"I played four years at a little D-3 school in Tennessee"
Explain it to me? what is a d-3 school? It is middle school or?Please
"I played four years at a little D-3 school in Tennessee"
Explain it to me? what is a d-3 school? It is middle school or?Please
A simple search turns up the answer: https://collegeathleteinsight.com/differences-between-d1-d2-d3/ and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_III.
I played four years at a little D-3 school in Tennessee
If a reader has to look something up on Google, the author has failed or the reader is not part of the intended audience.
AJ
If a reader has to look something up on Google, the author has failed or the reader is not part of the intended audience.
THAT I have to agree to, it's way too often that I have to look up something. The 'intended audience' part I disagree with. Most readers outside of the USA will have little to no knowledge of the NCAA but probably are still part of the intended audience. (Maybe except for the very specific US sports stories.)
If a reader has to look something up on Google, the author has failed or the reader is not part of the intended audience.
As a reader, even with dead tree books I find my self looking things up on Google. Not necessarily because I didn't understand it in context, but because I'm curious about whether a particular reference is real or fictional.
It's not something that bother's me either way.
Though in this case, probably a US based author who either did not anticipate drawing international readers or didn't anticipate that international readers would not under stand the division system in US college sports.
I'd guess the percentage of readers who would understand that reference immediately would be pretty small.
Maybe this is true, but I am familiar in general terms with the education system and student sports, again from books that I have read before. It's just that up to this point, I have not encountered such a division in the NCAA
That's what I'm saying. Even a lot of sports fans know only about "D-1" teams. The D-2 and D-3 divisions and rules (scholarships in D-2, at least some, and none in D-3, for example) are much more obscure.
If a reader has to look something up on Google, the author has failed or the reader is not part of the intended audience.
I have to disagree with that. Every professional/social group has their own set of buzzwords, phrases, and acronyms. If the MC is portrayed as part of a group, but is ignorant of the former, someone within that group is going to call bullshit. Someone outside of that group will be looking them up for context.
In their lives, people will face this in the real world depending on who they happen across.
in the real world
I'm not talking about the real world, I'm talking about stories in which authors are (hopefully) trying to entertain readers.
AJ
If the story tweaks the readers mind as being BS, they will lose interest. As a reader, I've abandoned more than one story for just that reason. There are many related threads, more recently it was the thread regarding regionalism.
If the story tweaks the readers mind as being BS
Generally that's probably not true. A realistic police procedural would be so boring as to send most readers to sleep, yet crime drama is a popular genre despite its lack of realism.
As the mantra goes, "Write what's entertaining, not what's accurate".
AJ
Staying in context, the OP post was:
"Explain it to me? what is a d-3 school?"
US College sports fans would know what that meant straight away. As evidenced by the OP post, people outside of that demographic will not necessarily have any idea what it is. Which is why I disagreed with this statement:
"If a reader has to look something up on Google, the author has failed or the reader is not part of the intended audience."
Where that author went wrong imo was not spelling it out. Division 3 vs. D-3. A reader cannot read the mind of the author. "Division 3" would make short work of any search. D-3 comes back with multiple returns for the vitamin on google, and half way down the page on duckduckgo.com a reference for NCAA division 3. Whereas the first link on both search engines come back with a NCAA reference if "Division 3" is used.
D-3 comes back with multiple returns for the vitamin on google, and half way down the page on duckduckgo.com a reference for NCAA division 3.
On the other hand, if you used "d-3 school" as your search term instead of just "d-3", the top five results on both Google and DuckDuckGo are all about NCAA division 3 schools/sports.
Your lack of skill with using a search engine is not the author's fault.
D-3 comes back with multiple returns for the vitamin on google, and half way down the page on duckduckgo.com a reference for NCAA division 3.
In one of my previous posts in this thread:
...when I searched for "d-3 school". The first 5 results of my search were all about NCAA devision III schools...
That was using DDG. Notice I searched for "d-3 school". Searching for just d-3 I would not expect relevant results.
The fact is that the search in my country does not give an answer to such a simple search query. I am from Russia, and I think I should not explain how unpopular baseball and American football are in my country, especially the education system, and that there is such a body that oversees the development of student sports at a level that is not available in our country.I am grateful to you for the explanation, I am translating a book for ordinary fans of foreign works, and it is sometimes difficult for me to understand what is being discussed. Once again, thank you very much and I'm sorry for my poor English
The fact is that the search in my country does not give an answer to such a simple search query.
Don't use google because it creates a search bubble. I use DuckDuckGo and simply searched for "d-3 school". Both links I provided were in the first 10 results.
Thank you, this is a good advice. Recently, I often turn to searching for various kinds of information related to translation, although it would seem that these are quite simple things for a citizen of the United States or Canada
Not being from the USA I've not had any involvement with the NCAA, although I have learned about it from various stories where it was mentioned. However, when I read that line I did not link D3 with Division 3 and my first thought was it was some sort of private school designation. If the line had been Division 3 then I would have linked it to the NCAA designation. To me the issue here is too much of a short cut that was explained.
Part of the problem was the normal terminology was not used. D-3 vice D III or DIII or Division III which would have been more recognizable ....
Essentially, the author was trying to indicate that the MC was an athlete, good but not great ability, who continued to play beyond high school level because he/she enjoyed the sport, but was not on scholarship and was not looking to "turn pro" following graduation.
Well, I didn't understand it either, and I attended a Division III school.
A coach would likely understand that D-3 is shorthand for Division III.
But writing for US college coaches would be writing for a pretty small subset of the population.
But writing for US college coaches would be writing for a pretty small subset of the population.
I looked up the context in the story itself. (Sadly I had to resort to an external search engine). To be honest, it's obviously baseball jargon (baseball porn!) and the reader doesn't really need to know the exact meaning. Readers can just gloss over it without the story losing anything.
AJ
However, when I read that line I did not link D3 with Division 3 and my first thought was it was some sort of private school designation.
The quote asked about was:
"I played four years at a little D-3 school in Tennessee"
Notice the "I played" part which made the connection for me when I searched for "d-3 school". The first 5 results of my search were all about NCAA devision III schools so the "I played" made sense. The only thing I know about the NCAA is from stories and that it has something to do with sports in the USA :)
Notice the "I played" part which made the connection for me when I searched for "d-3 school".
The way the wording is - "I played four years at a little D-3 school in Tennessee" would have as much meaning as - "I played four years at a little public school in Tennessee" or "I played four years at a little Catholic school in Tennessee"
The usual writing practice which is also promoted in most writing classes is that when you first use and acronym or special term you include either the meaning of it or enough context to make it clear to those who may not have come across it before.
Along similar lines, what the UK authors mean by attending a Public school is not what most US or Aussie writers mean by attending a Public school. Also, here in Australia a college is either a special pre university preparation school for years 11 and 12 of a technical college of 2 or 3 year courses to teach what used to be manual trades like plumbing and motor mechanic, although they've expanded what they teach a lot in the last few decades.
Also, here in Australia a college is either a special pre university preparation school for years 11 and 12 of a technical college of 2 or 3 year courses to teach what used to be manual trades like plumbing and motor mechanic, although they've expanded what they teach a lot in the last few decades.
Well, colleges cover a bit more than that, for instance the International College of Management Sydney which awards both undegraduate and postgraduate degrees.
https://www.icms.edu.au/
Ian
PS I became aware of ICMS when one of my grandkids started there :-)
International College of Management
Created in 1996 - a very recent creation in the Australian educational scene. What is now the NSW Technical and Further Education system started life as various Technical Colleges back in the mid to late 1800s while the Canberra Institute of Technology started life in 1928 as the Canberra Technical College and the Canberra College started life as the Phillip College in 1976 teaching years 11 and 12.
As I said - they've expanded a lot in the last few decades. However, they still aren't full university campuses.
Also, here in Australia a college is either a special pre university preparation school for years 11 and 12 of a technical college of 2 or 3 year courses to teach what used to be manual trades like plumbing and motor mechanic, although they've expanded what they teach a lot in the last few decades.
They have a good welding program. Worked with a group in Peru on an LNG project that was a product of that. Part of the terms for the construction contract was to extend that program to teach local Peruvians. The locals they turned out were very good welders.
The usual writing practice which is also promoted in most writing classes is that when you first use and acronym or special term you include either the meaning of it or enough context to make it clear to those who may not have come across it before.
Unfortunately a lot of authors here don't follow that practice. I keep an ever growing list of acronyms used in stories just because of this. Sometimes it's even unclear which explanation is the correct one if you look them up.
By-the-way, it was the combination of the "I played" with my search results that explained it for me. Separately they would have no meaning at all for me.
Unfortunately a lot of authors here don't follow that practice.
True. For years I thought Apple had some sort of strange dancing app or device called an IHOP, then I found out it stood for International House of Pancakes - but that was in about the 20th story IHOP had been in before anyone mentioned what they did there or what the full name was.
awnlee jawking
7/16/2021, 10:54:40 AM
If a reader has to look something up on Google, the author has failed or the reader is not part of the intended audience.
I beg to differ. We have a wide range of readers, geographically, in age, and in education.
Any story worth reading is going to have vocabulary and subject matter that's outside any number of readers' knowledge. A writer can only do so much with context and in-story explanation. A reader who's drawn into the story will go outside to fill in the areas he needs to get on with the tale.
As example, many of my stories bring elements of engineering or aviation or farming and may use terms outside a basic vocabulary. I've had readers comment positively on following a story and expanding their knowledge to color in the grey spots.
We don't write in Basic English. We write in a living language with all the colloquialisms and obscure terminology, and properly used, the telling of the tale is enriched.
As example, many of my stories bring elements of engineering or aviation or farming and may use terms outside a basic vocabulary.
If the reader thinks that they don't understand a term but they don't need to look it up to enjoy the story, I wouldn't class that as a failure.
If a story twist depends on the intricate detail behind a technical term used in a story, the author should explain it if they're interested in a wider audience.
AJ
If a story twist depends on the intricate detail behind a technical term used in a story, the author should explain it if they're interested in a wider audience.
I agree. My son recently showed me a meme joke that I couldn't understand until after he he spent fifteen minutes explaining the scene in the movie it came from, and it was a movie I've never even seen.
That is the thing about a lot of authors. They forget that when they are writing a story they might actually be "subject matter experts", and their potential readers are not. And what they end up writing turns into "subject porn", and others not of their level do not get it.
And there are many genres of that. "Gun porn", "history porn", "musical instrument porn", one recently is even "scholastic debate porn" (but I have still been enjoying the story).
Myself, I tried to go the opposite direction with one story, where there are a lot of "geek porn" elements in it (Dungeons and Dragons and early home computers). But I gave it mostly a "light" feel, removing most of the technical aspects and talking about the aspects without getting bogged down in minutia.
Sure, I could have gotten all involved in the character working through various nanosecond speeds of DRAM chips, and then comparing it to the CPU clock and configuring wait states, or how I had to use DEBUG and enter "G=C800:5" before low level formatting an MFM drive, but why? And who would care about that kind of detail?
In short, nobody. Because I knew that nobody would care about that and it was not important to the story. But I did introduce little things in here and there, which slowly added up as the story progressed. But were also so unimportant at the end that a casual reader was free to largely ignore it and go "OK, no idea what an NEC V-20 chip is, but he said that is another CPU. That is good enough because I know what a CPU is".
Of course, then you have the danger of some thinking they know even more, and trying to "correct" you. I myself laughed when more than one screamed at me that nobody would buy a 386 after the 486 came out, but in reality I was still building and selling XT class machines as late as 1993 because they were cheap, and that was all many people needed.
"Gun porn", "history porn", "musical instrument porn", one recently is even "scholastic debate porn"
"Catman has another winner with The Dirt Daubers. There isn't much sex. Food porn describes cooking and eating meals. Gun porn talks about various weapons and ammunition and their use. Well now there is earthmoving equipment porn in this story covering bulldozers, graders, bob cats, trailers, and a wide variety of other equipment and how it is used and maintained. I wonder if Lubrican has written a story about Bob cats?"
(From my review of the story)
Well now there is earthmoving equipment porn in this story covering bulldozers, graders, bob cats, trailers, and a wide variety of other equipment and how it is used and maintained.
It's Bobcats, not bob cats.
It's one word whether you are talking about the wild felines or earth moving equipment.
Also if you are talking about earth moving equipment, it should be capitalized, because it's a brand name.
https://www.bobcat.com/index
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/facts/bobcat
Maybe, but you haven't tried it.:)
I tried it in my novel "Steele Justice" (using the unreliable internet as a translator). Steele is questioning a Russian gangster.
"Who's behind your gang? Who's the boss?" (Steele asked)
Po'shyol 'na hui
"No, fuck you," Steele said. The Russian's eyes widened and the other two heads popped up. "Don't be so surprised. People have said that to me in many languages."