Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc] "Joseph Bright" and Huddersfield hobbits

Expand Messages
  • Larry Swain
    ... doesn t speak well of him. Making these sorts of mistakes on a course on tape/CD sounds to me like arrogance. A lecturer is just as responsible for
    Message 1 of 21 , Feb 17, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      On Fri, Feb 17, 2012, at 11:17 AM, [2]WendellWag@... wrote:



      >>This tape is part of his output, and this sort of sloppiness
      doesn't speak well of him. Making these sorts of mistakes on a
      course on tape/CD sounds to me like arrogance. A lecturer is
      just as responsible for accuracy in his recorded lectures (for
      which he's paid well, incidentally) as for his scholarly papers.<<

      But his other recordings, his scholarly output in books and articles, do
      speak well of him. Before judging him too harshly for these issues in
      this lecture, a) with John, we all make mistakes and b) as for scholars,
      I may not like a particular book or article that contains errors, but I
      don't judge a scholar's entire output on a single article, lecture, or
      even book.

      Larry Swain
      Chair, English Dept.
      Bemidji State University

      --
      http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web
    • "Beregond, Anders Stenström"
      ... _Uth[e-hook]rsfild_. The etymology is prob. the _field_ or land of _Hother_, _Other_ or _Huther_, _Uther_, the original owner; _or_ possibly
      Message 2 of 21 , Feb 17, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        David Bratman wrote:

        > (If there's
        > no initial H in the Huddersfield dialect, what's the dialect's name for its
        > own town?)

        _Uth[e-hook]rsfild_. The etymology is "prob. the _field_ or land of
        _Hother_, _Other_ or _Huther_, _Uther_, the original owner; _or_
        possibly _Ottersfield_, from ME. _oter_, OE. _otor_, an otter", so
        the H- of the standard form is possibly not original.

        Chivalrously,

        Beregond
      • James Curcio
        My understanding is it was a lecture done on his feet, not something read from a script, or something where you could go back and do it again. I ll be honest
        Message 3 of 21 , Feb 17, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          My understanding is it was a lecture done "on his feet," not something read from a script, or something where you could go back and do it again. 

          I'll be honest though, if something isn't a life and death thing, I tend not to worry about it too much. ;)  

          --------------------------------------------------
          --------------------------------------------------
          Cell: 484-319-7323
          --------------------------------------------------




          On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 7:41 AM, David Bratman <dbratman@...> wrote:
           

          WendellWag@... wrote:

          >This tape is part of his output, and this sort of sloppiness doesn't speak
          >well of him. Making these sorts of mistakes on a course on tape/CD sounds
          >to me like arrogance. A lecturer is just as responsible for accuracy in
          >his recorded lectures (for which he's paid well, incidentally) as for his
          >scholarly papers.

          I said "explain", not "excuse".

          James Curcio wrote:

          >People misspeak. Maybe I'm missing what the big deal is.

          It's a big deal when it's speaking before the microphones for a prepared recording. When a movie actor flubs a line, they do it again.


        • WendellWag@aol.com
          I ve talked (well, communicated by E-mail) with people who ve done courses on tape/CD and read various things by such people. It is not done on your feet.
          Message 4 of 21 , Feb 17, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            I've talked (well, communicated by E-mail) with people who've done courses on tape/CD and read various things by such people.  It is not done "on your feet."  The company issuing the course gets recommendations from students who've taken courses from the professor at their university.  The company sends out people to listen to their lectures.  They bring the professor in to record the course.  They insist that he prepares a script and they fact-check it.  They insist that he practice the lectures beforehand to make sure that he can do it in the correct amount of time and with no significant hesitations.  They record it and then listen to it to make sure that it corresponds with the script.  They test it with a customer focus group before releasing it.  Courses on tape/CD are expensive.  Small mistakes might get by.  It's a lecture and not a scholarly paper, so nobody expect brilliant, original ideas.  However, just winging it when you record the lectures is most certainly not acceptable.  I've listened to many courses on tape/CD over the years, and it's always clearly prepared and not a matter of winging it.
             
            Wendell Wagner
             
            In a message dated 2/17/2012 6:58:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jamescurcio@... writes:
            My understanding is it was a lecture done "on his feet," not something read from a script, or something where you could go back and do it again.
          • James Curcio
            Oh, well, in that case, it s a matter of simply being incorrect. I meant my understanding as in, having skimmed the messages in the thread. Not based on some
            Message 5 of 21 , Feb 17, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Oh, well, in that case, it's a matter of simply being incorrect. I meant "my understanding" as in, having skimmed the messages in the thread. Not based on some prior knowledge of this individual. 

              But I will speak to something that I do have direct experience of. It still irks me that I accidentally wrote the "devil's interval" was a minor 3rd rather than flatted 5th in a book that's been used in 3 college level classes that I know of. It got by me and 2 editors. It's something I know, mis-wrote, and never caught on multiple editorial passes. But it doesn't exactly keep me up nights. When (and if) the 2nd edition comes out, it'll be one of the many little errors to be fixed. 

              The point of this and my prior messages in this thread was simply--Life goes on, we hope. 

              --------------------------------------------------
              --------------------------------------------------
              Cell: 484-319-7323
              --------------------------------------------------




              On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 12:40 AM, <WendellWag@...> wrote:
               

              I've talked (well, communicated by E-mail) with people who've done courses on tape/CD and read various things by such people.  It is not done "on your feet."  The company issuing the course gets recommendations from students who've taken courses from the professor at their university.  The company sends out people to listen to their lectures.  They bring the professor in to record the course.  They insist that he prepares a script and they fact-check it.  They insist that he practice the lectures beforehand to make sure that he can do it in the correct amount of time and with no significant hesitations.  They record it and then listen to it to make sure that it corresponds with the script.  They test it with a customer focus group before releasing it.  Courses on tape/CD are expensive.  Small mistakes might get by.  It's a lecture and not a scholarly paper, so nobody expect brilliant, original ideas.  However, just winging it when you record the lectures is most certainly not acceptable.  I've listened to many courses on tape/CD over the years, and it's always clearly prepared and not a matter of winging it.
               
              Wendell Wagner
               
              In a message dated 2/17/2012 6:58:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jamescurcio@... writes:
              My understanding is it was a lecture done "on his feet," not something read from a script, or something where you could go back and do it again.


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.