A Sense of Doubt blog post #2627 - Does Grammar Matter - Prescriptivists vs. Descriptivists

A Sense of Doubt blog post #2627 - Does Grammar Matter - Prescriptivists vs. Descriptivists

Amazingly, I had set this post for today, and so since it's the day for a share in my rotation in the BLOG VACATION II, then rightly so, time to share.

ALSO, this subject seems fitting since in a few days I interview for a full time position at LCC, my school, and I want to be at the top of my game. I consider this interview and job application the most important of my life thus far, and if I do not get it, I hope they open two more positions in the near future (as they are expected to do), and I manage to get one of those.

Also, I need to fix in my mind the difference between prescriptivism and descriptivism as it's a concept that seems to escape my consciousness even after I review it. I hope this entry cements it in my consciousness for possible use.

Thank you for tuning in.

Andrea S. Calude // TED-ED

DOES GRAMMAR MATTER?

You're telling a friend an amazing story, and you just get to the best part when suddenly he interrupts, "The alien and I," not "Me and the alien." 

Most of us would probably be annoyed, but aside from the rude interruption, does your friend have a point? Was your sentence actually grammatically incorrect? And if he still understood it, why does it even matter? 

From the point of view of linguistics, grammar is a set of patterns for how words are put together to form phrases or clauses, whether spoken or in writing. 

Different languages have different patterns. In English, the subject normally comes first, followed by the verb, and then the object, while in Japanese and many other languages, the order is subject, object, verb. 

Some scholars have tried to identify patterns common to all languages, but apart from some basic features, like having nouns or verbs, few of these so-called linguistic universals have been found. 

And while any language needs consistent patterns to function, the study of these patterns opens up an ongoing debate between two positions known as prescriptivism and descriptivism. 

Grossly simplified, prescriptivists think a given language should follow consistent rules, while descriptivists see variation and adaptation as a natural and necessary part of language. 

For much of history, the vast majority of language was spoken. But as people became more interconnected and writing gained importance, written language was standardized to allow broader communication and ensure that people in different parts of a realm could understand each other. 

In many languages, this standard form came to be considered the only proper one, despite being derived from just one of many spoken varieties, usually that of the people in power. 

Language purists worked to establish and propagate this standard by detailing a set of rules that reflected the established grammar of their times. And rules for written grammar were applied to spoken language, as well. 

Speech patterns that deviated from the written rules were considered corruptions, or signs of low social status, and many people who had grown up speaking in these ways were forced to adopt the standardized form. 

More recently, however, linguists have understood that speech is a separate phenomenon from writing with its own regularities and patterns. 

Most of us learn to speak at such an early age that we don't even remember it. We form our spoken repertoire through unconscious habits, not memorized rules. And because speech also uses mood and intonation for meaning, its structure is often more flexible, adapting to the needs of speakers and listeners. 

This could mean avoiding complex clauses that are hard to parse in real time, making changes to avoid awkward pronounciation, or removing sounds to make speech faster. The linguistic approach that tries to understand and map such differences without dictating correct ones is known as descriptivism. 

Rather than deciding how language should be used, it describes how people actually use it, and tracks the innovations they come up with in the process. 

But while the debate between prescriptivism and descriptivism continues, the two are not mutually exclusive. At its best, prescriptivism is useful for informing people about the most common established patterns at a given point in time. 

This is important, not only for formal contexts, but it also makes communication easier between non-native speakers from different backgrounds. 

Descriptivism, on the other hand, gives us insight into how our minds work and the instinctive ways in which we structure our view of the world. Ultimately, grammar is best thought of as a set of linguistic habits that are constantly being negotiated and reinvented by the entire group of language users. 

Like language itself, it's a wonderful and complex fabric woven through the contributions of speakers and listeners, writers and readers, prescriptivists and descriptivists, from both near and far. 

https://bridgingtheunbridgeable.com/2012/10/05/creativity-andor-prescriptivism/

Creativity and/or Prescriptivism

Posted on October 5, 2012 by Viktorija Kostadinova

In a cult sketch on language, Stephen Fry compares the inexhaustible creative potential of language to that of music. The structure of language comprises a limited set of parts, just as a piano keyboard has a limited set of keys. However, they are both capable of producing an infinite number of combinations, each representing, as Fry puts it so vividly, “a unique child delivered of a unique mother”. And yet, he continues, we end up saying the same things over and over again. Could prescriptivism have something to do with that?

source: http://fuckyeahstephenfry.tumblr.com

The genius of Fry is that he manages to touch upon a very serious subject and make a very valid point about it while being hilarious at the same time. What he is actually referring to is how we have tried to stifle linguistic creativity with rules regarding just about any part of language usage, starting from simple grammatical rules, to complex rules referring to collocational patterns, style, appropriateness, the logic of a construction, and so forth.

As a non-native speaker of English, I have always felt that English is one of the rare languages in the world that has that great creative potential which allows a speaker to express exactly what they feel even if they are using an unusual combination of words. I always felt that, for instance, you can unleash your linguistic creativity and combine any verb or adjective with any preposition as long as it makes sense and expresses what you are trying to say more accurately, even though usage guides advise otherwise. It turns out, I have been living in delusion. Native speakers of English tend to have really specific ideas about which combinations are acceptable and which are not; these ideas do not differ greatly from what one would encounter in a prescriptive usage guide. Allan Metcalf, professor of English, author, blogger, AND a native English speaker, was recently the subject of scathing criticism regarding the non-standard use of ‘centered around’, instead of ‘centered on’, in one of his blog entries. He was accused of being careless about language rules, which is especially unacceptable for someone careful about language.

You might wonder how someone like him would react to accusations of using wrong/bad English. Explaining the etymology of the term and citing a dictionary entry is a very good option and the standard way of proving the point, which Metcalf did. However, he went one step further and created a prescriptivist contest! People are expected to come up with their own prescriptive rule, explain and exemplify it. Pullum succinctly expresses his views on this by calling it ‘fake prescriptive poppycock’, which I agree with. Nevertheless, after a few minutes of browsing through the newly invented rules, I came across some very interesting – and I have to admit, impressive – pieces of linguistic prescription. It struck me to what extent native speakers are aware of patterns of usage and how rule-conscious they are.

I am not sure whether that was the author’s goal in creating the contest, but I felt that one purpose of it was to make people aware of the absurdity and redundancy of prescriptive rules. By this, I do not mean that rules are bad in general; they make learning a second language easier and offer language users a sense of security about linguistic correctness. Some areas of language, however, should remain beyond the realm of rules. Language users should always be able to have some room left for unbridled linguistic improvisation.

How about you? Have you ever felt that rules restrain your linguistic freedom?

Blog Vacation Two 2022 - Vacation II Post 63

I took a "Blog Vacation" in 2021 from August 31st to October 14th. I did not stop posting daily; I just put the blog in a low power rotation and mostly kept it off social media. Like that vacation, for this second blog vacation now in 2022, I am alternating between reprints, shares with little to no commentary, and THAT ONE THING, which is an image from the folder with a few thoughts scribbled along with it. I am alternating these three modes as long as the vacation lasts (not sure how long), pre-publishing the posts, and not always pushing them to social media.

Here's the collected Blog Vacation I from 2021:

Saturday, October 16, 2021

A Sense of Doubt blog post #2433 - BLOG VACATION 2021 COLLECTED

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

- Bloggery committed by chris tower - 2204.28 - 10:10

- Days ago = 2491 days ago

- New note - On 1807.06, I ceased daily transmission of my Hey Mom feature after three years of daily conversations. I plan to continue Hey Mom posts at least twice per week but will continue to post the days since ("Days Ago") count on my blog each day. The blog entry numbering in the title has changed to reflect total Sense of Doubt posts since I began the blog on 0705.04, which include Hey Mom posts, Daily Bowie posts, and Sense of Doubt posts. Hey Mom posts will still be numbered sequentially. New Hey Mom posts will use the same format as all the other Hey Mom posts; all other posts will feature this format seen here.