Written English - Evolving or Corrupting?

[Opal]

So? why do people begin a sentence with the word "so"? I don't get it.

 

[Biker]

You just beat me to it as that is exactly the thing I was going to mention.

More generally ..... whilst I regret the use of poor English I can't help thinking that it is a losing battle - a bit like the French trying to stop the wide use of English words instead of French ones eg Le Weekend

That jars me too, seeing the words "would of" instead of "would have" or "would've". Man that gets on my pip. I've only started to notice that one creeping in. I think it's sad to see our rich language watered down with bad grammar and spelling. I suppose if we can do our part by making sure we don't add to the flood then we'd be doing something positive. Bit like recycling - "Every little helps". I'm no expert on it but I try not to make too many errors. I also resent the spell checker telling me that "criticised" is spelt wrong and should be "criticized". Hmmmm I notice spelt also is being flagged as wrongly spelled. Oh the irony!

As for the French fighting against the invasion of English phrases in their language. I think most of them accept it, it's the purists that kick off. It's actually adding to their language not taking something something away. Unlike text speak or laziness to use correct words.

Just as an side most English as it is spoken today is derived from French anyway. After the Norman invasion Anglo Saxon was considered the lesser language. I won't go into great detail about it but learning basic French is a LOT easier if you speak English. As a small example pretty much every word that ends in "tion" (Attention, action, inspiration) in the English language is of French origin it's just pronounced slightly different but has the same meaning.

 

[THOaken]

The English language is most definitely devolving. My generation seems to have no grasp of grammar, punctuation or syntax of any kind. On far too many occasions have I had the displeasure of seeing someone writing like this, "Hello My Name Is"... Do they not know the use of a capital letter? The digital age has produced what is called "leet" or "1337" speak, but no one really uses it any more, it's more of an underground oddity. However, I agree that there is an influx of those who would defile the spoken word with text speech. I find it quite disrespectful because I respect and value decent conversation not, "eh, watevz".

 

[Kong]

The English language is most definitely devolving. My generation seems to have no grasp of grammar, punctuation or syntax of any kind. On far too many occasions have I had the displeasure of seeing someone writing like this, "Hello My Name Is"... Do they not know the use of a capital letter? The digital age has produced what is called "leet" or "1337" speak, but no one really uses it any more, it's more of an underground oddity. However, I agree that there is an influx of those who would defile the spoken word with text speech. I find it quite disrespectful because I respect and value decent conversation not, "eh, watevz".

I disagree with the term "devolving" nothing can devolve. Whether it becomes simpler or more complicated in form, over time, it is always evolving.

 

[Clouston98]

Although I don't like people who write like "nd" instead of "and", I must admit I do like colloquial language and accents portrayed through writing, if you know what I mean?

 

[oldtimer]

I am encouraged by this post and the contributions to the thread., which indicate that there are still people who care about our living language. I was beginning to think it was just me.

I spent most my working life in Education, as primary school teacher, head teacher, teacher trainer and inspector. I was frequently saddened by the poor examples set to children by their teachers. I was even more startled when I discovered the poor English used by members of inspection teams I led.

One headteacher explained to me that she wanted children to express their ideas poetically without being inhibited by grammar or spelling. To me this is like asking someone to carve an intricate design with a blunt knife. If one does not have the words, how can one express the ideas?

The prime function of language is to exchange ideas clearly and unambiguously. This is especially important for lawyers and communicators such as teachers and lecturers and also those who write blogs and reviews on this site and elsewhere. I can think of at least two contributors to the site whose clarity enhances the pleasure and usefulness of their blogs and reviews. I'll spare their blushes, but note that they have already contributed to this thread.

We all have to learn that there are different forms of English. For example, that American and English differ and that dialects use different words and grammatical constructions. This is not a matter of being right or wrong but of knowing that what is appropriate in one context may not be in an other. The test is in how well the written communication is understood. And let us not kid ourselves that complex or technically specific ideas can always be expressed in simple language. We bushcrafters use words not necessarily accessible to the general user of English: what would the man in the street understand a crook knife to be , for example? I am grateful to the member who posted a list of textspeak words on this site, otherwise I still wouldn't know what lol meant.

It is also useful to bear in mind the difference between errors of faulty writing, such as typos and missing words (and readers can amuse themselves by spotting my own errors in this piece), which the spell checker may pick up and errors which arise through ignorance of grammar, spelling or vocabularly. I am thinking here of things such as lack of agreement between subject and verb, confusion between homonyms like "there" and "their" and malapropisms. The spellchecker is of little help here.

To those really interested enough to have read this far, may I suggest they refer to Richard Hoggart's "Uses of Literacy", Bernstein's "Speech Codes", of the works of Wittgenstein, all of whom have covered all the points we have so far!

 

[Macaroon]

That's a very good summation, in my view, oldtimer.............I use, and love to play with, colloquilisms and dialect all the time, but as you state, context is everything.

 

[John Fenna]

I am encouraged by this post and the contributions to the thread., which indicate that there are still people who care about our living language. I was beginning to think it was just me.

I spent most my working life in Education, as primary school teacher, head teacher, teacher trainer and inspector. I was frequently saddened by the poor examples set to children by their teachers. I was even more startled when I discovered the poor English used by members of inspection teams I led.

One headteacher explained to me that she wanted children to express their ideas poetically without being inhibited by grammar or spelling. To me this is like asking someone to carve an intricate design with a blunt knife. If one does not have the words, how can one express the ideas?

The prime function of language is to exchange ideas clearly and unambiguously. This is especially important for lawyers and communicators such as teachers and lecturers and also those who write blogs and reviews on this site and elsewhere. I can think of at least two contributors to the site whose clarity enhances the pleasure and usefulness of their blogs and reviews. I'll spare their blushes, but note that they have already contributed to this thread.

We all have to learn that there are different forms of English. For example, that American and English differ and that dialects use different words and grammatical constructions. This is not a matter of being right or wrong but of knowing that what is appropriate in one context may not be in an other. The test is in how well the written communication is understood. And let us not kid ourselves that complex or technically specific ideas can always be expressed in simple language. We bushcrafters use words not necessarily accessible to the general user of English: what would the man in the street understand a crook knife to be , for example? I am grateful to the member who posted a list of textspeak words on this site, otherwise I still wouldn't know what lol meant.

It is also useful to bear in mind the difference between errors of faulty writing, such as typos and missing words (and readers can amuse themselves by spotting my own errors in this piece), which the spell checker may pick up and errors which arise through ignorance of grammar, spelling or vocabularly. I am thinking here of things such as lack of agreement between subject and verb, confusion between homonyms like "there" and "their" and malapropisms. The spellchecker is of little help here.

To those really interested enough to have read this far, may I suggest they refer to Richard Hoggart's "Uses of Literacy", Bernstein's "Speech Codes", of the works of Wittgenstein, all of whom have covered all the points we have so far!

This is an excellent post!
I have problems with our great language stemming from several causes which include the following: being at school when the ethos was "never mind spelling , grammar and punctuation - ideas count more", going to an American school, in Belgium, where they tried to teach spelling, grammar and punctuation (that was in a great part different to that which I had picked up) and living for ten years in Belgium where, once I joined the workforce, I was using English, in an American based Multi-national company, with Francophone co-workers yet living in a Flemish community and studying computer languages through the medium of French! I now live in a part of Wales where Welsh is the first language of a good number of the local population....
I can guarantee that all that is an excellent way to confuse the spelling, grammar and punctuation of anyone - period (or is that "full stop").

I love languages and the fun you can have with getting your tongue (anyone notice the play on words, both English and French, there?) around them.

Word-play is one of the highest forms of humour ... or is it just the barest of bones of humorous/humerus talk?

 

[Macaroon]

Something else that I meant to mention in previous posts: How come all our Dutch, Scandinavian and other overseas contributors seem to be able to write so clearly and concisely in what is to them a second language?
Some of the most readable English is written by these contributors, and they seem to be able to communicate as well as most native speakers and better than most..............food for thought?

 

[mousey]

One thing that I'm not very good at is the acronyms, always takes me ages to figure them out.

I can think of at least two contributors to the site whose clarity enhances the pleasure and usefulness of their blogs and reviews. I'll spare their blushes, but note that they have already contributed to this thread.
QUOTE]

That's a bit of a give away as there's only two guys who have posted on this thread who also have blogs

 

[Stringmaker]

Something else that I meant to mention in previous posts: How come all our Dutch, Scandinavian and other overseas contributors seem to be able to write so clearly and concisely in what is to them a second language?
Some of the most readable English is written by these contributors, and they seem to be able to communicate as well as most native speakers and better than most..............food for thought?

It is directly related to the points made above by oldtimer.

If the education establishment is using dogma like "inhibited by grammar or spelling" then there is the root cause.

 

[santaman2000]

.......let us not kid ourselves that complex or technically specific ideas can always be expressed in simple language. We bushcrafters use words not necessarily accessible to the general user of English: what would the man in the street understand a crook knife to be , for example?......

Others have posted about considering your audience when writing. As a GI transitioning to civilian life I had to learn not to use military jargon (See? There's one of those words) in my civilian resume (or what you would call a CV) That said it was somewhat easier for me as my target audience, the hiring officials at the companies I wanted to work for, were familiar with military jargon, and in many cases actually used keywords to get the computer to flag resumes containing them for further consideration.

Note: the above sentence is an example of one of my personal faults when writing; it's what's taught as a "run on sentence" by teachers of professional writing classes (such as those teaching Professional Report Writingor Technical Writing)

 

[British Red]

I believe there is as oldtimer wrote some "inability" to communicate clearly. Within this I believe are those who suffer from an affliction, those who have not learned how to write clearly and accurately and those who can, but lack the discipline to do so.

A different barrier to clarity is the deliberate adoption of a cant or private slang. This generally has the purpose of an attempt to convey "I am not part of the rest of you - I belong to a "tribe" with its own language". Clearly this can say I am "young" - every generation develops its own vocabulary in an attempt to exclude "wrinklies" (the age "tribe"), however it can also be "I am wealthy / working class" (hence people speaking "Mockney" to indicate an economic "tribe"), it also extends to "aggressive dialect use" - you can see this in people who can speak "plain English" but choose not to in order to indicate a regional "tribe". In almost every case this is not just about social inclusion - it is about active social exclusion (think how funny it is to "yoof" when mothers try to use the latest slang - much eye rolling ensues to confirm that mother is not included).

I think then we should distinguish between people who are

Unable to communicate clearly
Have not bothered to communicate clearly
Are choosing not to communicate clearly to everyone to make a point

Red

 

[santaman2000]

......We all have to learn that there are different forms of English. For example, that American and English differ and that dialects use different words and grammatical constructions. This is not a matter of being right or wrong but of knowing that what is appropriate in one context may not be in an other. The test is in how well the written communication is understood......

Agreed. Again an example of targeting your audience. I might add though, that the goal isn't always to immolate the audience's speech, but sometimes to highlight your own so that your perspective is clear to them. Of course that presupposes that they'll still understand what you write.

 

[Dave-the-rave]

According to Trevor McDonald none of us speak properly. He and the Queen do though. Personally I think he should go bile his heid.

 

[santaman2000]

As a question I'm going to list some words not considered proper English but commonly used on both sides of the Atlantic. How many of you use them frequentlyl? How many avoid them at all costs? And how many use them dependent on the selected audience?

-young-uns (younguns?)
-ain't
-fix or fixing (as in, "I'm fixing to.... or I'll fix it for you to....)

I know there are many more but I can't think of them at the moment.

 

[mountainm]

I think discussions like these have been had amongst older generations for centuries.

Apply the same to culture, clothing, hair styles, music, behaviour. Rinse repeat.

"Must resist change."

 

[Stringmaker]

As a question I'm going to list some words not considered proper English but commonly used on both sides of the Atlantic. How many of you use them frequentlyl? How many avoid them at all costs? And how many use them dependent on the selected audience?

-young-uns (younguns?)
-ain't
-fix or fixing (as in, "I'm fixing to.... or I'll fix it for you to....)



I know there are many more but I can't think of them at the moment.

I avoid those; I am aware of them of course but have never included them in my speech or writing.

 

[Ecoman]

OK so lets have a show of hands. Answer truthfully the following questions.

1. How many of you are under 30?

2. How many of you use smilies when posting in the forum?

3. How many of you love bushcraft and would happily teach it to a child or adolescent if they showed interest?

So I bet most of you raised a hand to the first question. If you go back and read what has been put and then think on when you thought your Granddad was a bit stuffy and you knew best! I bet your Grandparents used words which are very much forgotten these days. I bet you now use words that your Grandparents would have frowned upon back then or simply didn't know the meaning of. What your criticising is basically the same thing. The language is constantly evolving and changing, language has trends and fashion like anything else. You will get slang words used in every language and eventually the slang words, if used enough, will succeed the original.

I bet a good few of you use smilies when posting on the forums too. Isn't that a form of slang? Would you write a letter and use them to emphasise a point? I very much doubt it, but yet when online or sending a text you will sometimes use a smilie to make sure the reader is absolutely certain of what you mean. The digital media we use for communication is changing our language, its inevitable as its a huge influence on our society as a whole. There is nothing that you can do to stop it, its "progress". We may not like it, I know I certainly don't, but I'm not going to jump up and down about it either.

I very much doubt any of you would turn away a youngster if they wanted to learn something that you are very passionate about. Whether its making a shelter, building a fire, foraging, making a possibles pouch etc. you would probably be only too pleased to pass on your skills and knowledge. I know I would. Now lets take the same youngster and put him in front of a computer. He may not be able to write properly and his syntax, grammar and spelling is atrocious (not unlike mine) but he is still the same boy you just taught how to light a fire and build a shelter. Would you still have taught him how to do it if you knew he couldn't string a proper sentence together? Of course you would! My point is that it doesn't really matter whether he is fluent in the art of written English but rather that he is involved in something you are passionate about (and is part of this excellent community).

Its good that so many of you are passionate about this subject but really, is it worth pigeonholing these individuals and making them feel like lepers because they wrote "their" instead of "there"? I mean, while your at it, why not hang a bell around their necks and shout unclean or burn them as a witch! I think there is more important issues to be discussed that a comma being in the wrong place or an apostrophe out of context. Its threads like this that make people, with less than adequate literacy skills, feel unwelcome on a great forum.

I mean no offence to anyone with this post.

 

[oldtimer]

I think discussions like these have been had amongst older generations for centuries.

Apply the same to culture, clothing, hair styles, music, behaviour. Rinse repeat.

"Must resist change."

I'm sure you are right. As a teacher I soon found that learning was a two-way process and that I learned from my pupils. I hope they learned more from me than I from them though because I was the one getting paid!

What is important, in my view, is that there should be a continual discussion, especially between generations. We should never resist change when it is for the better, but should resist it if it is not. To decide what is for the good and what not, we need discussion: for effective discussion we need clarity and open mindedness. There is a problem that many good ideas remain unshared in the heads of those unable to express them.

I think British Red makes some good points about deliberate obfuscation. Slang has always been used as a badge of exclusivity. Rhyming slang and palare were used so that policemen and officials would be less able to understand pub conversations.

Another point worth considering is that, generally speaking, written English has stricter "rules" than spoken. Am I alone in being irritated by writers who attempt to convey regional accents in written form? It always seem patronising to me.