Community Chat

[jaxs mom]

---

@WenGirl42 wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

"Adding a layer of translation from cursive to print on top of that can only further complicate this.  I understand schools can't take the time to teach cursive, but I sure wish parents would!" @WenGirl42

When it comes to historical documents, what layer of translation is there between cursive and print if they're utilizing the same language?

I agree with you, cursive is something that could easily be taught at home leaving classroom time for subjects that parents may find more challenging and are better left to the professionals. 

---

@SusieQ_2 There isn't one today (and look at all the differences in interpretation!)  But if we start relying on having other people translating documents from original cursive into print or other "modern formats" as a reason why people don't need to learn cursive anymore, there will be. I'm expressing myself poorly!  Right now, I can go to various online sources and read the text of these historical documents.  They all have the same text, because most of us who speak English and learned cursive can go right to the source document and see and understand the words for ourselves.  If the balance shifts so that fewer and fewer people learn to write (or read) cursive, that opens the door for potential differences in how the words are translated, because there will be fewer people who can go to the source and say, "that's not what that says at all."  Like how few people can read The Bible in Aramaic/Hebrew today.

---

You're kidding right? Printing and cursive are written alphabets for modern english , there is no interpretation required. It's basically the same thing as using a different font in digital print. The words are exactly the same, it doesn't require any interpretation at all. 

[WenGirl42]

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@WenGirl42 wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

"Adding a layer of translation from cursive to print on top of that can only further complicate this.  I understand schools can't take the time to teach cursive, but I sure wish parents would!" @WenGirl42

When it comes to historical documents, what layer of translation is there between cursive and print if they're utilizing the same language?

I agree with you, cursive is something that could easily be taught at home leaving classroom time for subjects that parents may find more challenging and are better left to the professionals. 

---

@SusieQ_2 There isn't one today (and look at all the differences in interpretation!)  But if we start relying on having other people translating documents from original cursive into print or other "modern formats" as a reason why people don't need to learn cursive anymore, there will be. I'm expressing myself poorly!  Right now, I can go to various online sources and read the text of these historical documents.  They all have the same text, because most of us who speak English and learned cursive can go right to the source document and see and understand the words for ourselves.  If the balance shifts so that fewer and fewer people learn to write (or read) cursive, that opens the door for potential differences in how the words are translated, because there will be fewer people who can go to the source and say, "that's not what that says at all."  Like how few people can read The Bible in Aramaic/Hebrew today.

---

You're kidding right? Printing and cursive are written alphabets for modern english , there is no interpretation required. It's basically the same thing as using a different font in digital print. The words are exactly the same, it doesn't require any interpretation at all. You can read helvetica the same you can read arial font.

---

Then how do you explain these kids who "can't read cursive?"  Isn't that why we're debating whether cursive should be taught in schools or not in the first place?

[SusieQ_2]

@WenGirl42 You didn't do poorly expressing yourself at all! 

I completely agree with you that when one language is translated into another the meaning is sometimes slightly altered, usually because the new language has no actual word for the old one so the next best has to used.

When something is changed from cursive to print, however, there is no loss in translation, because no translation is necessary. Taking words off a historical document written in English cursive and putting them in English type shouldn't change a thing. 

I get what you're saying though, and I think everyone's opinion has merit. My opinion is if a person can read printing, they can read cursive--if that cursive is written legibly. Most all of letters are quite similar. 

[Starpolisher]

---

@Mellie32 wrote:

---

@Starpolisher wrote:

---

@SaRina wrote:

You can spin the importance of cursive writing any way you wish.....as can be done with just about anything.  There are many other activities that can hone fine motor skills....   Unfortunately, students today are sorely lacking in math and English skills, and I'd rather see every extra moment of classroom time being spent on the core subjects.  If time is allotted for art, that's when students can learn cursive, even calligraphy.   Priorities.

---

Some think that both math and English skills are no longer that important due to technology.

We have machines that can do math for us and with English, whether it be receptive or productive, it tends to get "dumbed down" and is more accepted that way due to social media.

---

Who?

---

Well certainly not me.  I just retired from teaching in June 2015 and I can tell you that I was told by my administration that if students did not know basic math skills let them use a calculator.(middle school, grades 6 to 8)  Don't waste time trying to teach something that should have been learned in third grade. The same with reading. If they can't read it, read it to them and focus on comprehension not decoding. This was with regular and special ed. students. I found this to be very frustrating. Just one more example of why I left!

[jaxs mom]

---

@WenGirl42 wrote:

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@WenGirl42 wrote:

---

@SusieQ_2 wrote:

"Adding a layer of translation from cursive to print on top of that can only further complicate this.  I understand schools can't take the time to teach cursive, but I sure wish parents would!" @WenGirl42

When it comes to historical documents, what layer of translation is there between cursive and print if they're utilizing the same language?

I agree with you, cursive is something that could easily be taught at home leaving classroom time for subjects that parents may find more challenging and are better left to the professionals. 

---

@SusieQ_2 There isn't one today (and look at all the differences in interpretation!)  But if we start relying on having other people translating documents from original cursive into print or other "modern formats" as a reason why people don't need to learn cursive anymore, there will be. I'm expressing myself poorly!  Right now, I can go to various online sources and read the text of these historical documents.  They all have the same text, because most of us who speak English and learned cursive can go right to the source document and see and understand the words for ourselves.  If the balance shifts so that fewer and fewer people learn to write (or read) cursive, that opens the door for potential differences in how the words are translated, because there will be fewer people who can go to the source and say, "that's not what that says at all."  Like how few people can read The Bible in Aramaic/Hebrew today.

---

You're kidding right? Printing and cursive are written alphabets for modern english , there is no interpretation required. It's basically the same thing as using a different font in digital print. The words are exactly the same, it doesn't require any interpretation at all. You can read helvetica the same you can read arial font.

---

Then how do you explain these kids who "can't read cursive?"  Isn't that why we're debating whether cursive should be taught in schools or not in the first place?

---

I was addressing your claim that the meanings of words would change. The words are the same. Cursive is not a different language nor is it even a different dialect. You can't compare the two handwriting alphabets of modern english to the differences between Koine Greek and Mycenaean Greek or even Old English and modern English. 

[CouponQueen]

How does one sign their name without 'cursive' writing?

[jaxs mom]

---

@CouponQueen wrote:

How does one sign their name without 'cursive' writing?

---

They print it. Using cursive style isn't a requirement to sign your name. 

[chickenbutt]

I think it's kind of sad that they don't teach it anymore, but it just seems like more and more of the basics have fallen by the way.  Part of the value of some of these subjects that have been deemed unnecessary is that it develops different parts of the brain more completely, especially during the time when kids are growing up.   

But, hey, some people never get very good at it anyway.  You should see my husband's writing.  It's barely (that's being kind) legible to me, and I used to have to read doctors' prescriptions!

Still, I hate to see subjects lost that help round out the development of different parts of the kids' brains, as they grow up.

For me, one distressing part is not learning the conjugation of verbs and the use of pronouns.  This was like second or third grade stuff and now when some folks speak I just cringe at some of the things I hear.  The other day it was 'me and him used to date'.  Really, that sounds ok to you?  *sigh*  Ok, off the soapbox.  

[SusieQ_2]

---

@jaxs mom wrote:

---

@CouponQueen wrote:

How does one sign their name without 'cursive' writing?

---

They print it. Using cursive style isn't a requirement to sign your name. 

---

Many (most) people's signatures are not an exact image of the letters we see on cursive exemplars. Some people, for example, will use the capital "S" of printing and the rest of the word is cursive. They may use a combination of both and use connecting lines. 

I don't use all cursive letters in my own signature because I don't like the way it looks. I've never once had anyone turn down my paperwork, or documents,  because they didn't approve of my writing style. 

[CouponQueen]

Well...to be honest I have never encountered that ...

I of course turned to my friend "GOOGLE" LOL who isn't always correct so I always do a few different places..

This makes the most sense:

To write one's name to an instrument of writing in order to give the effect intended; the name thus written is called a signature..

This depends on your state and even the city. Federal regulation, 1 U.S. Code merely states that:

So the signature does not have to be cursive.

Different originators or proponents of a document may require a cursive signature. Such documents would include contracts, notaries, or even an employer wishing to have a cursive signature.

that said, I think cursive is important. We had time for it in our schedules..and our schedules had a lot more out of classroom glasses, Art, Gym, Music..we started learning cursive  in 3rd grade.

I learned typing in 7th..  My kids learned in 5th grade and the other 3rd...they didn't call it "typing" like we did..Mine was a Regents Class..Their's was of course called "keyboarding" and it was in the Computer Lab..they still found time to teach "cursive.."