Forums > Social Discussion > Do you write in cursive?

AnonymousPLATINUM Member

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
Well I have a problem with that..... I write in cursive AND print. If you read a letter from me I usually write it in both.

But it is not a waste of time to learn it.... I also think kids should learn sign language.

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
I think learning cursive is useful because it means you can write faster, obviously not as fast as typing.

I think there are more important things that could be taught in schools.

Hoppers are angels who lift us to our feet when our wings have trouble remembering how to fly.

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
Print and cursing... The former if I want nearly anyone to be able to actually read what I am writing

(sometimes even bold -> as I got born into a generation where it was NOT yet considered shouting )

the latter appears pretty but cryptic as I've been told a few times.

I think it's okay to teach kids - even though Jo is right - as a form of western calligraphy... I'm oldskool

the best smiles are the ones you lead to

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
I do both, My writing looks like a 4th grader's but its a mix. If a word has 2 e's next to each other they are cursive there are other times that its just easier to do cursive for a short segment. i DO NOT do any q's or z's in cursive however.

O.B.E.S.E.

Owned by Mynci!

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
Like many here, I do both.
If I want it to be for me, I will scratch it in cursive.
If I want someone to read it, I will print it.
Cursive is actually faster, which was the point but with speed comes illedgibility.

Most people I know have some form of combination for day to day writing. Certain letters resemble print but are more attached to the next.

Because of this, I can't vote one way or the other.

I also can't say if it's a waste of time to teach. I think alot of things are so, looking at it that way, what's one more?

Do you want kids to take notes expediantly but illedgibly? Teach cursive

Do you want kids to take their time and write clearly, but perhaps miss something they should have written down?
Teach print

Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
I am more of a cursive person but there is some printing. I had penmanship class but I still don't write as nice as my mother.

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
Yep, always do except for emphasis.

If you're doing exams, you have no choice otherwise you can't get everything down in time, and if it's illegible, you don't get the benefit of the doubt; you don't get the marks.

If you're going to be in that situation soon then practise it. Your grade will thank you.

End of sermon.

There is a slight possibility that I am not actually right all of the time.

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
I was taught to write by nuns, therefore my cursive is beautiful, as is my print



they made sure of that...

Posted: 27th Sep 2007

 Written by: AnueBunnie


Well I have a problem with that..... I write in cursive AND print. If you read a letter from me I usually write it in both.

But it is not a waste of time to learn it.... I also think kids should learn sign language.

BIG ditto

Posted: 27th Sep 2007
you can truly appreciate the wonders of cursive when you write in a language where you can't use it! sooo frustrating!!

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...

Posted: 28th Sep 2007
I write in cursive mostly but it's really messy!

.All things are beautiful if we take the time to look.

Posted: 28th Sep 2007
i had to look up what cursive means..i do both depending on situation.

Gayle.....!

Posted: 28th Sep 2007

 Written by: Gayle......!


i had to look up what cursive means..i do both depending on situation.

same here, for both

 Written by: PsyRush

 Written by: AnueBunnie


Well I have a problem with that..... I write in cursive AND print. If you read a letter from me I usually write it in both.

But it is not a waste of time to learn it.... I also think kids should learn sign language.

BIG ditto

just out of curiosity, why do you think kids should learn sign language?

Posted: 28th Sep 2007
i think they should too...

in fact i wish that the British Education system taught more about languages and communications.

I'd have loved to have learned Sign at school!... would ave been better than French.

Posted: 28th Sep 2007
We learned some but they just did it for a year and didn't keep up...I tried again in college but it didn't work so well

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed

Posted: 1st Oct 2007
I write for the most part in cursive, but it's really a hybred of cursive with a few print letters here and there.

My writing style came about as I wanted my writing to look flowing and pretty. The downside of this is it can be hard to read. The up side is it looks cool. My writing is also extremely tiny...we're talking half the size that fits on college ruled paper. So it's incredibly girly.

Oh yeah, and I never got around to learning how to write and symbols, so I just use treble clefs instead. Close enough, and it looks cooler, lol.

"Watch those explosions in the sky and you'll go blind, but not this time. Will you live in hope or dark desire? What can I say? F*ck love give me fire." ~Cities Of Night by Blaqk Audio (Davey Havok)

Proudly MCRmy

Posted: 3rd Oct 2007
I confess to ambivalence on this subject due to my own experience

1. I'm left handed - all hand writing is a 'mare to learn and make nice when you can't see what you've written

2. My junior school (from 7-11) taught italics - delightful when done properly, but after learning normal round print at infants plus point 1 above, mine ended up looking awful. My mum bemoaned us (4) having to do it.

3. In Senior school I reverted to round print a little joined up with a couple of italic oddities - 'a' like this (with an arm over it) and straight down tails for lower case y, g, q etc. In other words no discernable style - but at least it was legible when i wrote in 'best'.

4. At college (at 24) my lecture notes were my own peculiar style of shorthand - looked like a scrawl but I could read it

5. Now at work it's often lunchtime before I realise I haven't taken my pen out of the drawer due to everything being on screen and the lack of writing practice means my handwriting is frequently illegible even to me as it's usually hastily scrawled notes, in joined up with little definition of letters - and that's just plain stoopid!

Should cursive be taught? It IS difficult to read if you're not used to it but it is lovely to look at and it would be a shame to lose it altogether - but how do you get round the fact that after school/college you're unlikely to use it enough to keep up the standard? Well done to those who can and do though

'The last rays of crimson on the spindle tree as the cerise fruit splits and reveals its orange seeds in a gloriously clashing colour scheme no-one would ever dare to wear'
Euonymous Europeus

Posted: 3rd Oct 2007
I also had to look up the word cursive

At primary school we had special lessons for learning 'joined up' handwriting. Earliest I remember doing it was year 4 so I would have been around 7.
We even watched kids educational programmes which taught you how to write letters in the cursive style.

Anybody from the uk remember the magic pencil programme? "Up, down, around and flick!"

Nearly all my letters join up, and those that dont all the time usually do when if I concentrate on writing.

I love my handwriting. As a kid I would spend ages trying out differant ways to write letters to see if I liked

I think it should be taught in schools, if only briefly - as I know I found it much easier to write once I learned how to join up

Posted: 3rd Oct 2007
I remember the magic pencil!

*sings happily* up and down and follow me round and join me up together

...if only I had any idea which letter that was for... b maybe?


I write with joined-up words, though the form of my letters has strayed a long way from what I was taught (my g is basically a p and my h is usually L shaped).

Perhaps, with all the people here saying that their cursive writing is nearly illegible and so they need to spend time writing in print so that others can read it, schools should spend More time teaching how to write

But really the thought of not teaching joined-up handwriting to children gives me a lovely mental image of teaching a child to read as far as sounding out the individual syllables and letting them work the putting-the-word-together bit out for themselves.
(that image was lovely in my head because it was the two-headed monster from sesame street teaching the class )

I suppose I have a very loose understanding of the term 'cursive' since I have chopped it about to suit myself, but I do think that if you don't teach it to children then they will never have a basis from which to form their own efficient handwriting style. But then they type everything nowadays don't they?

Posted: 4th Oct 2007
I generally write in print,but the faster I write the more cursive it becomes, though I never get to full cursive

Do what you want coz a pirate is free,
You are a pirate!
Yo ho fiddle dee dee, being a pirate is alright to be,
Do what you want coz a pirate is free,
You are a pirate!

Posted: 5th Oct 2007
If what we need now is speed writing for note taking rather than formal presentation for wide consupmtion, why don't we teach shorthand? Just a thought...

'The last rays of crimson on the spindle tree as the cerise fruit splits and reveals its orange seeds in a gloriously clashing colour scheme no-one would ever dare to wear'
Euonymous Europeus

Posted: 5th Oct 2007
That was my thinking - replace it completely

'The last rays of crimson on the spindle tree as the cerise fruit splits and reveals its orange seeds in a gloriously clashing colour scheme no-one would ever dare to wear'
Euonymous Europeus

Posted: 5th Oct 2007
i thought short hand never caught on

O.B.E.S.E.

Owned by Mynci!

Posted: 8th Oct 2007
OK, so until 2 years ago I live in the left hander who doesn't write so much as spider poo across the page.
It was mostly joined up, but i wouldn't call it cursive.

And I though to myself, "school failed to teach 11 year old me how to wright good." (they failed me grammar and spelling too;) ) but I can do poi and ball contact, and writing has to be easier than that.

So I decided to learn cursive writing and a bit of penmanship!

Tips and History (v helpful): https://paperpenalia.com/handwriting.html
Tips for kiddies: https://www.handwritingforkids.com/handwrite/cursive.htm
In my geeky way, I'd say its kinda fun.

But I had some "issues" with cursive scripts, mostly that we are so used to printed fonts that many letters have shape over the last century.

I looked here at palmer: https://www.zanerian.com/Palmer.html (<-- that site has a lot of good scripts)
In particular:
F,I and Q
n,q and r
Don't read good to my modern eye. so I looked around the other scripts and borrowed/ adapted a few letters.
Anyone know a more modern cursive script?

Smiles
Drew

Posted: 8th Oct 2007

 Written by: poje


i thought short hand never caught on

It was only taught as a 'business' tool, ie for secretaries to take dictation which was then typed up. Once dictaphones became available, audio-typists replaced shorthand secretaries.

But they could take dictation at the rate of 90 to 120 words per minute - that's pretty damn quick and would certainly be useful for note taking and most especially for taking minutes of meetings - I've lost count of the amount of minutes from meetings I've received which are at best woefully inadequate as the record of the meeting and at worst criminally inaccurate!

'The last rays of crimson on the spindle tree as the cerise fruit splits and reveals its orange seeds in a gloriously clashing colour scheme no-one would ever dare to wear'
Euonymous Europeus

Posted: 8th Oct 2007
To add to Glass's links:

https://www.iampeth.com/lessons.htm#getting_started

There is some great instructions work as well as some amazing flourishes.. I've always been fascinated by quality script style writing, although I'm horrible at it.

There has been a depressing decline in people penmanship and general ability to write (not to mention spell or use proper grammar) since the influx of the modern PC and typewriters.

#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals

Posted: 9th Oct 2007
I used my own form of shorthand / abbreviations when I was at school. when I realised after a year my hastily scribbed notes were just plain illegible.
t = the
w/ = with
it was easy for a lot of my lessons as I did do mainly sciences and they have natural and recognised abbv's anyway. I think a recognised set of common abbreviations would be a better way to learn notetaking than a full short hand. but the worry I would have would be the loss of english language..

cn't kids jst use txt spk to abbrve8 now? they do get enough practice it seems... and it cna be damn frustrating. but I can see practical uses for it.

A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.

Posted: 10th Oct 2007
I've had a similar conversation with my sister - we both love the English langauge and were taught grammar and encouraged by our parents to speak and write properly. She's pretty anti the decline in standards whilst I take the viewpoint that language is to facilitte communication so if txtspk does that and actually increases/improves it who are we to say it's to be lamented?

It's not so many years ago Dr Johnson gave us a single spelling for each word from the myriad versions used, just around this country and the choices he made weren't always the most 'logical' - hence the difficulty in learning English. I'm all for local/regional variations of pronounciation and even spelling, so why can't we embrace another set of versions from a new 'community'?

Sorry -

'The last rays of crimson on the spindle tree as the cerise fruit splits and reveals its orange seeds in a gloriously clashing colour scheme no-one would ever dare to wear'
Euonymous Europeus

Posted: 10th Oct 2007
I always write in cursive. In Europe they only teach you cursive. Well, at least in Hungary, I'm 100 % sure, but I'm pretty sure about the other countries.
In 1st grade we learned how to write, and after a few months they allowed us to do it with pen (instead of pencil).
As you age and go through years and years of school (and cursive writing) your lines become more and more refined and pick up your own style.
A 13-14 year old's handrwiting is much prettier than an adult's in the US.

There is a study : graphology. it is the study of handwriting, where one can draw assumptions of one's personality. I was really into that.
Unfortunately it won't work on Americans, because they only write with print, and if they try cursive, it won't work, it will look like a 7 year old's.

If you look at people from other countries (I had friends from India, Africa, Europe) they all write beautifully, with very unique styles.

Marianna

Posted: 10th Oct 2007
Meihem In Ce Klasrum
By Dolton Edwards
First published: 1946


Because we are still bearing some of the scars of our brief skirmish with II-B English, it is natural that we should be enchanted by Mr. George Bernard Shaw's current campaign for a simplified alphabet.

Obviously, as Mr. Shaw points out, English spelling is in much need of a general overhauling and streamlining. However, our own resistance to any changes requiring a large expenditure of mental effort in the near future would cause us to view with some apprehension the possibility of some day receiving a morning paper printed in -- to us -- Greek.

Our own plan would achieve the same end as the legislation proposed by Mr. Shaw, but in a less shocking manner, as it consists merely of an acceleration of the normal processes by which the language is continually modernized.

As a catalytic agent, we would suggest that a National Easy Language Week be proclaimed, which the President would inaugurate, outlining some short cut to concentrate on during the week, and to be adopted during the year. All school children would be given a holiday, the lost time being the equivalent of that gained by the spelling short cut.

In 1946, for example, we would urge the elimination of the soft "c," for which we would substitute "s." Sertainly, such an improvement would be selebrated in all sivic-minded sircles as being suffisiently worth the trouble, and students in all sities in the land would be reseptive toward any change eliminating the nesessity of learning the differense between the two letters.

In 1947, sinse only the hard "c" would be left, it would be possible to substitute "k" for it, both letters being pronounsed identikally. Imagine how greatly only two years of this prosess would klarify the konfusion in the minds of students. Already we would have eliminated an entire letter from the alphabet. Typewriters and linotypes, kould all be built with one less letter, and all the manpower and materials previously devoted to making "c's" kould be turned toward raising the national standard of living.

In the fase of so many notable improvements, it is easy to foresee that by 1948, "National Easy Language Week" would be a pronounsed sukses. All skhool tshildren would be looking forward with konsiderable exsitement to the holiday, and in a blaze of national publisity it would be announsed that the double konsonant "ph" no longer existed, and that the sound would henseforth be written "f" in all words. This would make sutsh words as "fonograf" twenty persent shorter in print.

By 1949, publik interest in a fonetik alfabet kan be expeketed to have inkreased to the point where a more radikal step forward kan be taken without fear of undue kritisism. We would therefore urge the elimination, at that time of al unesesary double leters, whitsh, although quite harmles, have always ben a nuisanse in the language and desided deterent to akurate speling. Try it yourself in the next leter you write, and se if both writing and reading are not fasilitated.

With so mutsh progres already made, it might be posible in 1950 to delve further into the posibilities of fonetik speling. After due konsideration of the reseption aforded the previous steps, it should be expedient by this time to spel al difthongs fonetikaly. Most students do not realize that the long "i" and "y," as in "time" and "by," are aktualy the difthong"ai," as it is writen in "aisle," and that the long "a" in "fate," is in reality the difthong "ei" as in "rein." Although perhaps not imediately aparent, the saving in taime and efort wil be tremendous when we leiter elimineite the sailent "e," as meide posible bai this last tsheinge.

For, as is wel known, the horible mes of "e's" apearing in our writen language is kaused prinsipaly bai the present necesity of indikeiting whether a vowel is long or short. Therefore, in 1951 we kould simply elemineit al sailent "e's," and kontinu to read and wrait merily along as though we wer in an atomik ag of edukation.

In 1951 we would urg a greit step forward. Sins bai this taim it would have ben four years sins anywun had used the leter "c," we would sugest that the "National Easy Languag Wek" for 1951 be devoted to substitution of "c" for "th." To be sur it would be som taim befor peopl would bekom akustomd to reading ceir newspapers and buks wic sutsh sentenses in cem as "Ceodor caught he had cre cousand cistls crust crough ce cik of his cumb."

In ce seim maner, bai meiking eatsh leter have its own sound and cat sound only, we kould shorten ce language stil mor. In 1952, we would elimineit ce "y"; cen in 1953 we kould us ce leter to indikeit ce "sh" sound, cerbai klarifaiing words laik yugar and yur, as well as redusing bai wunmor leter al words laik "yut," "yore," and so forc. Cink, cen, of al ce benefits to be geind bai ce distinktion whitsh wil cen be meid between words laik:

ocean now written oyean

machine now written mayin

racial now written reiyial

Al sutsh divers weis of wraiting wun sound would no longer exist, and whenever wun kaim akros a "y" sound he would know exactli what to wrait.

Kontinuing cis proses, year after year, we would eventuali hav a reali sensibl writen languag. By 1975, wi ventyur to sei, cer wud bi no mor uv ces teribli trublsum difikultis, wic no tu leters usd to indikeit ce seim nois, and laikwais no tu noises riten wic ce seim leter. Even Mr. Yaw, wi beliv, wud be hapi in ce noleg cad his drims fainali keim tru.

#homeofpoi -- irc.newnet.net Come talk to us we're bored

Warning: Please Do Not Jump On The Seals