<p>I often field many complaints (primarily from my maternal parent) directed at my complex and syntactically liberal writing style. Is this ok? I habitually earned exceptional grades while in high school. Yet, I occasionally got into grammatical disputes with instructors by which, I tended to emerge triumphant - as an example, teachers would (in rare instances) bewilderingly assert that they were not familiar with either the terminology and/or the context [in reference to my choice of words]. In conversational settings (oral exchanges) I am sometimes impelled to loosen my usage of elaborate vocabulary, but still make way with the emphasis of humor (as filler). </p>
<p>I have always been an avid reader of the science fiction genre, but have also transitioned towards non-fiction and classical literature (as pertaining to my interests). In general, I am well-liked - and posses the capacity for being both socially charming and intellectually endearing. Taking the initiative to post this might come across as a bit silly, but I felt it would be worthwhile in consideration of the large pool of like-minded peers that may have endured similar experiences of harsh criticism and self uncertainty.</p>
<p>Can’t tell if ■■■■■ or serious. I’m assuming ■■■■■ because if you truly were a grammar “Nazi” you probably would have not used “ok” and if you did, you would spell it out, and you also would have capitalized “nazi” in the title.</p>
<p>It’s not called being a thesaurus Nazi, it’s called being pretentious.</p>
<p>I have to add, vocabulary isn’t necessarily an indicator of intelligence. A far more effective indicator is being able to speak in a way in which you can relate to your audience effectively. If you’re always trying to impress people with your dialogue, it’s rare that anyone with actual success in life and a high intelligence is going to be impressed. Rather, you’re more likely to turn people off. People either think you’re trying way too hard or you’re so out of touch with society, it’s no wonder you have so much time to browse the thesaurus. There are different types of intelligence, and language intelligence isn’t often considered superior; That’s if speaking like that could even be considered language intelligence, since again, you’re turning off the majority of your audience.</p>
<p>It’s rather like cooking- just because you have an array of spices, doesn’t mean you should use them all in one dish. And then pretend to argue that it tastes good to you, when someone complains.</p>
<p>Posturing is self-conscious. Sometimes, even a waste of time. If you are that bright, use it wisely. Don 't be so in love with the sound of your own rhythms. That’s all.</p>
<p>Assuming this is serious, there’s nothing wrong with using a varied vocabulary. I’ve had enough of anti-intellectualism in this country.</p>
<p>At the same time, part of being a good writer and speaker is knowing how to connect to your audience. And part of that involves your word choice and sentence structure. Talking to the head of the English department at Oxford will sound a lot different than talking to your best friends. </p>
<p>As an example, I once read some paragraph about a person’s experience with babysitting. At one point they started talking about how the kid loved to finger paint and would end up leaving paint everywhere, including all over their “visage.” It was a really casual piece, and that word just seemed completely out of place there.</p>
<p>tl;dr Having and using a wide vocabulary is great, just know when to use it.</p>
<p>There’s a huge line between intellectualism and plain old pretense- especially when, as noted, OP’s style is being questioned. No one’s advocating ignorance. Just a steer away from pseudo-intellectualism.</p>
<p>The right words, at the right time, in the right context. Economy, when called for. (I secretly love convoluted writing, but it has its time and place. And must be done well or it backfires.)</p>
<p>I miss the old History and Discovery channels, but I don’t think that’s a sign of some kind of intellectual decline in the U.S. It’s just a sign that the masses prefer stupid entertainment over learning in their free time, but that has always been and will always be the case, imho. I could go more into how I tend to disagree with societal decline, but that would probably derail the thread completely.</p>
<p>Anyway, I think the OP is ■■■■■■■■. His first post has a ton of faulty punctuation. It’s definitely nothing glaring, but someone who would somehow naturally develop a “complex and syntactically liberal writing style” would do better.</p>
<p>What!? Who doesn’t love Moonshiners? Black Gold? Amish Mafia? I think they even have Property Wars. (The shows are easily mixed up with truTV’s). Discovery Channel has lost some good shows, though.</p>
<p>Looking at the OP’s other posts, I’d say it’s just the way he writes. I’d agree that ten dollar words should be used judiciously, lest the writer appear pompous.</p>
<p>To continue with the threadjack, I remember a MadTV spoof ad for A&E after the network made the transition to more, er, popular programming.</p>
<p>“A&E. No longer artistic or entertaining.”</p>
<p>And I just checked out the lineup on the History Channel. “Bamazon?” Did they really send a bunch of rednecks to the Amazon to strip mine the rainforest? Oh, the humanity.</p>