When a grammar error is discovered, can it be corrected?
First let me state the obvious—based on my own experience—that hordes of people are confused about certain basic grammar principles. Why do I see so many errors in choosing the pronoun to use with direct objects, especially when introduced by and with another person, as in “Joe talked about the book with Anna and ] .” And another one is the near 100% usage of “lay” instead of “lie” and “laid” instead of “lay”) nowadays, even in published sci-fi books that most certainly had professional editors proofread them.
Can we make predictions about the future? Did you use a computer for a few minutes? Can they become inaccurate once some people are using them for long enough? Only to get correct on their own. What are the consequences? Both of these problems keep me bonkers, and I fight my own little battle against them whenever possible.
I know that dictionaries are descriptive, rather than prescriptive. I use them in different places. In history, both are technically history books. But grammar books seem less so, to me. Those seem as though they ought to be prescriptive in order to reduce the erosion of structured and meaningful language.
What can we do to keep the tension between what human beings should be doing and what humans should ‘feel’ like? Is it worth fighting against them? Do most people like to capitulate to people who are quick to accept any mass public usage as a fait accompli?
I
don’t imagine for a second that my own writing is error free. How do I change my state of mind when I don’t understand an answer or something wrong in my mind?
I am not imagining that language is static or ignorant that today’s correctness is all too often yesterday’s error. Why does slowing change work?
What I am trying to ask is that in a way I am hoping to define the limits of pedantry. Is being pedantic with an abstract notion of pedantic tradition a parodied adherence to unchecked rules in the face of actual and foregone changed reality?
Poking fun at my own mistakes to highlight supposed pedantry on my part is to miss everything I am trying to say.
Is it
possible to change tongue and tin? It was in that way, yes it had to be an easy answer. What I wanted to explore is the value in efforts to teach the “proper way” versus. Any new usage is not just accepted but welcome or even sought out. the other end of the spectrum where any new usage is not just accepted, but valued. I’m reminded of some things: the conservative/liberal scale, |——+——+—+—+—=radical
moderate radical liberal conservative The funny
thing is that they both want things to change. What would anyone think of the radical liberal thinking about language when the word “new” goes fast? The RTA, for the sake of sameness or continuity, or some other just as not-necessarily-realistic ideal.
I’m not particularly asking where should we be on this scale as that’s purely subjective. What is real world? How fast is language change inevitable in the future? Are efforts to reduce its rapid morphing either effective or worthwhile in any measure? Which is livable, practical, and sensible position with respect to language evolution?
Feel free to edit my grammar. No comments needed.
Update 3
Another thing that may be of interest to both my supporters and detractors: this ‘Kinetic Typography TV series’ video by Stephen Fry. I like the movie. I can’t wait to read it. I don’t disagree with him. I am not sure I am wholeheartedly in this lack of disagreement.
My daughter holds a PhD in Linguistics. Does she want to be an outsider? For improper usage, a person with good letter goes for standard usage. That is, a legitimate use. (Marvin,
2012)
Doomed! Doomed, I tell you. You don’t know what’s at issue when you heard about DEAD!
Is this a continual complaint? Periodically, some one sounds off about it.
Is the kingdom dead? Long live The King!
How can I get over this?
Grammar and spelling are the servants of communication, but are far from essential.” “Ugh! Once meant (and still could mean) “Hey Ogg! Where is that sabre-tooth tiger? Language is great fun. But don’t mistake the content for the container.
Do we really feel like we’re doomed? In fact, I don’t think the types of errors you are pointing out aren’t even worth worrying about, given that even the BBC can’t seem to properly choose between “to” and “too”. There’s” (instead of “there are”) seems to be used and accepted by more or less everybody these days. What my history is?
Is humanity doomed? Thankfully, in almost all cases, it doesn’t really matter.
If we want to explore the future we are destined for, and those changes are more or less inevitable, then today’s world seems destined for disaster. Maybe our language is no longer broken? Languages have been around for thousands of years, evolving and changing; no language has ever evolved itself into a corner or created a construction that makes the language non-functional.
Many of the “correct” English words and constructions that we now use today got their start as stupid-sounding “mistakes”. Our case and gender systems have disappeared completely, for example.
In fact, if I am not mistaken, two centuries ago, the only people who passed the test were Anna and I” would have been the pedantically correct version, and “Anna and me” would have been the sloppy “wrong” version; it used to be that in the copula would provide nominal case on both sides (e.g. (if nominative case was on both side at all) “It’s me” (i.e., it is I of course)’). Sometimes in a perfect world, an idiot, just has to put things into context.
If you find certain things silly, there is nothing wrong with feeling that way and avoiding them — and not all variations become mainstream. How can we stop this phenomenon of human change? Mainly because it is inevitable, but also because you’d only be protecting a momentary instance of a thing that is constantly in flux.
I can’t agree or disagree with you in the case of lay and lies either. Most people don’t even know the correct paradigm for conjugating these verbs. I interpret the changes in popular usage to mean that these verbs are undergoing regularization; the old paradigm seems inherently confusing and I welcome the change: the language is fixing itself. I think this might also be an interesting point of view to consider.)
Addendum based on the question’s first edit: I recommend reading up on standard Arabic to consider attempts to stop language change in its tracks. Are Islamists against Muslims using the Arabic in their Quran if they believe that it is always a holy book? This Standard Arabic is the only “official” Arabic, it is the only one they learn in schools, and it is the only one they write in. When using a language, you can never stop language change. Instead, every region has evolved a distinct dialect (and these “dialects” really stretch the definition of that word to its breaking point). In many cases, they are not mutually intelligible (for example, Moroccan Arabic and Baghdad Arabic), and nobody in the Middle East actually speaks Standard Arabic as a first language. If I grew up in the south gypsy community, I never knew there was something in the north! Most of the time, if speakers of different dialects want to communicate, they speak in a simplified hybrid of their own dialects and Standard Arabic (leaving off things like case marking that exists in SA). The Standard form has become more or less different from the spoken language of the native speakers. If they can’t actually manage to follow the rules automatic it will fail.
If I want to learn useful Arabic, I have to learn Standard Arabic for reading and for some television programs, and I have to learn another language in order to actually communicate with people around me. I also have to start with plain Arabic. Why is this system so bad?
If for some reason we decide to freeze English as it is now and make a concerted effort to keep this form as it is, we will inevitably end up with the same messy diglossia situation that they experience now in Lebanon.
Addendum by editing last sub-edit: I can’t keep up with this moving target 🙂
Is language change inevitable? If yes then how fast? Yes
it’s inevitable. In terms of actual ‘core vocabulary’ drift, I believe it is possible to derive an approximate glottochronological rate of change, which seems to have historically been at about 20% per century.
What will my core vocabulary word have in a hundred years?
How can I determine adherence to grammatical standards with time? Is it true that rules have a linear evolution and those rules must evolve independently of words?
(Much more speculatively speaking: It is likely that people are always and perhaps without knowing it creating new words and phrases, but also and more slowly wrestling against a “spirit of gravity” embodied in linguistic axioms. We fight against this’master of the earth’ by bringing to light new movements and becomings that aren’t diagrammed in the form of a tree (certain poems, for example); in other words, beneath the flow of words there is a long war against the ‘tyranny of heaven’.
Is this grammaticality itself already a politics of subjectivity? If it is, we assent to grammaticality of all forms, by torn between subjects and objects, by confronting the arborescent’stasis’ of language composed of subjects and objects, we have to confront the’real’ language, which flows in all directions at once, spreading like a patch of oil, like life itself and how
to deal with gravitational waves (hence the ‘trophy’, which is,
If being
pedantic is slavish adherence to outdated rules in the face of actual and foregone changed reality then when do we conclude that a change is a foregone conclusion?
Change has always been a foregone conclusion. If English wasn’t changing, tries to stop it.
As you can
imagine, English is pure like a pirate whore. The real problem is that the people who would fight in the Indian army want to destroy English. We don’t borrow words; on occasion, English has chased other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.
What are some
good examples of James Nicoll and Richard Thompson.
Are we not doomed yet? No one is a better person than us.
How can I ask you a question that nobody else can read?
Think of the Wikipedia, all the online dictionaries, the blogs about languages, writing, etc.. Is this new? What is the best way to prepare to read, write, and speak a Spanish speaking language?
