The near absence of the term "spoken grammar"?

I suppose we are just not worthy, old chap.

MrP

Or not equipped.

Well, I'm sure we don't always get all the wine into the glass; but the forum is free, and attractively illustrated.

MrP

Hi Anon

You're opening a big can of worms here. This website is global and, as such, is not a Standard English devoted site. In fact, most of the users of this site seem to use American English. As an English teacher, born in England and working from England, I can find this peculiar. Some people take great offense when I give an alternative answer based on Standard English.

Wit

Thank your for that, Adrenochrome. Much to think on there.


Good luck in the play-offs.


Best wishes,


MrP

AnonymousIf it's good enough for the folks at Oxford UP, why does it not appear more on this, linguistics, website?

Because it's useless. Normal people just call it "spoken English", and that's it. I think talking about "registers" might be much more useful than inventing other grammars.

Authentic speech in any language is immeasurably tedious, when examined in a faithful transcription, or on a recording. Only a very few people would find it engaging, after an hour or so of initial curiosity. And you have to read vast amounts of it, to extract tiny amounts of information. There are better things to do with your time.

Besides, one of the great pleasures of talking with fl

Kooyeen

AnonymousIf it's good enough for the folks at Oxford UP, why does it not appear more on this, linguistics, website?

Because it's useless. Normal people just call it "spoken English", and that's it. I think talking about "registers" might be much more useful than inventing other grammars.


How can one invent

<And you have to read vast amounts of it, to extract tiny amounts of information. There are better things to do with your time.>

There are experts doing that job for you right now. Just read them to get an idea of how the two grammars are different.

MrPedanticAuthentic speech in any language is immeasurably tedious, when examined in a faithful transcription, or on a recording. Only a very few people would find it engaging, after an hour or so of initial curiosity. And you have to read vast amounts of it, to extract tiny amounts of information. There are better things to do with your time.

MrP