Issuu on Google+

Comparison  of  the  seven  sites  –  notes  for  Task  A  and  feedback  in  part  3  of  the  lesson.   Title  of  site   1.  Main  mistakes  of  grammar  and  spelling.   2.    English  appropriacy.   Abbey     Bookkeeping  spelled  wrongly  in  site  name  and  name   Formal  tone  is   bookeeping   of  service.   relatively  well   services   Missing  apostrophes  on  years,  redundant   maintained  but  marred     apostrophes  on  P45’s.   by  casual  idiom  “take   Blueberries   Comparative  comparative  “more  simpler”.   them  in  our  stride.”   Incomplete  sentence  starting  with  which.   US  English  (spellchecker)  –  staffs.   Guide  lines  as  two  words.   Pronoun  reference  –  take  them  in  our  stride  (people   or  tax  returns?).   Careless  punctuation  e.g.  no  ‘  ‘  around  yes.   Over-­‐capitalisation:    Office.  

Celtic  cement   and  gd-­‐graphics   barry     Peaches  

GD  graphics:   Web  site  and  website  –  latter  is  correct.   It’s/its  classic  error.    Run-­‐on  clause  sentence.   Celtic  cement  (designed  by  GD  graphics  and  on  their   site  as  an  example):   Inconsistent  use  of  numbers  e.g.  1  and  one.   Missing  comma,  crushers,  climate  change.   Wildly  overcapitalised  e.g.  words  that  ‘look’   important  like  Replacements.   Jeff  Lewis   Webiste  (from  a  website  designer).    Text  under   design  portfolio   poster  and  web  needs  bullets  or  rewrite,  just  garble.     About  page  several  errors  e.g.  for  mentioned  not   strawberries   aforementioned.    I  recognises,  I  specialises  –  patois?  

 

3.  Effect  on  customer.   Dire.    This  is  an   accountancy  service   where  customer   expects  (and  pays  for)   meticulous  accuracy.     Any  educated  person   would  be  put  off  using  a   service  like  this.         Name  of  service  has   connotational  links  to   Abbey  National  –  they   should  be  protesting   too!       Tone  is  appropriate  but   This  is  a  website   annoying  rhetorical   designed  to  give  an   question  in  bold.   impession,  a  good  one.     These  apparently  small   errors  and  stylistic   irritations  add  up  to  off-­‐ putting  annoyance  and   detract  from  the   argument.   Chatty  tone  is  ‘writing   It’s  the  client’s   as  speaking’  –  needs   responsibility  to  provide   higher  level  of   correct  copy,  but  what  if   formality.   the  designer  can’t   produce  his  own  correct   copy???  

4.  Causes  of  problems   Writer  of  site  copy  has  poor   written  English.    Probably   written  by  one  person  as   mistakes  are  consistent.    Site   may  have  been  built  by   consultant,  in  which  case   firm  should  have  proof-­‐read   copy.    A  spell  and  grammar   checker  would  have  found   many  of  these  issues.  

Poor  proof-­‐reading  at   approval  stage.    Most  of   these  errors  would  not  be   detected  by  a  spellchecker,   unfortunately,  so  human   knowledge  required.    

Self-­‐designed  site  –  needed   proof-­‐reader.  


Bluegg     Lemons  

PAT  cleaning     Plums  

Great  barn   Country  Guest   House     Limes   Cheapcoverz     Oranges  

   

“If  want  that  chat  over  a  coffee”.    Who?    You?       Imnprobable  quotes:  “hello  Décor  …  “  Bingo!      Erm,   the  company  name  is  spelled  ‘Dekor’   “They  just  didn’t  realise.”  Realise  what?   Spell  and  grammar  checkers  would  eliminate  few  of   these  errors  –  literate  human  required.  

Style  here  is  worse   than  the  grammar  “It   sounds  like  an  excuse   to  sit  around  drinking   coffee  and  chatting.”    

Spelling  and  grammar  mistakes  virtually  implode  the   page  e.g.  relay=rely,  lay=lie  (several  times  on  the   rolling  strapline  and  repeated  throughout,  also  on   the  publicity  card  Charlotte  found).     One  sentence  is  garble  “We  will  offer  you  to  conduct   a  fre  of  charge  and  obligations  survey  of  your   premises,  creating  a  service  that  is  perfectly  suited   to  your  establishment.”   Over-­‐capitalisation  e.g.  give  =  Five,  beaches,   Antiques.    Yet  a  capital  is  missing  from  Millennium   Stadium.   For  and  many  shops?   Punctuation  almost  non-­‐existent  –  reads  like  a  chain   of  key  words  and  phrases,  not  even  bulleted.   Chav  number  plate  website  name  –  cheapcoverz.       Overcapitalised  everywhere.   Use  of  ‘like’  instead  of  such  as.   Your    you’re  (twice  on  these  pages  alone).   Missing  full  stops  and  commas.   Bucketload  as  two  words.   A  redundant  ‘and’  

Why  US?  Invites   ridicule  using  the   capitals.    Phrases  such   as  “Unlike  many  other   companies”  make   careless,  if  funny   generalisations.  

Another  designer  site   selling  its  wares.    Jokey   English  makes  terrible   impression,  especially   as  errors  pervade   throughout  the   extensive  portfolio  (we   checked  –  look  at  the   Swansea  BID  site)   If  you  can’t  clean  up   your  English,  can  you   clean  up  my  house?  

Designers  design  own  site  …   but  can’t  write  English  for   toffee.    Mmmh.    Need  to   import  a  writer  or  employ  a   jolly  good  proof-­‐reader.  

Sadly  this  site  looks  to  have   been  written  by  a  non-­‐native   speaker  of  English.    No   excuses  though:    the  web   exposes  all.  

Hard  to  say  as  there   are  so  few  complete   sentences.      

Impression  is  of  a  non-­‐ In-­‐house  job     professional  approach.     Is  your  room  going  to  be   as  untidy  as  this?  

Bombastic  style  does   not  inspire  confidence   in  the  product,   especially  as  they  do   not  practise  anything   they  preach.  

Dire  effect.    Designers     of  book  covers  who   write  like  this?    You   pays  ya  money  and  ya   really  gets  ya  choice     cheap!  

Looks  like  an  in-­‐house  job   written  by  a  geek  and  proof-­‐ read  by  nobody.  


Comparison of the seven sites