I have to say, aside from the left part of the page where it fades out, I find your printing to be easier to read than your cursive. Perhaps the fact that I read print much more than cursive has something to do with it, but on the other hand you write cursive much more than print, so I'd think that would balance out.
I was taught in the Canadian school system in BC in the 80's/90's. Around grade 3 we are taught to srite and quite printing everything. By high school, most people just do what ever is comfortable. I have noticed that it seems most guys default to printing by High school. We had basic penmanship, but I don't guys just can't seem to grasp how to write neatly and by High school they print everything cause at least it is legible that way.
Whole language suck ass as a method of teaching English. I grew up with this and we were never really taught parts of languages. It took getting to Grade 8 French to finally really know what verbs, adverbs, pronouns and stuff actually were. I was not the only one.
This rings pretty true for me, I was in BC/AB schools around the same time. I remember learning to write cursive fairly young but then moved over to printing by high school. I personally don't see the big deal with cursive, most people's I can read easy enough and I prefer the look of it when it's done with good penmanship.
Whole language must have been how I learned, I knew what a verb/adverb etc was but I had no idea about conjugation, imperative and that sort of thing. It was the same thing I started French in grade 8 and learned more about language that way then I ever did in English class. The first time I had to conjugate a French verb in class I had no idea what I was really doing.
I always enjoyed crossing double 't's with a single stroke. Unfortunately, my enthusiasm frequently carried over to "lt" and "tl". And sometimes double 'l's too.
When we learned cursive in elementary school they made a huge deal out of it. We were told that if we didn't learn it we would be in big trouble. You can't keep up taking notes if you don't know cursive. Everything you have to write in the real world needs to be in cursive. People will think you're stupid if you don't know cursive. It was stupid, but they seemed to wholeheartedly believe it. After it stopped being required I never used it and still laugh when I hear people mention what a hard time a kid will have later in life if they don't know it.
I grade labs now and the majority of people print. The vast majority of the ones who write in cursive do so illegibly. I think there are very very few places where cursive is still a needed skill. I finish my essays and take notes just fine without it.
However, I'd call that "Joined-up Writing" image posted earlier print. It looks like print to me and is how a number of people normally print. It is nothing like the cursive we were taught and that some people still try to use. Perhaps there is a bigger difference between cursive and joined-up writing than just the name.
In the U.S. I'd greatly reduce the emphasis put on cursive. We spent far too much time on it and for too much emphasis was put on using it later. There are more important things to learn. It shouldn't go entirely, but for us it was nearly half of third grade (the other half being big bad scary multiplication).
I grade labs now and the majority of people print. The vast majority of the ones who write in cursive do so illegibly. I think there are very very few places where cursive is still a needed skill. I finish my essays and take notes just fine without it.
Holy fuck this ^
What little marking I've done has been vastly interpreted through the lens of how easy it is to read. Cursive is not easy to read and if I don't see good numbers you've slipped from the "yeah looks good" to "I don't think you really tried so fuck you".
Seriously, go to a country that teaches cursive as the 'normal' form of writing and notice the difference in quality. I have the impression that you over there learn to write cursive after a year or two of writing in block letters and I understand you for hating it because of that. The 'switch' is really minimal if you don't get the chance to get used to block letters.
I agree that it is easier to write cursive unreadably than block-letters, but don't make it out as something inhumanely hard by nature. It's just about the moment you're introduced to it and whether you're forced to use it daily from then on.
When I was taught at school in England, we learnt joined up writing from about age six I guess. No cursive with the loops and funny letters, pretty much just print-style letters but they taught you the best way to link them. I still write in pretty much the same way now, but I've changed it a little bit when I realised that some things made it faster or easier to write, like writing a k the other way round, or using the cursive s and f (I never thought of it as cursive, more as French letters or something), but I don't use open b's or the cursive r's. And I write capitals in the basic way, nothing fancy.
I definitely find it much easier to write in joined-up than in print, it is much faster. I tried writing something out joined up and then in print, I had to make a conscious effort to print it and it was definitely slower and less flowing.
I grade labs now and the majority of people print. The vast majority of the ones who write in cursive do so illegibly. I think there are very very few places where cursive is still a needed skill. I finish my essays and take notes just fine without it.
Holy fuck this ^
What little marking I've done has been vastly interpreted through the lens of how easy it is to read. Cursive is not easy to read and if I don't see good numbers you've slipped from the "yeah looks good" to "I don't think you really tried so fuck you".
I do a fair bit of exam marking, and ones that are done in cursive are definitely the worst to mark.
Not all cursive exams are messy, but when they are, they are almost illegible. Messy print (or semi-print) exams are at least usually readable.
Luckily, they are computer science and engineering exams, so there aren't pages of straight writing, but I can sometimes spend more than five minutes trying to decipher a few paragraphs of messy cursive, when it would usually take me less than a minute to mark the same question if it was written legibly.
When I was taught at school in England, we learnt joined up writing from about age six I guess. No cursive with the loops and funny letters, pretty much just print-style letters but they taught you the best way to link them.
Well, I think that's a key difference. I write in "joined up print", but I still consider it print. They are print letters, but they are just joined in a logical fashion. I've been writing like that since before we were introduced to "running writing" in school.
I learned cursive back in grade school. I'm surprised to see that so many hated it so much.
Yeah, it was not terribly exciting copying letters over and over, but I really didn't think it was that hard. But then again I suppose it's no different than me being completely incapable of drawing anything that looked good in art class while others were spitting out masterpieces left and right.
Even back as a nine-year-old, I called bullshit on capital cursive letters. Take "G" for instance:
1) It looks nothing like a "print" g, lower or upper case.
2) You cannot possibly tell me that goofy looking thing is any faster than just drawing a print "G"
3) The little tail to "connect" the G to your next letter looks really forced.
In college, when I had to write essay exams, I found I naturally used cursive because I could write faster. However, I almost always use the print forms of capital letters, probably because I thought it looked better. So I'd write out "Handwriting" as [print]H[/print][cursive]andwriting[/cursive]
If you're saying that cursive has to be one particular script then yes, they're wrong.
On the other hand, if you're going with every dictionary definition I've seen, then there's no one standard cursive style.
It might be part of the reason why few people seem to use cursive if they have it drummed into them at school that cursive has to be the crappy style shown in the OP.
If you're saying that cursive has to be one particular script then yes, they're wrong.
On the other hand, if you're going with every dictionary definition I've seen, then there's no one standard cursive style.
It might be part of the reason why few people seem to use cursive if they have it drummed into them at school that cursive has to be the crappy style shown in the OP.
Yes, I could see how the argument that there are so many different ways to technically write "in cursive" would lend to supporting the legibility and ease-of-use of it.
Well, for a start, there'd be more choice apart from
a) keep writing a horrible style of cursive that's perhaps difficult to write legibly
b) abandon cursive completely
I imagine that if people were taught an easier style of cursive they'd keep using it longer, get more practice at reading and writing it and probably wouldn't be in the situation of cursive illiteracy that a lot of people seem to be in.
I'm all for abandoning the more absurd styles of cursive, but I'm obviously not quite understanding the problem with the others.
Well, I used to. I can still read it, but...well, considering how my school mostly uses computers for doing assignments, and how I can get away with signing my name in print for the most part...it seems pretty much useless to try and re-learn it.
Posts
Because in cursive it looks like an i :P
I have to say, aside from the left part of the page where it fades out, I find your printing to be easier to read than your cursive. Perhaps the fact that I read print much more than cursive has something to do with it, but on the other hand you write cursive much more than print, so I'd think that would balance out.
This rings pretty true for me, I was in BC/AB schools around the same time. I remember learning to write cursive fairly young but then moved over to printing by high school. I personally don't see the big deal with cursive, most people's I can read easy enough and I prefer the look of it when it's done with good penmanship.
Whole language must have been how I learned, I knew what a verb/adverb etc was but I had no idea about conjugation, imperative and that sort of thing. It was the same thing I started French in grade 8 and learned more about language that way then I ever did in English class. The first time I had to conjugate a French verb in class I had no idea what I was really doing.
I always enjoyed crossing double 't's with a single stroke. Unfortunately, my enthusiasm frequently carried over to "lt" and "tl". And sometimes double 'l's too.
Of course, I do that in print anyway.
I grade labs now and the majority of people print. The vast majority of the ones who write in cursive do so illegibly. I think there are very very few places where cursive is still a needed skill. I finish my essays and take notes just fine without it.
However, I'd call that "Joined-up Writing" image posted earlier print. It looks like print to me and is how a number of people normally print. It is nothing like the cursive we were taught and that some people still try to use. Perhaps there is a bigger difference between cursive and joined-up writing than just the name.
In the U.S. I'd greatly reduce the emphasis put on cursive. We spent far too much time on it and for too much emphasis was put on using it later. There are more important things to learn. It shouldn't go entirely, but for us it was nearly half of third grade (the other half being big bad scary multiplication).
Holy fuck this ^
What little marking I've done has been vastly interpreted through the lens of how easy it is to read. Cursive is not easy to read and if I don't see good numbers you've slipped from the "yeah looks good" to "I don't think you really tried so fuck you".
I agree that it is easier to write cursive unreadably than block-letters, but don't make it out as something inhumanely hard by nature. It's just about the moment you're introduced to it and whether you're forced to use it daily from then on.
I definitely find it much easier to write in joined-up than in print, it is much faster. I tried writing something out joined up and then in print, I had to make a conscious effort to print it and it was definitely slower and less flowing.
I do a fair bit of exam marking, and ones that are done in cursive are definitely the worst to mark.
Not all cursive exams are messy, but when they are, they are almost illegible. Messy print (or semi-print) exams are at least usually readable.
Luckily, they are computer science and engineering exams, so there aren't pages of straight writing, but I can sometimes spend more than five minutes trying to decipher a few paragraphs of messy cursive, when it would usually take me less than a minute to mark the same question if it was written legibly.
Well, I think that's a key difference. I write in "joined up print", but I still consider it print. They are print letters, but they are just joined in a logical fashion. I've been writing like that since before we were introduced to "running writing" in school.
I learned cursive back in grade school. I'm surprised to see that so many hated it so much.
Yeah, it was not terribly exciting copying letters over and over, but I really didn't think it was that hard. But then again I suppose it's no different than me being completely incapable of drawing anything that looked good in art class while others were spitting out masterpieces left and right.
Even back as a nine-year-old, I called bullshit on capital cursive letters. Take "G" for instance:
1) It looks nothing like a "print" g, lower or upper case.
2) You cannot possibly tell me that goofy looking thing is any faster than just drawing a print "G"
3) The little tail to "connect" the G to your next letter looks really forced.
In college, when I had to write essay exams, I found I naturally used cursive because I could write faster. However, I almost always use the print forms of capital letters, probably because I thought it looked better. So I'd write out "Handwriting" as [print]H[/print][cursive]andwriting[/cursive]
I haven't written in cursive since like the 6th grade. It's legible, I guess, but it's a lot uglier and took me a LOT longer to write than the print.
Depends how you define cursive.
If you're saying that cursive has to be one particular script then yes, they're wrong.
On the other hand, if you're going with every dictionary definition I've seen, then there's no one standard cursive style.
It might be part of the reason why few people seem to use cursive if they have it drummed into them at school that cursive has to be the crappy style shown in the OP.
Oh, wait...
a) keep writing a horrible style of cursive that's perhaps difficult to write legibly
b) abandon cursive completely
I imagine that if people were taught an easier style of cursive they'd keep using it longer, get more practice at reading and writing it and probably wouldn't be in the situation of cursive illiteracy that a lot of people seem to be in.
I'm all for abandoning the more absurd styles of cursive, but I'm obviously not quite understanding the problem with the others.
Well, I used to. I can still read it, but...well, considering how my school mostly uses computers for doing assignments, and how I can get away with signing my name in print for the most part...it seems pretty much useless to try and re-learn it.