Here’s an interesting article about how edition changes came about between Simplified and Diamond Jubilee. Most were teacher recommendations.
how-system-changes-are-made-in-gregg-shorthand pdf
Another interesting study, this one by the government:
VARIATIONS FROM “STANDARD GREGG SHORTHAND” IN THE SIMPLIFIED EDITION WERE INVESTIGATED AFTER USE IN EMPLOYMENT TO DETERMINE INTERRELATIONSHIPS AND TO MODIFY AND REFINE THE “GREGG SHORTHAND SIMPLIFIED” PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES. SAMPLES OF SHORTHAND, WRITTEN BY WRITERS WHO HAD AT LEAST 2 YEARS OF INSTRUCTION IN “GREGG SHORTHAND SIMPLIFIED,” WERE PROCURED FROM NOTEBOOKS USED EVERYDAY ON THE JOB. EVIDENCE SUPPORTED THE HYPOTHESIS THAT, ALTHOUGH CERTAIN KEY ELEMENTS IN “GREGG SHORTHAND SIMPLIFED” ARE NOT FOLLOWED ACCURATELY, SHORTHAND WRITERS WRITE ESSENTIALLY TEXT SHORTHAND DURING EMPLOYMENT. IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THE SIMPLIFED SHORTHAND, AS IT WAS TAUGHT, SERVED ITS PURPOSE
Teri, these are interesting. Do you agree with their criteria in choosing the shorthand writers they did, as their standard of usage?
I wish they had used a wider range of shorthand experience, with comparisons among groups of much experience, compare with those of quite extensive experience, and those compared to those with less.
Several thoughts and questions appeared in my mind as I read through these:
Was this more of the "slippery slope" of reducing standards to a lower common denominator? Watering down Gregg Shorthand? Why not have more training rather than lower what there is to learn? Etc.
I hope some of the Anni and Pre-Anni writers here will post what they think.
Sometimes I reach for the DJS, Notehand, and Greghand books for a rest, and they are so tempting. Yet, for me, Pre-Anni has a beauty and appeal that does not let me go.
A comparison:
It is possible to learn to tune a guitar, to master three or four chords with the left hand, a few ways of plucking and strumming the right hand, and play thousands of simple folk songs, hymns, etc. This can bring one much enjoyment and fulfilling recreation.
It takes years of diligent study to master the instrument to beautifully play music such as Bach or Paganini.
There was a common saying in music schools, decades ago, that freedom of expression is only possible with mastery of one's instrument.
I am glad there are many forms of Gregg, specific versions to suit various needs.
But, for purposes which require mastery, I think higher standards and longer periods of training give more beautiful results.
I wish the offerings of the various versions of Gregg Shorthand had been clearer. Lower standards for less demanding purposes. Higher standards and more rigorous, extensive training for the greater demands.
And I sometimes wonder what those who have gone before us would tell us now.
Thank you for another very interesting find!
Such a thoughtful response, Lena! You've given me a lot to think about! I suppose since Diamond Jubilee was the edition I originally learned, the changes mentioned in the first article are completely logical to me. A disjointed past tense stroke, for example, seems strange to me– I'm sure there are many here, though, that think a joined one strange. We naturally gravitate to the edition we first learned as being the "normal" one.
It seems logical to me that they asked for input from teachers for improving the system– they were the ones in the trenches, so to speak, since it was the teachers who saw firsthand how well the particulars of an edition worked with a wide range of students. This was the target market.
Is it fair to call the post-Simplified editions "lower standards," however? I guess I've always seen it more as "lowered speed requirements due to the needs of a shifting business world." Court reporters needed to be really fast… but that skill level might have been overkill for anyone else (though it's certainly fun to see how fast one can go with shorthand! Who doesn't dream of reaching 250+ wpm!) But it might be like sending a nurse to medical school and requiring a doctorate, when really an associates degree at a nursing college will do. Sure, the extra knowledge would be interesting and make the nurse more valuable, but then the nurse might as well become a doctor. Not everyone wants to spend the extra money/time/energy to reach that lofty goal. So I guess there had to be concessions along the way for Gregg. It really boils down to a each person's personal goals/needs and what they're willing to put into it. I don't have a need to take verbatim dictation, but I do take copious notes. Notehand suits my needs. If that ever changed, I'd consider taking up Anniversary, since it had so much extra supplemental material available.
One might ask why Gregg ever felt the need to publish any more editions after Pre-Anniversary in the first place? It certainly served many very well. Even early on, it seemed Gregg was looking at a more simplified personal use shorthand, even before Anniversary came along. Gregg was a visionary who believed his system was so efficient, that it would take over longhand as the primary form of communication. That didn't happen, but it's a testament to the system that, although there have been changes over the decades, most of the fundamental outlines are still intact from its first days.
Thanks for the thoughtful post, Lena!
Teri, thanks for your lovely post. I enjoy reading of the real delight different ones experience in the version of Gregg different people post about. You have found so much with Notehand and DJS that enhances learning, for any of the versions, in my opinion.
I really like how concise Greghand is, and how well laid out the Notehand book is. The DJS books I have are easy to understand and follow. I don't have any Simplified books with me, and haven't looked at them much. When I compare the Anni and Pre-Anni books with the more modern versions, it really does strike me as the difference between becoming a virtuoso classical musician, or becoming quite adept at folk music. Both require mastery of one's instrument, but the requirements for mastery differ greatly.
I like your examples of learning the version on needs for the purpose required.
I quite enjoy reading Carlos' examples in the different versions. It is so very inspiring to see his versatility and mastery.
Dr. Gregg's efforts to make shorthand useful for anyone's level of need is our treasure. We get to choose. 🙂
Ooops. Correction: "…learning the version one needs for the purpose…."
As someone who is learning Pre-Anni, I generally feel that there is no need to simplify shorthand. Instead Gregg shorthand should have a set of "Core" principles and "Advanced" principles. I think the general problem with DJS and Simplified is trying to reduce Gregg to the core principles, and in doing so, making it difficult to advance to the "Advanced" principles without re-learning a lot.
One of the motivations from learning Pre-anni is from reading previous versions of the manual e.g. 1902, 1898, 1895, 1888. Each one is an extension upon the previous.
Having tried Machine Steno with Plover, I have found that pen shorthand suffers from the disadvantage that you have to write one character at a time. However there are all sorts of disambiguation devices in pen shorthand not available in machine. I believe that the strengths of pen shorthand should be played to the max.
Also, what I find irritating in Simplified and later versions is the thinking that there are "correct" and "incorrect" ways to do things. During his lifetime Gregg was much of the opinion that the only thing that was important was to be able to read it back. Thus, when encountering a new word that you can't write inmmediately, I consider it totally valid to regress to simpler priciples in order to get everything down. This may involve writing everytthing out in full. Thus the simplifications in later versions are, in my opinion, unnecessary.
This is an area that particularly interests me. Some of you may recall that I covered some of this ground last year in my post here: DJS System Rationale
I write a mixture of DJS and Simplified, with additional brief forms from other versions and of my own invention. As I use my shorthand for personal use, I do not feel a need to spend the extra time and effort to learn a version that could potentially deliver a speed that I do not need. If users of Simplified, DJS and later were able to take dictation at the necessary speed in a business situation and transcribe it accurately, surely the Gregg versions did the job.
For myself I would like to use shorthand to take down speech verbatim. This requires a speed of 180+ wpm. Such situations differ from traditional business as you can't tell the speaker to slow down. For this reason I chose pre-anniversary.
Thanks for this, and the link to the older post and articles. I learned DJS first (for a generous interpretation of learned), but am now focusing on Simplified. I remember struggling with hooks on their sides and merged with the next letter, but they seem natural now. (I still worry, though, about using too deep a curve at the start of F, C, R (and V, G, L), and thinking there's a U, and TR looking like TOR.)
DJS has 4% more strokes for typical use. Worrying whether I'll be able to read it slows me down more much more than 4% !
One of the articles mentions a booklet for teachers listing the differences. Does anyone know where I can find it, or has anyone made one?
The article by the teacher of the speed-building night school class, where many started with Simplified then moved to DJS, was encouraging. They treated it like an experiment, and found that writing whichever outline they thought of first worked fine. It was fast and the notes were still unambiguous. I might do the same.
I use it for meetings and book notes. Readability is more important than speed, and longhand works fine, but I like the idea of shorthand. My notes are perfectly clear the next morning, but I need to read them months later.
Very interesting!