Grammar and the Prescriptive Attitude

Question

Hi,

For those interested, you might wish to check out [url="http://www.languagehat.com/archives/001763.php"]Grammar and the Prescriptive Attitude[/url]. I think this topic has been bounced around this forums a few times, though I have not kept pace with the discussion.

MH

Korin · Accepted Answer

Hallo,

I like the way Otto Jespersen (in 'Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin') aptly
summarised the nature of language changes by comparing it with one of the theories of the
Manchester School of Economics:

'Everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds if only
no artificial hindrances are put in the way of free exchange, for
demand and supply will regulate everything better than any
Government would be able to.'

Korin

MrPedantic · Answer

It's an interesting idea. Does the metaphor hold true in all its parts?

For instance, a supplier can advocate his product through advertising, and so stimulate demand: artificial encouragement, as opposed to artificial hindrance.

Similarly, I can advocate split infinitives, in a best-selling book about grammar, and so stimulate the production of split infinitives: artificial encouragement, again, as opposed to artificial hindrance.

Or take the example of famous writers: Denham, Cowley, and Dryden had a great influence on the way English was written in the C17 and after, simply because people liked the way they wrote, and were persuaded to do likewise.

I'd be more inclined to say that if person A advocates usage XYZ, and so changes the way people use language, that's as much a part of the process as any 'undirected' language change.

MrP

Paco2004 · Answer

A learner's side humble opinion

A problem of English learners like me who have learned and are learning English through printed matters is that they tend to think spoken/informal English should be as grammatical (in prescriptive sense) as written English. Grammar was originally rules made for writings, not for speaking, and no matter what language it may be, native speakers (and even non-native speakers) wouldn't care much about whether what they utter is in agreement with the rules written in grammar books or not.

In the world of google, many native speakers seem to write in an atmosphere as if they are speaking, and so the writing is often away from the grammar rules. When learners access such writings, they would worry in a way like; "This is not the same as I have learned in school!, Why? Why is it so?" When I was a school boy, we English learners (especially beginners like me) couldn't have such worries because the only English we could access was written English (most of them had passed grammar checks, I think). But now, be it happy or unhappy, we can access to native speaker's soundless spoken English through Internet, and some ambitious earnest learners are trying to check the grammar rules they learned by using extracts of such online English. For example, I saw some person asked in the forum how to change such a phrase 'I couldn't care less!' grammatically into a reported sentence. I can easily guess it would be a kind of nonsense exercise to native speakers. But I also can guess the questioners had no bad intention in asking such things. I guess it comes just from the fact that they didn't know formality levels (regions?) of phrases used online. I can imagine also some of such earnest learners might be teasing English teachers in their school with (prescriptively wrong) sentences they have got through Internet. I'm not an English teacher, but I really sympathize teachers who are teaching English in school everywhere in the world at this time when every student can access spoken/online English through Internet. What learners here should know is that spoken/online English and written English are someway similar but different things, and that the trivial/sophiscated grammar rules taught in school are made mostly for writing articles for pedagogic use.

paco

MrPedantic · Answer

It's an interesting question: is 'standard online English' a variety of spoken or written English? Or should it be regarded as a 3rd category?

At this point it would be useful to have some scans of those posting on English Forums, so that we could establish which parts of the brain light up...

One day we'll all post on the internet by talking into a piece of software that recognizes our words and posts as we speak. At that point, it really will be a problem for learners of English –even native speakers are appalled when they see transcripts (or hear impromptu recordings) of their own speech!

MrP

Paco2004 · Answer

In another view, we might say ESL students are encouraged by online English. Some ESL students would hesitate to write English fearing grammatical mistakes.

paco

MrPedantic · Answer

That's true!

I'm reminded of this phenomenon. A non-native English-speaking person (X?) visits your place of work. His English is carefully phrased; his grammar is correct; he has only a slight foreign accent. After he's gone, someone (Z?) will say: 'his English was better than mine!'; or 'he speaks better English than the English!'; or some such phrase.

The intonation can vary; but it often implies a) admiration b) a rebuke to those English people who 'don't know their grammar', etc.

I find this interesting, because there's another kind of non-native English-speaking person (Y?) who visits your place of work, or perhaps works at your place of work. His English resembles the English English people speak; his accent may be difficult to detect or non-existent. He probably has an English wife or girlfriend.

The curious thing is, people comment much less frequently on Y's brand of English (in my experience). If they do comment, it's simply to say 'fluent, etc'. His English may be 'better' than X's English, in real terms; but it isn't as remarkable.

(Alternative version: 'she, etc' for 'he, etc' throughout.)

MrP

Korin · Answer

I do not consider advertising some forms as artificial hindrance. If you are a popular writer, you can use them, or even overuse them. At the end of the day, it's up to your readers if they start using your forms or not. You advocate split infinitives in your grammar book as long as you clearly state that 'traditional' form of the infinitive is also grammatically accurate,
and the form you recommend is only the question of your personal grammatical/stylistic taste.

In all these cases speakers of a language are not forced to use one particular form. No form is imposed by any institution. Generally, at least that's what I believe, a language reflects the needs of its speakers, and changes according to them.

If today, for example, someone began an unbelievably successfull compaign to promote
the language of Shakespeare, perhaps, the English speakers would be likely to switch to the Early Modern English (That would be interesting: Lovest thou me, darling?). If the campaign was successfull and worked, you couldn't claim that some artificial hindrance had been imposed on the speakers.

You can't force the speakers to do anything as long as you want to be successfull. What you can do is to make them believe that they need to use particular forms, but that's the other story...

Korin

Korin · Answer

By the way, ironically, I teach British native speakers to use 'correct' English  <img class='emoticon' style='Width:19px;Height:19px;' data-delaysrc='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/5.gif' src='https://uat-englishforward-forums-backend.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Emoticons/5.gif' alt='Emotion: wink'/>

MrPedantic · Answer

A slight misunderstanding, Korin: I was interested in the phenomenon of 'artificial encouragement', rather than 'artificial hindrance', by analogy with advertising.

To take the usual example: we create an idea of 'body odour', and then sell people deodorants. Thus the shelves of the supermarket reflect the needs of its customers; but sometimes those needs can be 'created'.

Similarly – a 'thought experiment' – if we create the idea that the 'split infinitive' is extremely chic, through our best-selling book on grammar (maybe it's called 'To excessively eat, to randomly shoot, to quickly leave'), and the 'chic split infinitive' permeates all varieties of English, till native speakers can't utter 3 words without splitting an infinitive – does that count as 'prescriptive'?

In the following century, would the rule develop: 'always split your infinitive'? And the century after that, would sober-suited linguists decide it had all been a great prescriptive scam?

I'm just curious as to how 'natural' language is. (The 'Big Mac' view of language vs the 'organic free-growing green stuff with plenty of roughage' view.)

Apologies if my earlier post was obscure!

MrP

Korin · Answer

My apologies, MrP (your post was clear)

That's interesting. Actually, artificial encouragement can be in its own way 'prescriptive.' Creating a chic idea you influence speaker's choices prescribing a particular usage of the infinitive. You may not be successful overnight, but as an increasingly great number of speakers will be adopting your form, one day it will inevitably become a standard form recommended by grammar books. The grammar books, on the other hand, will be then 'descriptive' capturing the linguistic tendencies of the majority of the speakers (I'm lost!)

On the free market you do not always start to manufacture the products
that you think the customers desperately need. Sometimes you produce a commodity and then take pains to make customers believe that it is your product that they need (until they finally buy it.) In the same way, artificial encouragement, if done in a smart and effective way, is an indirect manifestation of the 'prescriptive' approach.

So, perhaps, the development of a language is a constant interaction between prescriptive and descriptive elements, the latter being the result of the former(?) I don't know why, but what comes to my mind now is Hegel's thesis, antithesis and sinthesis.

Let's take some element of language:

1. Since most of the speakers use 1. thesis
it, grammar books describe it as
a standard and correct form
(descriptive approach)

a very chic idea has been created (very influential writer or whatever)

2. A new form is gaining popularity 2. antithesis
among some of the speakers as
a result of e.g. artificial encouragement
Some (writers, politicians, people working
in media) people may be unconsiously
advocate this particular form
(prescriptive approach?)

After some time...

3. The new form has become a standard 3.Synthesis
form and the old form was preserved in
a language but as old-fashioned or
reserved only to some contexts or dialects

After some time..

4. The existing grammatical order is being 4. The above-mentioned synthesis
described in grammar books becomes a thesis
(it describes the language as it is)
(again descriptive approach)

5. and so forth

Is it all probable?
Korin

Grammar and the Prescriptive Attitude

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions