Last week’s post focused on the issue of the period and its use as an indicator of the end of a sentence, or as an indicator of anger or annoyance. I wrote about how when I was initially asked about the issue that I was reflexively grumpy and thought that the younger generation was being too sensitive. This was a mistaken, perhaps though, understandable reaction. It was really early in the morning.
There are a couple of reasons my response was wrong. The first is that I didn’t take the time to really think through the issue or question. I just reacted. I really should have said, “Let me explore this a bit more and get back to you.” I eventually did, and after a couple discussions with my classes where they explained things to me, I began to understand what was going on. I started to see why the period was viewed as it was, and more importantly, under what conditions it was so viewed. This was the key breakthrough for me. I learned quite a bit and instead of being grumpy I was intrigued to know more.
My first reaction of frustration and annoyance was based on the thought that this generation was being too sensitive and also ignoring the rules of grammar, which should be used by anyone regardless of generation. Punctuation is used to help us better communicate. I was essentially putting together a list of reasons why this period issue indicating anger was and is wrong. I am an academic after all. I need to have reasons for my beliefs.
This was the wrong approach. Instead of marshaling all the reasons I was right and they were wrong, I should have, and eventually did, looked at how and why the seemingly innocuous period was now being used to indicate anger. The best part of this new approach is that I not only had a much better understanding of the issue, but I was also able to learn something from my students. Just as good was that as they taught me about the period and I asked questions, they began to see how my questions helped me better understand what was going on. They began to see inquiry in action. More than a few students marveled at how as they discussed the period they began to uncover the rules they used—rules they had not seen or paid attention to before. They learned, as I did, that they weren’t ignoring punctuation or being bad at grammar. We all learned that the text box in the communication supplanted the period as an indicator of the end of a sentence. It seems younger folks tend not to send paragraphs over text, they send basically sentence-sized chunks. The text box was the visual indicator of the end of the thought. It was behaving functionally in exactly the same way as the period normally does. They had created a new punctuation mark. They know how and when to use the period in other contexts, so the claim that they’re bad at grammar, or lazy, is just misplaced.
If I had remained stuck in the right v. wrong or proper v. improper mode of thinking, look at what I would have missed. I would have missed a rich and engaging discussion with my students, they wouldn’t have learned anything, and I would have remained ignorant of an important way younger people communicate. We also came to an important understanding. While both “sides” of the issue may understand a bit more about the other, we found out there were other questions lurking. They were related to the right wrong issue, but they’re importantly different. It’s a question of how to continue to communicate given these distinctions difference in ground/grammar rules. We agreed that even though I understood the difference, I probably wouldn’t change my approach. It’s a long-standing habit. They also agreed that they wouldn’t likely change there’s either. In fact, there really didn’t seem to be a need for anyone to radically change their approach. But the issue remained then on how to interpret and understand various communications when there is the possibility of confusion.
We weren’t able to get very far on that issue. But we all did seem to agree that if we wanted to communicate better, then the it was important for us to understand where the other was coming from and that included their generational standing. A younger person would need to understand that I might not know the rule, or that applying it is difficult for me given my habits. I would need to understand where my students were coming from. There was no sense that either group was right. Nor was there a sense that somebody was wrong. We just have a case where the rules for punctuation got changed. Perhaps we’ll figure this out and get on the same page. Maybe as the older generations lose influence the issue will be solved in the younger generation’s favor. If I had to predict, I would think that’s the way things are going to turn out.
The overall point is much in line with the apocryphal quote from Ted Lasso. “Be curious, not judgmental.” Had I remained judgmental, I would have lost out on a wonderful set of experiences and some great things to think about. Once I kicked over into curiosity mode, the world opened up to me. I was introduced by my students to things I never would have paid attention to, and they learned as well. It was a rich and rewarding experience.
There doesn’t need to be a winner or a loser in these sorts of debates. It’s not even that both are right. It’s more that there’s a world out there that’s in need of as much exploration and curiosity that we can give it. It’s a delightful world, and I know that I laughed more than a couple times when I was chatting with my students on this topic. I need to be in curiosity mode a whole lot more.