Latin and other prestige language arguments
- Rules such as the split infinitive relate to Latin (e.g. amare for ‘to love’ doesn’t split so why should we?)
- Latin was a language for the elite echelons - inaccessible for the lower classes - no longer has the same linguistic relevance (except e.g.)
- English has grown to be a language of science and business
Perscriptivist motives
- Preservation (dangers of losing texts e.g. Shakespeare, Chaucer)
- Standardisation (BBC - advocate for SE and RP, Aberdeen can understand)
- Class (‘correct’ grammar, subtle semantic distinctions - a way for the middle classes to demonstrate their education and imply their status)
(e. g. Dr. Johnson - thought that the word ‘knife’ ruined Shakespeare’s Macbeth, it was a vulgar word used by common tradesmen)
Descriptivist motives
Language is an ever-changing and developing expression of human personality, and does not grow well under rigorous direction. — C. L. Wrenn, The English Language
A humanist academic view of knowledge which, like science, tries to lay aside all preconceived ideas in order to discover what is really there
JEAN AITCHISON - Use the change in language in order to discover more about the evolution of society, “we must examine the frays in language, not clip them and throw them away”
JEAN AITCHISON
- Progress vs Decay (1991)
“an ever-whirring wheel – no end point for language change”
“…frayed edges must be examined, not snipped away and tidied”
“damp-spoon” – language change is due to laziness – “only true lazy speech is drunken speech”
CHARLES HOCKETT
Substratum theory
- Influence of different forms of language
- E.g. Jewish Yiddish influence the way New Yorker’s say “coffee” as “caw-fee”
ROBERT LANE GREENE
DECLINISM (similar to ‘crumbling castle) however, argued that literacy rates are a lot higher in the UK and USA compared to the previous century
JOHNATHON SWIFT
1712
- Lived before Samuel Johnson wrote the largest dictionary
- Keen Perscriptivist (though those terms were not even coined at this stage)
- “I see no reason why language should be changing – some method should be taught in fixing it.”
LYNNE TRUSS
- Eats, Shoots and Leaves, 2003: A Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation
TRICIA LENNIE AND STUDENTS
- Through looking at dictionaries - debated the question of whether ‘standardisation’ is still possible - or desirable in 2005
- Elly, a students’, conclusion:
“Standardising an ever-changing, organic creation like language is like giving the artist only one colour to work with. The necessary tools should be in place first, which have to be standardised otherwise they cannot be used to communicate - paintbrushes and grammar, spelling and canvas. But why should creativity and imagination be stunted by the insistence that the artist should only paint in red? Perhaps it is that the standardisation supporters have yet to realise the brilliance and dynamism of a work in full colour.”
