Ahh. Memetime! With rant!
Nov. 30th, 2003 06:45 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
| conuly's Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 6 | |
|---|---|
| Average number of words per sentence: | 11.28 |
| Average number of syllables per word: | 1.43 |
| Total words in sample: | 7231 |
| Another fun meme brought to you by rfreebern | |
Okay. Since when has "the number of syllables per word" been a reliable indicator of ideal grade level? Banal, irony, smite, these are not words your average 6th grader can use correctly (much to my unending shame), but any 5 year old can say "supercallifragilisticexpiallidocius" (incidentally, the book was better. Much better). Continuing that, I can have very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very long sentences without making the sentence harder to understand... that says nothing for the complexity of the sentences, etc. It also goes without saying that this says nothing about the content of my journal, only about the alleged writing style... we can all come up with very short and simple porn that would give me a low grade rating. Hm. That's pretty funny, actually....
Anyway, so, it's interesting, but not worth paying attention to. Yep.
Can you believe I just found this?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 06:39 am (UTC)I remember my school used accelerated reader for required reading, and grade level was decided by the number of syllables in a sample of 100 words. Asinine? You bet yer britches. I knew that was idiotic when I was in fourth grade, too. Because a lot of the "big" books I read with large words were actually simpler than the ones with smaller words! That system irritates me, because most words in the english language are three or less syllables. I mean really.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 09:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 01:59 pm (UTC)incidentally, hippie got grade 6 too, if that's any comfort *laughs* she's older than you are...
Actually, a low grade level is a Good Thing...
Date: 2003-11-30 03:07 pm (UTC)I think obfuscation is bad. It certainly can be fun, though, as in the case of the Obfuscated C Contest (http://www.ioccc.org/).
G.
Re: Actually, a low grade level is a Good Thing...
Date: 2003-11-30 03:17 pm (UTC)Which is not true. You can have short, yet complex sentences, and short, yet difficult words. *smites stupid categorizing system*
no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 07:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 10:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 06:39 am (UTC)I remember my school used accelerated reader for required reading, and grade level was decided by the number of syllables in a sample of 100 words. Asinine? You bet yer britches. I knew that was idiotic when I was in fourth grade, too. Because a lot of the "big" books I read with large words were actually simpler than the ones with smaller words! That system irritates me, because most words in the english language are three or less syllables. I mean really.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 09:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 01:59 pm (UTC)incidentally, hippie got grade 6 too, if that's any comfort *laughs* she's older than you are...
Actually, a low grade level is a Good Thing...
Date: 2003-11-30 03:07 pm (UTC)I think obfuscation is bad. It certainly can be fun, though, as in the case of the Obfuscated C Contest (http://www.ioccc.org/).
G.
Re: Actually, a low grade level is a Good Thing...
Date: 2003-11-30 03:17 pm (UTC)Which is not true. You can have short, yet complex sentences, and short, yet difficult words. *smites stupid categorizing system*
no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 07:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-30 10:48 pm (UTC)