Slashdot Mirror
Why There Is No Such Thing as 'Proper English'
Pikoro writes: A recent article in the Wall Street Journal explains why the concept of a "proper" English isn't realistic. Quoting: "It's a perpetual lament: The purity of the English language is under assault. These days we are told that our ever-texting teenagers can't express themselves in grammatical sentences. The media delight in publicizing ostensibly incorrect usage. ... As children, we all have the instinct to acquire a set of rules and to apply them. ... We know that a certain practice is a rule of grammar because it’s how we see and hear people use the language. ... That’s how scholarly linguists work. Instead of having some rule book of what is “correct” usage, they examine the evidence of how native and fluent nonnative speakers do in fact use the language. Whatever is in general use in a language (not any use, but general use) is for that reason grammatically correct. The grammatical rules invoked by pedants aren’t real rules of grammar at all. They are, at best, just stylistic conventions.
... between "terror" and "terrible", "fuhrer" and "furor", "suffering" and "suffrage", you're ripe for being fooled and robbed by politicians at every step. And not just politicians. EULAs can use fancy words, knowing that average Joe is barely literate, and put them in various forms of electronic bondage. Credit card applications... you name it. Everything around you will take advantage of you.
Having strong grasp of language is VITAL for a society's survival. This is axiomic. There shouldn't be articles about it. It's not a controversial issue, or rather, it only becomes one when average IQ dipped low enough to warrant creating excuses for not learning the language.