Councils ban the use of Latin.

[Grumpmeister]

Hang on, there are latin phrases that have been so commonly used that pretty much everyone knows what you are on about when you use them. So I have just one thing to say to the moron who came up with this idea, Stercorem pro cerebro habes.  

A number of local councils in Britain have banned their staff from using Latin words, because they say they might confuse people.

Several local authorities have ruled that phrases like "vice versa", "pro rata", and even "via" should not be used, in speech or in writing.

But the ban has prompted anger among some Latin scholars.

Professor Mary Beard of Cambridge University said it was the linguistic equivalent of ethnic cleansing.

Some local councils say using Latin is elitist and discriminatory, because some people might not understand it - particularly if English is not their first language.

Bournemouth Council is the latest local authority to draw up a list of nineteen phrases which its staff are no longer allowed to use, either verbally or in official correspondence.

Other local councils have banned "QED" and "ad hoc", while other typical Latin terms include "bona fide", "ad lib" and "quid pro quo".

But the move has been welcomed by the Plain English Campaign which says some officials only use Latin to make themselves feel important.

A Campaign spokesman said the ban might stop people confusing the Latin abbreviation e.g. with the word "egg".

I'm sorry but if you are confusing e.g with egg then you are just polluting the gene pool.

[Darwins Selection]

I'm sorry but if you are confusing e.g with egg then you are just polluting the gene pool.

QED

[Snoopy]

A point that these councils seem to have missed is that they are responsible for education so if people nowadays find such words and phrases confusing whereas in the past the populace knew what they meant then it must confirm that the education of the masses is now lacking. An argument that I have been putting forward for many years and local councillors have been denying.

Nevermind ~ Mrs Snoopy#2 is taking on the THW's Maths Teacher tomorrow evening. He has switched all homework and GCSE revision to auto pilot using a web-site (not one that he has anything to do with but one they have "bought into"). At a glance one can see which exercises the child should be doing, the programme marks answers as correct or incorrect and shows the percentage "scored". Of course the child can have as many goes as she likes until she gets it right. Thus, given enough time, she can score 100% in all sections and walk away believing that she knows all she needs to pass her upcoming exams.

Does this work   ~ Although I can see how it makes Sir's life easier as he simply tells them which sections to dial up and he does nothing more than check back later to see their "marks".

I too can score 100% by simply filling in numbers at random ~ eventually I will score a hit.

Give enough monkeys enough typewriters and they will eventually come up with the Complete Works of Shakespeare so they say ~ however it doesn't mean the monkeys understand it.

Mrs S#2, newly qualified and registered as a teacher (although she has been a tutor for years) intends to ask how this new system enables the teacher to evaluate the child's learning ~ because it plainly doesn't. There is a distinct difference between teaching and learning. He may believe he is teaching, using the latest technology but how is he checking that the children are actually learning and for that matter how does he know who is putting in the answers? For the latter plainly he does not because he has yet to pick up that I have done one of the exercises.

[Bar Wench]

Ahhh but that will be because he has to fill his use of IT quota. 

[Snoopy]

Ahhh but that will be because he has to fill his use of IT quota. 

Correct and bugger the education of the kids he is responsible for.

The point is that for the fifty minutes he stands at the front of the class he and he alone is responsible for what he teaches and for how much of that his pupils actually learn. No quotas can alter that.

So if all children (or their parents) can score 100% and he uses that to evaluate how much the children have learned what use is it?

[Barman]

I thought the worst bit of the article was this: -

At the same time it is important to remember that the national literacy level is about 12 years old and the vast majority of people hardly ever use these terms.

Source

WTF? 

Wouldn't it be better to raise that level instead of just removing more sophisticated words? 

[Grumpmeister]

Yes but that would mean people would be to intelligent to work for the Plain English Campaign.

[Nick]

It's idiotic. Let's ban Indian words too

Bungalow
Kebab

In fact let's just talk in Anglo Saxon

Starting with Fook Off!

[Snoopy]

Any minute now someone will tell us that they ran out of bricks and the builder said "We'll bung a low roof on it" and that is where the word came from.

Oh F*ck ~ I just did 

[Uncle Mort]

I've not heard 'explanation' that before. 

I agree with BM, how on earth can we accept a national literacy level of about 12 years old? That is a disgrace.

[Nick]

Yer wot mate?

[Uncle Mort]

See? it's catching.

[Snoopy]

Innit.

[Darwins Selection]

Nostro adventu commotus, Caesar duas legiones in citeri-
ore Gallia conscribit. Nonnu Ui pudore adducti remanebunt.
Vulneribus confecti, barbari se in fugam contulerunt.

[Snoopy]

We are struggling with this but in essence think you are saying that Ceasar raised two legions in Gaul (or Wales) as these are interchangable) but could not remain and left the legions to their own devices until they were overwhelmed by the barbarians (locals presumably)