The Phenomenology of Error -Julie K

When I first started reading this I was a little lost. As I started to get through the reading I realized he was talking very passionately about errors in writing and how they are not handled the same as social errors. My mind was blown reading through this because of how much he expressed his opinions on what seems to be such a simple matter.

When I think about writing a paper, I do pay attention to the grammar and verb tenses I'm using but in no way do I feel like I should apologize for the errors I make. I feel like checking these kinds of grammar errors is somewhat of a lost art. If enough people forget about certain rules, they seem to just disappear. For example, he mentions that "Zinsser rejects impact as a verb, despite the fact that impact has been used as a verb at least since 1601." Things change over time and I think with technology booming like it is, grammar is less important.

On a different note, I like that fact that he brings up the idea that if people whose job is solely to find errors and points them out, makes and error and does not see it that does error really matter. That's at least what I got from it. I liked this line, "What I'm interested in here is the noticing or the not noticing by the same person who stipulates what should be noticed." It seems like such a complicated sentence but I feel like this sentence really shows his purpose for writing.

If we, as writers, aren't supposed to make errors and the people who correct and point out our errors don't even notice their own, then who is to say that those errors are even worth pointing out.

Overall, I think this reading was very deep, and eye opening. I think it's pretty crazy when someone can talk so deeply and so long about one topic. I don't really enjoy, however, reading such deep material.