Re: Death of the English Language
- From: David Auerbach <auerbach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: xywrite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 13:54:04 -0400
The other philosophical subtext (or, rather, *an* other) is the distinction
between descriptivist and prescriptivist accounts of English (or any other
language for that matter.) Linguists working on the syntax and semantics of
natural languages are, by and large, engaged in a non-normative enterprise.
Moreover, they would fall on the floor laughing if you told them some of the
"rules" of English pushed by the run-of-the-mill prescriptivist. By now, I
imagine, it is well-known that such "rules" as never ending a sentence with a
preposition and prohibitions against split infinitives are simply nonsense.
What isn't nonsense, as long as it isn't mistaken for the actual grammar of
English as she is spoke, are style books. (Which isn't to say that style books
are free to make any rules; just that it is good to have consistent and
justifiable rules in those contexts where style books make sense.)
Also on the normative front, it makes sense to resist diachronic alterations of
meaning, where those alterations are motivated by ignorance, sloppiness, etc.
and not by usefulness, gap filling, etc. I'm thinking here, as did the OP, of
"begging the question", whose misuse I find distressing and depressing.
David Auerbach
auerbach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies
NCSU
Raleigh, NC 27695-8103
On Oct 17, 2010, at 12:44 PM, Carl Distefano wrote:
>
> Reply to note from flash <flash@xxxxxxxxx> Sun, 17 Oct 2010 12:29:59
> +0200
>
>> http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Grammar_Nazi
>
> Amusing article. There's no doubt that people who gratuitously
> correct other people's grammar are tedious sorts, and I think the
> hyperbole about Nazis is mostly a colorful way of saing "Back off!".
> The philosophical subtext of "grammar Nazi", though -- the notion
> that "standard" or "educated" English implies totalitarian control
> -- would make an interesting essay topic, which might be framed by
> the observations that (1) the Western system of university education
> is descended from a regime in which a few Latin-speaking monks
> produced, and were the designated keepers of, a discrete body of
> canonical texts, and (2) the future of education is in doubt absent
> broad agreement on what comprise the core attributes of an educated
> person. This "totalitarian" notion springs, evidently, from the view
> that the Internet is, and should be, an anarchic environment with no
> organizing principle beyond its underlying protocols -- a view for
> which I have some sympathy, especially given the current assault on
> Net neutrality. Yet surely the "Nazi" trope is fundamentally
> meretricious. When a thousand flowers bloom, the smell of manure is
> hard to avoid.
>
> Let me hasten to add that the correction of grammar or syntax in any
> language, human or otherwise, in this forum is completely
> appropriate, on-topic, and established by custom and usage of many
> years' standing. If you attempt to do so, however, you had damn well
> better be right. Otherwise, no soup for you!
>
> --
> Carl Distefano
> cld@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
Other related posts:
