they loose a receiver

Ahh! Wild Rio on the prowl! Everyone lock your doors! Mothers watch your babies!

Oh. Maybe you meant ``lose''.

It sounds to me like someone got a tuner and a refund! MMh?

They dented it to the point that it functioned improperly in some way. DiGNAN sent it back to me, then we sent it to UPS for the claim. They examined it for a few weeks and then sent it back to us. Then they wanted proof of its value. I insured it for $299. The receiver was not even made anymore, but some company on pricegrabber still had it listed for a high price, so I sent them that.

Then, we heard nothing for a while. Then we heard that they paid but someone in our factory took the money. That seems impossible to me. Eventually, they sent a guy in a suit over here to check everything out and discuss what's going on. We were then told to send them the receiver again. A couple weeks later we got the check. What a bunch of choads.

Ahh! Wild Rio on the prowl!

Not that kind of Receiver. It was a Sony STR-DE945 stereo receiver.

Aaargh! Bitted!

Oh well...I've postponed it as long as I could.

In my defence : English is not my native language, how's your Dutch Bitt?

Hmmm. So before I move I need to get a witnessed notarized statement or something about everything I have working.

In essence, yes. The next time I move, even if it's across town, I plan to be much more careful about the fine print and get some sort of foreman to personally observe and sign off on everything that plugs into the wall. And, I'll get it on videotape.

"Okay, now let's have a look at my clock radio."

Speaking of UPS... I have a package coming that arrived at my depot at 9:38 this morning. Scheduled delivery *still* shows as yesterday, and it doesn't look like it's even going to make it today.

Feh. I want my Thunderbirds DVDs.

In my defence : English is not my native language, how's your Dutch Bitt?

Oops. I try not to do that. Het spijt me. It happened to be pretty funny in this case, though, kinda like one of those signs in a Japanese hotel like ``You are invited to take advantage of the chambermaid.''

My Dutch would be non-existant to exceedingly poor. On the other hand, my German is simply very poor.

Oops. I try not to do that. Het spijt me

No problem. And might I say that those three Dutch words are simply perfect. Spelling AND grammar!

That might seem silly, but I wouldn't be too surprised if a lot of Dutch young people would spell that incorrectly. Probably as "Het speit me" (the pronunciation is the same). The difference between, "ij" en "ei" is thought at a very young age in schools, but some never quite get it. I've even seen spelling mistakes like that one appear in peoples' curricula vitae. Truely shameful.

Sheesh...what a story. Glad it worked out eventually. But I must say, after what I experienced with them today it doesn't surprise me one bit.
I curious what their next step will be. I doubt they'll leave it as-is.

those three Dutch words are simply perfect

Through no fault of my own. That's just one of those ``this phrase equal that phrase'' things. I couldn't even begin to examine the grammar involved. And I'd probably butcher the pronunciation.

Which reminds me of my German teacher. It was at least a year before I figured out the word he used to get us to repeat what he said, ``alluhtuhssambituh'', was, in fact, the phrase``Alle zusammen, bitte'' (``All together, please'').

I often wonder about how well native speakers of languages other than English actually use their languages, if they are as poor at them as most native English speakers are, and if that has anything to do with how ``difficult'' the language is to begin with.

I often wonder about how well native speakers of languages other than English actually use their languages, if they are as poor at them as most native English speakers are, and if that has anything to do with how ``difficult'' the language is to begin with.

I guess this is a universal issue. Though I do expect eg. Chinese to be more difficult to learn than Western language, if not only for the different "alphabet".
I found English to be relatively easy to learn, (much more so than French), because it's a more "intuitive" language. (if you know what I mean). French has so many exceptions to their general rules, it's ridiculous.

Something I've always wondered about natively English speaking people : do some song lyrics sound as stupid to them as to me? When I hear song lyrics, I can't help sometimes but translate them into Dutch in my head. When I try to sing the "Dutch version" of the song then, it just sounds utterly stupid. Not only because most of the times the words don't match or rhyme anymore, but mostly because then I really realise how stupid the meaning of the lyrics is.

When I hear songs in Dutch, most of the time I'm ashamed. The song lyrics are mostly so corny, like you wouldn't believe. Granted, there are some exceptions, but very few.
Then I also think : people who speak English natively surely must experience this too? Or has this effect "faded out" because English songs are practically all you hear?

I found English to be relatively easy to learn, (much more so than French), because it's a more "intuitive" language.

Well, it's intuitive to you, as Dutch and English are fairly closely related. I imagine that the Italians out there would find French easier.

However, what I meant was, are Dutch speakers, on the whole, as poor at using Dutch as Americans are at using English? And so on for the French and French, Spaniards and Spanish, etc. I don't even have a good feel for how well the British are at speaking English. TV is my only largesource of information there, and that's hardly a good sample.

Oh, and as to lyrics, to be honest, I hardly ever think about lyrics until something jumps out at me, and that's likely to be something exceptional, so, I suppose, I'm somewhat inured to lousy lyrics.

And I can only think of a very few times when I've heard non-English lyrics in popular American music. ``99 Luftballons'', of which there was an English translation, ``99 Red Balloons'', oddly. There is a German version of ``Games Without Frontiers'' that I used to hear on the radio occasionally. That's all I can think of at the moment, other than a spattering of non-English lyrics in otherwise English songs (``Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto'', et al.)

UPS is the biggest JOKE that I have seen

Not the first time I've heard this.

A guy on a newsgroup had a computer totally destroyed by UPS and was given the *full* runaround for insurance. While the first one was being sorted, the replacement package was broken into en-route and had parts stolen, and was delivered with the tape resealed. He had photos of it before being shipped, and UPS helpfully removed *all* tape before delivering it back to him claiming the old "unsufficient packaging"

Well, cutting a huge amount of successful sueing (for £2500+), judgement setting aside, alleged lies etc. right before the "main trial" last month the site www.ups-are-crap.com disappeared and had a short notice saying the matter was settled and it redirected to www.ups.com

He succeeded, but they fought *very* hard and dirty.

Gareth

Can you not "abuse your position" and make an "official visit" with a couple of colleagues, flash badges and so forth? I realise the stupidity of this type of abuse of power, but if it was done with subtlety, it might work....

They are worth the wait - we were watching "Cry Wolf" and "Danger at Ocean Deep" this morning - yet another generation of children entranced by the Master, Mr Anderson. You should see the Captain Scarlet and Joe 90 masters - superb - but they are apparently going to be the last ones 'cos Carlton is in trouble.

I must say, in spite of the fact I know Jonathon Frakes is directing and producing, I am absolutely dreading the new Thunderbirds movie - they didn't even ask Gerry to provide any advice on scripting and characterisations. They have also signed up some absolute WALLIES for the cast members. Arrrghh!!

Really? I personally think your English is fine It's way better than my French or German but that's not hard!

- Trevor

I think the French are pretty horrible at pronouncing their language. You may have a sentence of 5 words with 6 letters each. They will leave out half of the syllables and then half of the words.

-Biscuits

They are worth the wait

Well, TechTV is showing them, and is how I discovered them... in fact it was discovering Thunderbirds (by accident) that caused me to finally attach the digital cable box to the TiVo, then play some games so the analog channels get tuned by the tuner, and the digital stations come through the cable box. (Same "head end" for 2 different inputs)

I also ordered Captain Scarlet, Stingray and Fireball XL5

Sadly Thunderbirds Are Go and Thunderbird 6 seem to be on Region 2 DVD but not Region 1. If I had a PAL to NTSC converter or some software that would deal I'd buy PAL DVDs and convert them myself.

And no sign of Joe 90 yet either.

As early as 1998 neither Gerry nor Sylvia Anderson appeared to be in danger of providing advice for the movie (assuming this is the same project) so I don't really have hope.

If I had a PAL to NTSC converter or some software that would deal I'd buy PAL DVDs and convert them myself.

I have an Apex AD-600A simply for the purpose of watching Region2 Fururama DVDs and soon 'The Family Guy.' I highly recommend the player as it has the hacks built-in from the factory. Although, one of my friends also has an AD-600A with newer firmware that does not have the secret hacks menu.

I would like the fight more then I have. The problem is the time. I am a full time student and sitting on the phone or driving out to places doesn't leave much time to do much. I do of course have some "free time" but I hardly want to waste it trying to get my $800 back. I also fear that I may spend more money trying to get it back then it would be worth. When I get some time i'll post the whole story, its quite a trip.

-Greg

Considered getting one, but I really want a "real answer" and not a DVD player I have to drag around with me. Or I could use my laptop, but I don't want to do that either.

There's a whole page about Sampo DVD players and adapting the firmware to work with Apex DVD players along with patches for extra features. It's here. I've not personally got one so I can't really say much about it.

- Trevor

I talk, argued, screamed (in that order) to just about every UPS department and the insurance company they used with no results. I still have not received any money to this day.

I have a three-word suggestion: Small Claims Court

You don't need an attorney, the paperwork is easy to fill out, you file the claim and if they fail to come to court to defend against it, then you automatically receive a default judgment for the amount of the claim.

At that point, if they refuse to honor the judgment, you can take whatever collection actions you deem necessary -- take the judgment paper, go to one of their depots, and impound a delivery truck if you want. Or, hire an attorney to really go after them, and they will be liable for the collection costs as well as the judgment amount.

The downside is... you have to file the claim in the home state of their corporate offices, which might prove difficult from a logistics point of view. Or maybe you don't... it might be in whatever state the services (or lack of) were provided. It's worth looking into.

On the few occasions where I have filed small claims actions, I have found the personnel at the courthouse (where you get the forms and file the papers) to be very helpful and informative.

tanstaafl.

Yeah I did look into SCC but the problem is that I am in Miami, FL and the insurance company they use is in the carolina's I think, I dont have the information offhand. The only real time I have that I could make that adventure is during spring break and I have other plans for that

-Greg

I don't even have a good feel for how well the British are at speaking English.

On average, no weller than Americans.

There was a study several years ago of British students studying foreign languages at university (a friend of mine reading German at Aston actually participated). Almost all had a much better grip on the grammar and syntax of their adopted language than they did on those of English.

And the reason for this is simple: pupils learning foreign languages at school are taught grammar; nobody ever teaches the grammar of English.

True story #1: in a French lesson at age 14, just beginning the two-year course for the new-for-our-year GCSE examination, our French teacher was telling us of her horror at the dumbing-down that had occurred since the previous year's O-level syllabus. "You don't even have to be able to use the past tense correctly any more," she said, "I mean, how many of you can use the past tense already, two years before the exam?" Several hands went up, but she must have also got some blank looks, because she said, "OK, how many of you understand the concept of past tense and present tense -- whether in English or in French?" Not every hand went up -- and this in the top French set out of five. And I only knew about it from other French lessons -- no English teacher had ever mentioned it.

True Story #2: in the sixth form, we had "General Studies lessons", where for six lessons each we'd get a smattering of economics from an economics teacher, an overview of biology from a biology teacher, and so on. When we got an English teacher we basically ganged up on him and forced him to teach us grammar. In thirteen years of education, those six lessons were the only formal instruction in English grammar any of us had.

Peter

nobody ever teaches the grammar of English

Well, there I got lucky. My English teacher (when I was about 11 years old) taught us proper English grammar. I've also learnt French, Latin and Ancient Greek (and a little German and Spanish), which also gives one quite a good handle on grammar.

I don't necessarily use it correctly, but I do (mostly) know how.

I never got taught any grammar until around GCSE time. Then I had a new English teacher who'd just started teaching and felt that we should know some English grammar at least. A lot of people I know would be hard pressed to say what a noun, verb, adverb etc... is and they've all got university degrees so it's not for lack of trying.

I've been told that if you learn Latin then you get a good feel for English grammar.

- Trevor

However, what I meant was, are Dutch speakers, on the whole, as poor at using Dutch as Americans are at using English? And so on for the French and French, Spaniards and Spanish, etc...

Well, I can't speak for all those languages, but I can speak for Dutch. And the the answer is a big YES.

In the days when I was still in school grammar and spelling was actually taught. Now it isn't anymore. And this shows. A lot.
I'm not claiming to be the best writer in the world, but when I see the stupid mistakes that are often made I can't help but think : "are you doing this on purpuse or are you really that dumb?"
Nah, the school system hasn't improved much in the last years. In my days at school making certain mistakes (which I won't elaborate on now, otherwise I'll have to teach you the basics of Dutch and this will end up to be a VERY long post ) was considered to be a deadly sin. Now the same mistakes are considered more or less "normal".

I still can't stand to watch them though. I guess I got that hammered in hard when I was a kid.
And so it should be. The native language is part of who you are. If this gets neglegted, it feel to me as if the whole heritage gets negleted. And that's truely a shame.

Can you not "abuse your position" and make an "official visit" with a couple of colleagues, flash badges and so forth? I realise the stupidity of this type of abuse of power, but if it was done with subtlety, it might work....

Well, I have three problems when it comes to that.
The first one is integrity. I can honestly say that I've never abused my power to get personal gain, and I'd like to keep it that way. Call it a concience thing if you will.
The second reason is that it's out of my jurisdiction. Here in Belgium, the police has no jurisdiction in civil matters (which this clearly is)

However, this DOESN'T mean that I don't know what to do when push comes to shovel. If UPS wants a fight, I'll let them have one. I know my rights and I know which legal institutions I can use and how to use them.

The third reason is that I don't have a clue where to go to to complain in person. UPS is one of those firms that doen't have a real address, and the people you need are never where you expect to find them. E.g. when I phoned to complain about what happened yesterday, somehow I ended up in Holland in their Dutch department. Patching me though to the correct department was not possible of course.

Come to think of it : I have flashed my badge once when I wasn't on duty (which doesn't make much difference because according to the law I'm 24/24 "on duty").
See, I had parked my car on a parking spot near the dorm where my girlfriend lives. I stayed there for the night. When I got back the next morning the number plate of my car was gone. There was a note behind the windshield wipers. It was from the janitor (sp?) The note stated that the space I occupied was a private space and that I had no business being there. It said I could pick my number plate up at his office and that I had to pay a 100 euro fine.

So I went there. And I let him speak. He had that look in his eyes like : "I've got this sucker now and I'm going to give him a piece of my mind"
The conversation went something like this :

Him : "Aren't you ashamed to occupy somebody else's parking space ?"
Me : "I'm sorry, I had no idea this even WAS somebody elses space. How was I supposed to know, there's no indication of this anywhere. But aren't you ashamed to steal somebodys licence plate?"
Him : "I have the right to do so"
Me : "Says who ?"
Him : "The police. I've contacted them and I know who you are, this is your identity" (he showed me a small piece of paper which indeed stated my identity)
Me : "Oh, I see we have a problem here. What do you suppose to do now ?"
Him : "Simple. You pay 100 euro's, you get your licence plate back and you move your car"
Me : "That might be a problem"
Him : "Howso ?" (It was clearly showing that he was feeling pretty good about himself at this point)
Me : "Because you've made the mistake of unscrewing the wrong person's licence plate!"

At that time I flashed my badge. His face turned as white as paper, and this didn't improve when I told him that he had exactly 10 minutes to screw my licence plate back on, or otherwise I'd arrest him for stealing and damaging personal property, embezzeling (sp?) an official document (which a number plate is) and deliberately trying to rip off people (can't remember the official term in English).
I also demanded to know WHO the police officer was that gave him my personal data through my number plate, because this was clearly a breach of that person's professional secrecy. (I don't know if this is the correct term, but you know what I mean).
I fully intend to contact the police force's internal affairs and inform them about this collegues' loose morals when it comes to his profession secrecy. In my book that's one of the biggest mistakes you can ever make when you're an officer of the law.

Anyhow, ten minutes later I drove on, WITH my number plate.

Every time I see this guy now, he's extremely polite. Up to a point where he would probably even wash my car if I asked him to.

It still feels pretty good when I think about it.

Really? I personally think your English is fine It's way better than my French or German but that's not hard!

Why thank you kind Sir! Coming from a native Englishman, that's truely a compliment!

I agree. As I said, I try not to correct niggling errors when it comes from s non-native English speaker, but you had me fooled. You even have those things right that I don't have any concrete definition for (like when to use ``did run'' instead of ``ran'', etc.).

That being said, I don't know if it's a typo or not, but it's ``push comes to shove'', not ``shovel''.

``[D]eliberately trying to rip off people'' is fraud, BTW. I can't think of a good word for ``professional secrecy'', but I feel like there must be one. ``Confidentiality'', maybe?

I got 12 years of grammar in school. I had it coming out of my ears. They pounded it in so well, I can still recite every preposition from memory, diagram a compound-complex sentence, and tell the difference between a predicate nominative and a direct object. I couldn't believe it when I got to the University and they were still teaching grammar. Needless to say, I placed out of those classes. I'm pretty sure this isn't representative of most Americans though. I was fortunate enough to attend private schools.

Out of curiousity, if they don't teach grammar, what do they teach in your English classes? Literature? Spelling?

And I've got no idea what half your post actually means...

I'm fine with grammar and can usually construct a sentence which is spelt correctly and has correct grammar. It's just that I've never really been taught it. I've just had to pick it up as I go along from what little I was taught and books I've read.
It's weird, I just sort of know if a word is spelt correctly or not. I actually quite good at knowing the spelling of words but I have to write or type it first though. If you just ask me to say it then I'll have trouble remembering. *shrug*

- Trevor

I don't even have a good feel for how well the British are at speaking English.

On average, no weller than Americans.

Oops.

In my defense, I edited that sentence to change its structure, and just forgot to change that word from ``well'' to ``good''. Oh, good.

I mean ``well''!

In thirteen years of education, those six lessons were the only formal instruction in English grammar any of us had.

I had several years of school where grammar was taught, but it ended by the time I was in 6th grade (10 - 12 years old). I don't think that kids that age really have the ability to relate formal rules like that to natural language, to abstract anything that natural and ingrained. They should teach basic grammar at a young age, so that you have some basis for what later seem like arbitrary rules (like ``well'' vs. ``good''), but then teach it again, more in-depth, once you get older.

I think this may be the basis for no longer teaching much grammar at all, in that kids simply don't or can't comprehend it, so it seems like it's just not working. I know that I didn't start to understand grammar at all well until I took German in my last two years of high school, and I still don't know it that well.

I work at FedEx. Carefully handling packages isn't a priority. The only packages that I'll even think twice about not throwing 20 feet or dropping on the ground are the ones that say glass only because it makes a mess. Fragile doesn't even register since at least 50% of the boxes say fragile. You'd be surprised at how durable a Dell computer can be.

It's weird, I just sort of know if a word is spelt correctly or not. I actually quite at knowing the spelling of words but I have to write or type it first though. If you just ask me to say it then I'll have trouble remembering.

I have the same symptom. My mother always thought it was odd that when asked to spell things out loud that I didn't spell in syllables, but I'm basically reading what I've written down on the virtual piece of paper in my head, so syllables are irrelevant.

I've always figured it was some sort of idiot savant type of thing.

At the same time, there is a small subset of words that I can never remember how to spell correctly, no matter how hard I try. Most of them have to do with sets of double consonants and which ones are doubled. ``Necessary'' vs. ``neccesary'' is probably the biggest one.

...but you had me fooled. You even have those things right that I don't have any concrete definition for (like when to use ``did run'' instead of ``ran'', etc.).

*wooooosh* (sound of my heart swelling with pride)

That being said, I don't know if it's a typo or not, but it's ``push comes to shove'', not ``shovel''.

a lot less proud now. I knew that! Stupid typos!

``[D]eliberately trying to rip off people'' is fraud, BTW
Oh yeah...fraud...that was the word I was looking for... usually when I can't remember a word I look it up in the dictionary; but I'm not at home for the moment, so sorry about that...

Out of curiousity, if they don't teach grammar, what do they teach in your English classes? Literature? Spelling?

Mostly literature... but grammar is also thought. Did I say somewhere it wasn't? If I did then I'm sorry. I meant to say that when small children are taught Dutch there isn't that much emphasis on grammar anymore, but this isn't the case when it comes to English (at least I hope it isn't; it's been ten years since I had my last English lesson)

Hey, don't feel bad. Typos have nothing to do with understanding. They just have to do with uncoordinated fingers. But I could believe that in a colloquialism like that that got mistyped in a translation book somewhere and then got propagated. I figured it was a typo, but, again, it was kind of a funny one. (I get images in my mind about what these things look like.)

Thanks for the tip! Next time I want to use a shipping company I'll make sure that there's a sticker on the package saying : "careful, glass contents" on it!

I have the same symptom. My mother always thought it was odd that when asked to spell things out loud that I didn't spell in syllables, but I'm basically reading what I've written down on the virtual piece of paper in my head, so syllables are irrelevant.

Same here, too. When I find I've got a word wrong, assuming it's not just due to the font size in the BBS edit box being too small or to an editing error like "well" above, I usually find that I've always got that word wrong, that I've been faithfully remembering an incorrect spelling.

I've always figured it was some sort of idiot savant type of thing.

What's interesting is that this ability -- to look at an entire word and see whether it's correct or not -- is often described as exactly the ability that dyslexics lack. It sounds as if dyslexia is a less-than-average facility at an innate skill which it's also possible to have a greater-than-average facility at.

Peter (resisting the temptation to reword that sentence with "at which...")

It's weird, I just sort of know if a word is spelt correctly or not

I have this too. Do you also recognise this : somebody else has written a text and asks you to read it. And even if there is only one spelling mistake in that entire text your eyes are magically "drawn" to it. It's like I don't even have to read the text to see the fault.

Funny thing, but I've been able to do this for as long as I can remember.

Absolutely! And I can't not think about it, too.

Yep. I do exactly the same thing. Whenever I read anything I get drawn to mispelt words. It's quite annoying sometimes because the mispelt word bugs me.

Anybody else able to read really quickly? But still remember a lot about the text? When I've had to revise for exams I can usually read through the textbook or course notes a few days before and then sit the exam without any problems. This only works if I'm interested in the subject and I understand what it's trying to say. If I don't then it fails miserably

- Trevor

I hadn't ever thought of that. I've read that English speaking people (and, I would assume people with languages written similarly) don't read letters, but read words, just like one would if he were reading pictographic East Asian languages, the advantage to alphabetic languages being that one can sound out a word if he's never read it before, which, of course, only generally helps if he's heard it before, discounting knowledge of potential roots.

Heh... yeah I have the exact same thing. Only downside is that 3 days later most of the info I gathered while reading is gone again.
In case of exams this is not a bad thing since most of the time I only have to take them once. (I hope)

Some of the advantages in having a language you can sound out even if you don't know the word is lost when you think about the number of pronunciation rules English has. And that's not even beginning to deal with the foreign words that have now become part of English.

English must be very difficult to learn if it's not your mother tongue. There is a large number of words that sound the same but are written differently depending on context. Their, they're, there etc...

- Trevor

After the exam I would forget about the subject. You can still ask me questions and I can answer them but it's not quite the same as if I had sat down and worked through it all properly.

I had to learn LaTeX (Okay, can't typeset it properly here so the capitialisation will have to do) a while back for my dissertation so I sat down and read through the manual in a couple of days and just got on with it. It was strange at first because I was used to WYSIWYG editors like Word but after a while I got used to it.

- Trevor

I think that that's actually related to why Americans are accused (rightly) of being overly monolingual. It's because we have nowhere to practice any other language. Those near French Canada have something of an advantage in that respect, as well as those in Texas and Florida, due to the large Spanish-speaking population.

But in Europe, one can drive an hour and be in an area where everyone speaks a different language, so it's easier to ``practice''. Of course, that's just my provincial theory.

Edit: My point being that it's easy to practice a new computer language, as one has nearly immediate correct feedback, and, generally, one has a distinct task to perform with the language.

those in Texas and Florida, due to the large Spanish-speaking population

And California. I know one Los Angeleno who came to England, and was so used to serving staff being illegal Hispanic immigrants that he kept trying to order beer in pubs in Spanish, through force of habit.

Peter

Every time I see this guy now, he's extremely polite. Up to a point where he would probably even wash my car if I asked him to. It still feels pretty good when I think about it.

That was a fantastic story! Thanks for sharing it.

I stand corrected. That was a well written, coherent explanation of the meaning of integrity, and I applaud yours, sir. I suspect there will be no miscarriages in the application of law within your jurisdiction

And here's an accompanying sound effect to the excellent number plate story:

(Rousing rounds of applause, audience whistles, foot stamping, etc.)

Now THAT is what I call "revenge", and served frozen solid in this case....

When I was in 5th grade in Canada (A very long time ago now), we had a series of reading comprehension and speed tests in the english class. I upset their bell curve quite a bit when they decided that my average reading speed was around a thousand words a minute with 98% recall. This was so far outside the norm that they reran the tests about four times to check if I was faking it

I can't actually remember a time when I couldn't read to some degree or other, and my father says I sort of worked it out for myself around 3 or 4 years old.

In the right mood, which is often late at night when I'm just tired enough to be drifting into a sort of alpha-state, the reading becomes so automatic and involved it's sometimes like I'm seeing the book as a movie (I have a very visual mind), and I've been know to go through a 250 page novel in less than an hour. In this state I often read eight or nine books in a row, and then wonder why I'm so tired the next day

Mind you, I don't personally know anyone else who buys fiction twenty books at a time, and then reads them all in a weekend. Maybe I'm just peculiar somehow? Nah, that can't be it...

That's why I like buying books when I'm in Canada or the US, they give you a bulk discount.

pca

I can't actually remember a time when I couldn't read to some degree or other, and my father says I sort of worked it out for myself around 3 or 4 years old.

My mum's favourite cutesy story about me learning to read, is that I was three when my little brother came along, naturally causing Mum to be dead tired when reading me my bedtime story. So she started missing bits out to get through Mr Men or A.W. Awdry quicker -- and I noticed and started watching the book while she read to make sure she didn't miss words out. (I must have been a nightmare kid!) Eventually I could tell which word she'd missed out just by the look of it, and the rest was history.

Peter

I stand corrected. That was a well written, coherent explanation of the meaning of integrity, and I applaud yours, sir. I suspect there will be no miscarriages in the application of law within your jurisdiction

Thanks. Of course, I can't speak for the entire police force, but I try to do my job to the best of my abilities. Which is sometimes hard because most of the times when I intervean somewhere people aren't really happy about it. (because they're at fault and got caught obviously)
Still, everything seems worth while it again those seldom times when I can actually really help someone.

After all, I joined the police force not because I like pestering people (for real! ), but because I like helping people. Though somedays when I've been in another bar fight, and I've been called names and spit upon once more it's hard to keep believing that. But up 'till now I'm doing fine. It's brought me into many interesting situations and I've seen things most people don't have a chance of seeing in their entire life. I could probably fill a book by now and I've only been at it for 5 years. (wow, has it really been that long?)

> I've read that English speaking people [...] don't read letters, but read words

In fact, in English, people tend to read groups of words at a time, (which is an) (important thing to) (remember when) (setting type as) (poorly-chosen line breaks) (can affect the) (ability to read) (smoothly) - have you ever noticed that when reading out loud, you tend read ahead a few words and then speak, rather than say each word as you read it?

Whereas in German it is common to read groups of letters, which is why they can cope with reallylongwordslikethis.

What a remarkable proof. Thank you.

I find that I tend to read entire paragraphs at once, which is why I suffer from the problem (mentioned above somewhere) that I'm immediately drawn to the one spelling/grammar mistake in the entire paragraph.

Also, if the paragraph is very large (more than about 10 sentences or 60 words), I have to start from the beginning and read it more slowly. As you can image, this makes it very hard to read anything by Umberto Eco or Eric Hobshawm.

In thirteen years of education, those six lessons were the only formal instruction in English grammar any of us had.

Sigh... this topic makes me realize just how badly education has slipped in this (U.S.A.) country.

When I finished 8th grade (that would have been at age 13 or 14) my English teacher had quite literally taught us (or at least attempted to teach us) everything there was to know about English grammar. I mean, everything.

Things like use of the nominative case and nominative form of the verb "to be" in instances where uncertainty of expression called for the subjunctive. Example: "I would not do that if I were he." is correct grammar, and we were taught why it was correct.

In all the remainder of my education (an additional 10 years or so) I was never, not one time ever, exposed to any aspect of grammar that I hadn't been taught in the eighth grade.

When I try to discuss these things with my contemporaries (well, not exactly contemporaries, there aren't too many people around as old as I am -- say, people 10 years younger than I) they just look at me with a blank expression and think, frequently aloud, that I am weird.

Y'know, not even nostalgia is what it used to be.

tanstaafl.

``Necessary'' vs. ``neccesary'' is probably the biggest one.

Naah... it has to be the deadly duo of "accommodate" and "recommend". I had to just burn those two words into my brain, brute force by rote. All those "c"s and "m"s are hard to keep straight.

tanstaafl.

Peter (resisting the temptation to reword that sentence with "at which...")

Ending a sentence with a preposition? That is something up with which I shall not put!



tanstaafl.

In Kindergarten, on the last day of the year, we had one lesson on reading. That entire year, after learning the alphabet (again, the same as in pre-k), we left for the summer knowing exactly one word, and that word even had a contraction in it. I think the particular word we were taught sums up the educational system of the U.S. quite well: CAN'T.

I never had formal grammar instruction. Perhaps it is because I went to 7 different schools, both public and private. Fortunately, my mother is an English teacher and my father is an engineer, so I learned to speak properly at home. Things such as the proper usage of "whom" came naturally to me, since proper english was spoken at home. When I took the PSAT, I scored abysmally on the grammar section. I generally speak correctly, but I don't know why it is correct.

Something that is probably worse than our grammar instruction is mathematics. In first, second, and third grades, kids learn addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. If they are lucky, they might even learn fractions and decimal points. After that, most kids do not learn any new mathematics until 8th grade, when they study PRE-algebra. I was lucky in that I had pre-algebra in 5th grade, after only sitting idle for one year and moving slowly all the years previous.

Why are our schools so pathetic? Is it the teachers? The system? Perhaps it is the students? Our school day was 7 hours long. Of that, we spent about an hour in class changes and about 10 minutes at the beginning and end of every class. Of the remaining 4 hours, 30 minutes was lunch-time. Only about half of the remainder was used in productive instruction, which was very slow. Of course, every teacher made sure to assign more busy-work to take home than all the time they actually spent teaching us. This was in the advanced classes....

-Biscuits

CAN'T

Wow, the parents must have loved those teachers after that summer

As for the rest of it, I don't think all educational systems are too bad. Although I had the benefit of attending school in one of the top school systems in the country (lot of good it did me ).

However, overall I'd say that our educational system has devolved into nothing more than daycare.

it has to be the deadly duo of "accommodate" and "recommend". I had to just burn those two words into my brain, brute force by rote.

But you see those words fairly often. The ones that get me are the ones that are oddly-spelt and slightly obscure: inoculate/innocuous I had to just memorise.

Peter

However, overall I'd say that our educational system has devolved into nothing more than daycare

Wonderfully put !

However, I don't think it's the fault of the teachers or schools entirely. The parents also have a lot to do with it.
See, when I was in school, a teacher was still a person for whom there was respect (that wasn't even that long ago, say 10-15 years). Now that seems to be completely gone. I've got a few uncles that teach, all in the higher education department. There are some of the most demotivated people I've ever seen in my life and they all long for the day of their retirement (though some even got more than ten years to go)

They've told me stories that I found so hard to believe that they had to be true. One of the best (and therefor one of the most tragic) is still that they can't really afford to fail students anymore. If they do this now, they risk the that the parents of the kid come to school with their lawyer (I kid you not!) to "talk" about the kid's bad grades ! Of course, it's always the teacher's fault according to the parents. Their kid is such a sweet boy/girl, it's simply not possible that it got such bad grades because it was too lazy to lift a finger of schoolwork throughout the enire year.

In my days (god I feel like an old fart when I say that!) when I got a bad grade or I got some sort of school punishment I could expect a lot of trouble when I got home. Most of the time I had to do the "assignment" twice : once for the teacher and once for my parents. I've cursed a lot in those days , but looking back at it that wasn't too bad a system. Now most of the times when a kid gets punished by a teacher, their parents tell it that it doesn't have to do the assignment, so it doesn't. There's very little teachers can do about that.

I've had some excellent teachers over the years. I was always fortunate to have better-than-average schools and good teachers. My classmates were rarely troublemakers or anything like that. Still, even with dedicated teachers, we spent less than 2 hours a day actually productively learning. All the class changes and disruptions made it difficult to get much done. There were also extremely gifted people put in the same classes as extremely slow kids. Either the teachers had to move at a fast pace and leave the slow kids behind, or they had to spend day after day explaining the same concept over and over again. The methods of teaching haven't really improved in the past few hundred years and they are starting to break down as more and more people are crammed into every classroom and as we expect people to go into life with more than a 6th-grade education.

I was lucky, however: on a good day in some of the classes in my highschool, no learning took place. On a bad day people were having knife fights, throwing marble bricks at eachother, or just brawling on a bad day. I was jumped one time during school by a group of black thugs who just wanted to get back at "whitey." They hit me, and about 10 other people, from behind with a 40 lb. backpack. I was knocked unconcious and had one of my teeth badly chipped. The next week, they were all back in class.

I would say 1/3 of the people in my school got my caliber of education, which is to say halfway decent. The rest got nothing at all, except daycare and an easy way to meet drug dealers. How are we going to clean up our schools and get rid of all the people who don't want to be there? Even after we do that, will things really improve? There are a bunch of sorry teachers out there, but even with excellent ones and good students, it is difficult to overcome the system. And I don't think the Republican's genius proposal for standardized testing is going to do squat. All it is going to do is encourage teaching to the test. The system is already flawed and they are only going to make it more entrenched instead of giving teachers the freedom they need to actually teach.

-Biscuits

And I don't think the Republican's genius proposal for standardized testing is going to do squat. All it is going to do is encourage teaching to the test.

England and Wales (maybe Scotland too, dunno) have had standardised testing for a while now. All it has proved is that there's one thing worse than teaching to a test, and that's parenting to a test: "Why are you wasting my child's time teaching this stuff that's not on the syllabus, when you could be going again over stuff that is?"

I'm sure I got a better education between the ages of 5 and 14 (not taught to tests) than between 14 and 18 (taught to tests). The material was less advanced, of course, but there were no arbitrary restrictions on how far the teacher would take it if the class all upped and ran with it.

In fairness, there were a couple of teachers who didn't teach to the test, either by announcing at the start of certain lessons "this isn't on the syllabus, I'm just telling you in case you're interested", or by just handing the more advanced pupils other stuff to get on with while they laboured the point on syllabus material to the rest of the class. But such teachers were in the minority, at least in science subjects. (Arts subjects, I'd imagine, are less susceptible to teaching to a test, because you can get arbitrarily advanced in an essay on Macbeth, whereas you simply can't solve GCSE maths questions with vector calculus.)

The only classroom lessons we got after the age of 14 that weren't taught to a test, were the sixth-form General Studies lessons I mentioned above. (They were nominally aimed at the A-level in General Studies, but as the examiners are allowed to ask absolutely anything, you can't teach to the test.) This had two results: firstly, about half the pupils simply bunked the lessons wholesale, and secondly, those of us who did turn up got interesting, insightful, challenging teaching such as most of us hadn't heard for years.

Peter

Things like use of the nominative case and nominative form of the verb "to be" in instances where uncertainty of expression called for the subjunctive. Example: "I would not do that if I were he."

I don't think you're remembering that quite correctly, or you're misusing terms, or something. There are actually two grammar trip-ups in ``I would not do that if I were he.'', which is correct English, but not, I think, quite for the reasons you state.

The first, and simpler one, is that the verb to be (in the form ``were'' in this sentence) is an intransitive verb, which means that it does not take a direct object. As such, when you use a noun or pronoun in the predicate side of the sentence, it is being used as a predicate nominative, which means that it's renaming the subject. As should be obvious, the direct object would be in the objective case, and the predicate nominative in nominative case. In English, nouns do not take different forms between nominative (or subjective) and objective cases, but pronouns often do, and ``he'' is the nominative case of the pronoun that would be ``him'' in objective case. A good, simple example is that one should not state on the phone ``It's me'', but, rather, ``It is I'', à la Lamont Cranston.

The second has to do with the subjunctive mood or tense. The subjunctive mood is used when, as you say, the state is uncertain, like when you use ``if'' or ``might''. In modern English, the subjunctive forms of the vast majority of verbs, if not all of them, are the same as their third-person past tense forms. Many modern English language scholars will tell you that the subjunctive form is all but dead. It really has no reason to still be here, as there is always some other word that indicates the subjunctivity of the verb. I think that it still sounds nicer to use the subjunctive, though.

Anyway, my point is that those two rules are not related, so you're either conflating those two things, or your teacher taught you rules combined together for common happenstances.

Either the teachers had to move at a fast pace and leave the slow kids behind, or they had to spend day after day explaining the same concept over and over again

This isn't really related, but I had to tell a story (I want to tell one too! )

In my senior year of high school, I was in an AP (college level) English class. One of the few stimulating classes I took during high school. Anyway, it was the end of the year, and because we had read and discussed Conrad's "Heart of Darkness," our teacher showed us "Apocalypse Now" and we would talk about it as we went through the film.

So one day we finally watch the last portion of the film, the lights go on, and a cheerleader-type raises her hand.

"Mr Sherrett? Who is this Charlie that they keep talking about??"

so you're either conflating those two things, or your teacher taught you rules combined together for common happenstances.

No... I think it's just that it has been more than 40 years since I learned it, and my memory just isn't what it used to be.

tanstaafl.

However, overall I'd say that our educational system has devolved into nothing more than daycare.

Well, that states the problem rather succinctly. How about a solution?

One of the greatest things about American Education also plants the seeds for its downfall, and that is, everybody is entitled to a free education through the 12th grade. Unfortunately, whoever makes the "rules" went (IMHO) a step too far and decided that not only is everybody entitled, but they are required to partake of this education, at least through the age of 16. (Perhaps that varies from state to state?)

My solution is this: at birth, everybody gets a "certificate" or whatever, good for life, for a 12-year (13 with Kindergarten) public school education, but nobody is required to use it. Think what classrooms and teachers would be like if everybody was in the room because they wanted to be there!

The people who drop out of school will eventually find out on their own how hard it is to get through life without an education, and would be able to resume their education whenever they had reached sufficient maturity to realize they needed it. Imagine a class full of 30-year-old seventh graders...

Classes would still have to be taught at the level of the lowest common denominator; but that level would be significantly higher than it is now with classes filled with disruptive miscreants who not only don't want to be there, but shouldn't be there.

tanstaafl.

Oh god, that just wouldn't work. I can just see a third of our population that can't read, write, or add. Heloooo eighteenth century. Not to mention that we'd have to pay their way through life.

Oh wait, I guess we already do.

The problem with that, and this is the same argument I've used against private school vouchers, is that the education of American children does much more than simply educate the children. It props up the infrastructure of the country. As Lectric said, if it wasn't required, then we would have more idiots out roaming around than we do now, and that would be bad for the country.

Of course, that doesn't help solve the problem. While I dislike the whole private school voucher thing, mostly because it doesn't actually help the children who would most benefit from it, maybe some sort of remuneration for good schoolwork would help. That is, give bonuses to teachers and principals whose students do well, which would encourage them to be more than babysitters.

I don't really know. I've never been in a school where learning didn't occur, but, then, I was always in the advanced classes. I suppose that the children who would really benefit are the seemingly average ones who would actually want to learn if they had the opportunity.

However, overall I'd say that our educational system has devolved into nothing more than daycare.

One of the greatest things about American Education also plants the seeds for its downfall, and that is, everybody is entitled to a free education through the 12th grade. Unfortunately, whoever makes the "rules" went (IMHO) a step too far and decided that not only is everybody entitled, but they are required to partake of this education, at least through the age of 16.

Bah. I don't believe that for a second. You have the same thing in Canada -- a system that requires everyone under 16 to be in school, getting a free education, and it certainly hasn't devolved into a daycare. Sure, there are kids there that don't want to be there, but even in the basic level classes I took, kids that just goofed off got kicked out of class. Kids that didn't want to be there played hookey, and, quite often, repeated a few classes. If you don't know the required material, you failed.

My neighbour spent the last few years teaching public school (in Compton, no less). I took a look at the report cards that he's using, and it's pathetic. Where are the grades? There was far more emphasis on "does he play nice with others," and "is she trying hard," than there appeared to be on actual grades. He had kids passing grade 4 based on the fact that they put in effort, not because they learned the material.

When a teacher at a school in New York isn't allowed to punish a student that swears at her, let alone have him removed from class, because there's a policy in place that says "we don't punish the students," there's something far more seriously wrong with the system than just requiring kids to be in until they're 16. What do you expect a system to turn into when parents show up at a school with lawyers? "My kid isn't learning, so I'm going to sue you." "Okay, your kid passes, because I don't want to be sued."

Blame it on society, blame it on the kids, whatever -- but it sure ain't the fault of the system for requiring a kid be in school.

The problem is that sometimes there's a fine line to walk. Do you fail kids all the time and discourage them enough to make them drop out of school, or do you pass them up through the grades and hope something sinks in, despite them not knowing it all? I don't like either choice, but I'd lean towards the latter. It sounds like the case you're talking about is a bit extreme in the passing area.

I think in cases like the ones you mention (instances when you "don't punish the students"), it truly is daycare - keeping the troubled kids off the street.

As for that suing example, I think we can all agree that that is messed up, but I don't think that's common. I went to what a lot of people considered an "affluent" high school, and we never had anything near that stupid done by the parents. Although, we did have parents of kids in band who thought their child should have been principle chair simply because they were their child. Some people are just whiny brats, I suppose

Write to UPS, tell them that said package was NEVER received.

Once they they dig up paperwork to the contrary, it should also show that you collected the package and therefore paid for it up front..

-ml

When I was 9 years of age, our family relocated to Montreal, where, after three earlier years in a very strict traditional schoolroom, I was placed in a "free form" experimental school. Few formal classes, no walls, lots of toys, lots of playing, and the odd "gather round the table" session with a teacher.

Three years later, we moved back to New Brunswick, where I re-entered the traditional school system, and the teachers were at a loss as to how to place me. My french was, of course, good. Math scores were through the roof, and my reading level was off the chart. But geography, history, and other memorization subjects were merely average.

I still don't really understand how that happened.

But due to my reading scores, I got bumped into an advanced English Lit course, bypassing the English grammer teaching that the others were all getting. As as result, I missed out on the only chance I ever had to done good for grammer.

But somehow along the way, I did pick up acceptable grammer; most likely from reading.

Cheers

not only is everybody entitled, but they are required to partake of this education, at least through the age of 16.

The kid doesn't have much of a choice, but a parent can take their kid out of school. Ever heard of home schooling?

not only is everybody entitled, but they are required to partake of this education, at least through the age of 16.

The kid doesn't have much of a choice, but a parent can take their kid out of school. Ever heard of home schooling?

Yes, but I think what tanstaafl was getting at is that a child is required to be in education until 16 years old. Whether the parent(s) decide to use the public school system, or home schooled, or sent to a private school doesn't matter -- the one option a parent does not legally have is to withdraw their child from all systems of education.

Besides, I'll wager that in 99.9% of the cases where a child is failing from school, it's the parents that are to blame. I see it all the time. My X-g/f works in a category 1 school, the lowest of the low grade-wise. They are generally from poor parents who had the children simply to collect more money from the government. There was even a case I know of where a parent wanted their girl classified as learning disabled, so they could get more money. I'm sorry, but that's some sick #$%^.

I did pick up acceptable grammer

But not acceptable speling, I see.