is grammar dying?

[heavenlyboy34]

I notice that over the past 20 years, it has become more acceptable to use atrocious grammar in formal speech. It ranges from common beginner level mistakes to borrowing so heavily from colloquialisms that the real meaning of language is lost. WTF?? :confused:

Why are we glorifying stupidity and ignorance? Am I being too picky?

[SnappleLlama]

NO, you're not being too picky. It drives me crazy, as well!! Then again, I used to diagram sentences for fun, so I may not be sane. :)

[Mini-Me]

I notice that over the past 20 years, it has become more acceptable to use atrocious grammar in formal speech. It ranges from common beginner level mistakes to borrowing so heavily from colloquialisms that the real meaning of language is lost. WTF?? :confused:

Why are we glorifying stupidity and ignorance? Am I being too picky?

Grammar dying? Naaaaw, dat bitch just flat-out dead! ;)

[micahnelson]

The internet killing Grammar? Thats unpossible!

[hillertexas]

I think, ever since the "headline" (getting the message to the people using as few words as possible ) was introduced to the people, grammar has become less important. I am ok with some "regression" on correct grammar. IMO, "the message is the message" and as long as that message is received, grammar is unimportant.

[hillertexas]

Also, I think that "formal speech" is on the way out. I think language is a fluid thing that can and should change with a culture that is becoming less formal on all fronts.

[RJB]

I use bad grammer on the internet, but i know how to clean up when it matters.


What scares me is people who don't know. It's like the person who goes to the job inteview or court case with holes in his jeans and a T-shirt instead of a shirt and tie.

On these forums with you guys I feel like I'm on my couch in my sweat pants and a T-shirt-- so that's I write

[hillertexas]

Man, I love language/linguistics...

So what is the "real meaning of language" if not simply to relay an idea successfully to a receiver? Of course, if the message is not transfered successfully, that is a problem.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

how is noam chomsky good at linguistics? I don't understand

[Kade]

I notice that over the past 20 years, it has become more acceptable to use atrocious grammar in formal speech. It ranges from common beginner level mistakes to borrowing so heavily from colloquialisms that the real meaning of language is lost. WTF?? :confused:

Why are we glorifying stupidity and ignorance? Am I being too picky?


Not at all.

[hillertexas]

how is noam chomsky good at linguistics? I don't understand

I don't understand what you are asking.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I don't understand what you are asking.

everyone says, "noam chomsky is great at linguistics" I never understood how

[heavenlyboy34]

Thanks for all your replies. It's so frustrating for me to have to listen to self-proclaimed grown adults using "kid-speak"! I often wish that people spoke with speech-bubbles so I can fix their mistakes with a red sharpie! :eek: It's also very depressing when I have to speak like that when I need to be understood...I tend to use "big words" that confuse people. Very sad developments out there. :rolleyes: :(

[hillertexas]

everyone says, "noam chomsky is great at linguistics" I never understood how

hmmmm...maybe simply because he is an academic who studies linguistics. I really don't know much about Noam.

Here is the Wikipedia criticisms:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Noam_Chomsky

I agree with this guy:

Marvin Minsky, co-founder of the MIT AI Lab, has criticized Chomsky for his near-exclusive emphasis on syntax: 'Chomsky seems almost entirely concerned with the formal syntax of sentences, to the nearly total exclusion of how words are actually used to represent and communicate ideas from one person to another. He thus ignores any models indicating that syntax is only an accessory to language.

interesting stuff...

[JeNNiF00F00]

I have often wondered about this. I think that it is just a part of speech and how it evolves. I'm kind of thankful we dont speak in old english anymore. :)

I get this crap all the time from people because of my southern accent which I think is pretty much an evolved scottish/irish accent. A lot of people from where I grew up are of that descent and I have British family from "across the pond" personally tell me that my accent is very similar to that of some parts of Scotland but just on a different level...kinda weird but thats just my theory.

Us southerners tend to cut words off or slur them...cant help it thas just how we talk! ;) Jus' go wit da flo.;)

[slothman]

NO, you're not being too picky. It drives me crazy, as well!! Then again, I used to diagram sentences for fun, so I may not be sane. :)

I havn't diagrammed(sp) in years.
Of course I like doing weird math problems.

I do try to use correct grammar even on the internet.
I spell-check and everything.

[heavenlyboy34]

I have often wondered about this. I think that it is just a part of speech and how it evolves. I'm kind of thankful we dont speak in old english anymore. :)

I get this crap all the time from people because of my southern accent which I think is pretty much an evolved scottish/irish accent. A lot of people from where I grew up are of that descent and I have British family from "across the pond" personally tell me that my accent is very similar to that of some parts of Scotland but just on a different level...kinda weird but thats just my theory.

Us southerners tend to cut words off or slur them...cant help it thas just how we talk! ;) Jus' go wit da flo.;)

There are some good things about old English. Old English utilizes the case system, similar to many other languages such as Spanish, Russian, and French. (when I say Old English, I mean in the philological sense-as contrasted with middle, Elizabethan, and modern Englsih) This gives greater flexibility and eliminates (some) confusion. The downside is that those languages are harder to learn than English! :eek:

[LBennett76]

I am a grammar nazi, and I have become so annoyed by letters my son brings home from school where the teacher has skipped all the proper rules of grammar. For senior composition class when I was in high school, you could write a 10-page paper, but if you misspelled one word it was an automatic F. The teacher said if you can't spell a word either look it up or don't use it. It might seem harsh, but that's what English class is for. He used to take it even further though and sit at the front of the class with a ruler measuring margins. He demanded perfection, and it encouraged me to earn his respect.
Nowadays, people just write whatever with no concern for the rules of language. It's terrible because to me it doesn't matter what someone is saying in their writing. If there are misspellings and bad grammar mistakes, it distracts from the message, and I don't consider the source reliable.
The degeneration and degradation of our language is in direct correlation with dumbing-down of America. It's sad.
But then, like some mentioned earlier, I loved diagramming sentences... and I love solving complex math equations. So maybe I'm just weird too. haha

[heavenlyboy34]

I am a grammar nazi, and I have become so annoyed by letters my son brings home from school where the teacher has skipped all the proper rules of grammar. For senior composition class when I was in high school, you could write a 10-page paper, but if you misspelled one word it was an automatic F. The teacher said if you can't spell a word either look it up or don't use it. It might seem harsh, but that's what English class is for. He used to take it even further though and sit at the front of the class with a ruler measuring margins. He demanded perfection, and it encouraged me to earn his respect.
Nowadays, people just write whatever with no concern for the rules of language. It's terrible because to me it doesn't matter what someone is saying in their writing. If there are misspellings and bad grammar mistakes, it distracts from the message, and I don't consider the source reliable.
The degeneration and degradation of our language is in direct correlation with dumbing-down of America. It's sad.
But then, like some mentioned earlier, I loved diagramming sentences... and I love solving complex math equations. So maybe I'm just weird too. haha

LOL...I was always good at diagramming sentences, and that was hellacious fun-but math is icky! (maybe that's because I have dyscalculia, though)

[Truth Warrior]

Deliberate Dumbing Down of America - E Book download is NOW FREE TO ALL!!!
Right click and "Save Link As"
Click here to begin download
File is 6.75 MB (http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf)

[RockEnds]

Ever read Tom Sawyer? Language is a tool. Use it to its best affect.

[Kludge]

only thing wurse then bad grammer is bad spelling and vocabularry bad capitalizashun is bad to than you gots the !!!!!!s AND WIERD USE OF caps LOCK!!!!! at strange times and bad brakes!!!!! ALMOST FORGOT when you put all ur werds in one line without any brakes at all!!!!!!!

[heavenlyboy34]

Ever read Tom Sawyer? Language is a tool. Use it to its best affect.

Yes, and Huck Finn as well. However, the language in those books was used for artistic effect and depiction of a historical period. Scholars still use those books to understand the culture of Twain's time. You should also note that when Twain was writing essays/non fiction, he used standard english.

What this discussion is about is deliberate dumbing down of language in day-to-day as well as "academic" use.

[heavenlyboy34]

only thing wurse then bad grammer is bad spelling and vocabularry bad capitalizashun is bad to than you gots the !!!!!!s AND WIERD USE OF caps LOCK!!!!! at strange times and bad brakes!!!!! ALMOST FORGOT when you put all ur werds in one line without any brakes at all!!!!!!!

LOL!! Good one, Kludgey. :D

[RockEnds]

Yes, and Huck Finn as well. However, the language in those books was used for artistic effect and depiction of a historical period. Scholars still use those books to understand the culture of Twain's time. You should also note that when Twain was writing essays/non fiction, he used standard english.

What this discussion is about is deliberate dumbing down of language in day-to-day as well as "academic" use.

Well, ya know, kids are 2 kewl for skewl.

Edit: My bad: 2 kewl 4 skewl.

[Pericles]

I have yet to see a cogent argument presented in a well reasoned essay littered with bad grammar and erroneously spelled words. Imprecise speech is a symptom of imprecise thinking.

[heavenlyboy34]

I have yet to see a cogent argument presented in a well reasoned essay littered with bad grammar and erroneously spelled words. Imprecise speech is a symptom of imprecise thinking.

Would you agree that the sad state of national culture encourages imprecise thinking, or is it a localized phenomenon limited to certain cities/states? :)

[RockEnds]

Awe now, some a them folks who gots real good grammer ain't real good thinkers neither. Why, I once read a fella name a Frude, er Frued, er sumpthins like that. He was a real good talker, but his thinkin wasn't much to brag uhbout.

[humanic]

I don't think you're being too picky.

I have a question though: Did you mean to write the headline in all lowercase or is that unintentional irony? :)

[heavenlyboy34]

I don't think you're being too picky.

I have a question though: Did you mean to write the headline in all lowercase or is that unintentional irony? :)

It's not "formal" writing, or I would have fixed it up. Touche! ;)

[coyote_sprit]

I only use bad grammar to mock other people who use it. Does that make me a bag person?

[LittleLightShining]

Thanks for all your replies. It's so frustrating for me to have to listen to self-proclaimed grown adults using "kid-speak"! I often wish that people spoke with speech-bubbles so I can fix their mistakes with a red sharpie! :eek: It's also very depressing when I have to speak like that when I need to be understood...I tend to use "big words" that confuse people. Very sad developments out there. :rolleyes: :(
I'm with you, though I notice it much less frequently in speech than in writing. I confuse people, too, sometimes, but they assume I know what I'm talking about-- which I mostly do. When I talk to people who understand what I'm saying they put more weight on my message.

[constituent]

It ranges from common beginner level mistakes to borrowing so heavily from colloquialisms that the real meaning of language is lost.

If you really feel this way, then the whole purpose of language eludes you.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

How has Noam Chomsky contributed to linguistics? There's nothing to learn

[heavenlyboy34]

If you really feel this way, then the whole purpose of language eludes you.

Really? Please enlighten me on the whole purpose of language. I love language! :D

[Sandra]

Really? Please enlighten me on the whole purpose of language. I love language! :D


Do you care more how something is said, or what is said?

[heavenlyboy34]

Do you care more how something is said, or what is said?

This is a tough call. I would have to say that wording (how something is said) is somewhat more important in clarity of meaning. That's my background in advertising and communication speaking, though. ;)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Ok. So Noam Chomsky sucks dick? Gotcha

[RSLudlum]

You might be interested in reading some of John McWhoter's works like "The Power of Babel" and "Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care", they were pretty interesting reads. He's also a linguist and has delved into some political discourse in the past decade with books like "Winning the Race" and "All about the Beat: Why Hip Hop can't save Black America". He's actually taken quite a bit of slack from the black community in coming out against reperations and challenging them to reevaluate what the black community deems 'important' to break from the chains of slavery that the 'black elite' seem to always cling to for political use. In essence he says stop blaming everyone else for the problems many black communities have and says the decay of the family and morals, with media celebration of this fact, is one real reason for the desparities seen.

[Mini-Me]

You might be interested in reading some of John McWhoter's works like "The Power of Babel" and "Doing Our Own Thing: The Degradation of Language and Music and Why We Should, Like, Care", they were pretty interesting reads. He's also a linguist and has delved into some political discourse in the past decade with books like "Winning the Race" and "All about the Beat: Why Hip Hop can't save Black America". He's actually taken quite a bit of slack from the black community in coming out against reperations and challenging them to reevaluate what the black community deems 'important' to break from the chains of slavery that the 'black elite' seem to always cling to for political use. In essence he says stop blaming everyone else for the problems many black communities have and says the decay of the family and morals, with media celebration of this fact, is one real reason for the desparities seen.

He sounds a bit like Cosby, actually. :)

[lucius]

I know that removing grammar from modern curriculum is intentional; I have yet to uncovered the specifics of why. I will speculate that it is for social control, similar to limiting an individual's vocabulary, which retards development/well-being throughout life.

I am interested in this topic and will contact Ms. Iserbyte for her insight.

As TW posted earlier, here are the nuts-&-bolts of US educational policy agenda:

The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America in 6.75M pdf, download at link: http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf

[RockEnds]

I know that removing grammar from modern curriculum is intentional; I have yet to uncovered the specifics of why. I will speculate that it is for social control, similar to limiting an individual's vocabulary, which retards development/well-being throughout life.

I am interested in this topic and will contact Ms. Iserbyte for her insight.

As TW posted earlier, here are the nuts-&-bolts of US educational policy agenda:

The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America in 6.75M pdf, download at link: http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf

The goals quite probably include intentionally impairing the ability of an entire generation to communicate their ideas effectively as well as hampering their ability to understand the political and philosophical concepts of past generations.

[Mini-Me]

The goals quite probably include intentionally impairing the ability of an entire generation to communicate their ideas effectively as well as hampering their ability to understand the political and philosophical concepts of past generations.

If you pair this with the fact that young people are more likely than older people to be rebellious and anti-establishment in general (or a Ron Paul supporter in particular), it's a pretty sound strategy for trying to prevent them from being able to convince their elders of their political views.

[RSLudlum]

He sounds a bit like Cosby, actually. :)

yeah, and here's his take on Cosby and the crap Cosby has got for his comments:



Bill Cosby Can't Say That, Can He?
June 3, 2004
source (http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_dmn-bill_cosby.htm)

By John H. McWhorter

Partial transcript of Bill Cosby’s remarks:

People marched and were hit in the face with rocks to get an education, and now we've got these knuckleheads walking around. ... The lower economic people are not holding up their end in this deal. These people are not parenting.

I am talking about these people who cry when their son is standing there in an orange suit. Where were you when he was 2? Where were you when he was 12? Where were you when he was 18, and how come you didn't know that he had a pistol? And where is the father?

People putting their clothes on backward: Isn't that a sign of something gone wrong? ... People with their hats on backward, pants down around the crack, isn't that a sign of something, or are you waiting for Jesus to pull his pants up? Isn't it a sign of something when she has her dress all the way up ... and got all type of needles (piercing) going through her body? What part of Africa did this come from? We are not Africans. Those people are not Africans; they don't know a ... thing about Africa.

We have millionaire football players who can't read. We have million-dollar basketball players who can't write two paragraphs.

With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua and Mohammed and all of that crap, and all of them are in jail. Brown vs. the Board of Education is no longer the white person's problem. We have got to take the neighborhood back. ... They are standing on the corner and they can't speak English.

People used to be ashamed. ... [Today] a woman has eight children with eight different "husbands," or men or whatever you call them now.

The idea is to one day get out of the projects. You don't just stay there.

We as black folks have to do a better job. ... Someone working at Wal-Mart with seven kids, you are hurting us. We have to start holding each other to a higher standard.

The incarcerated? These are not political criminals. These are people going around stealing Coca-Cola. People getting shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake and then we run out and we are outraged, saying, "The cops shouldn't have shot him." What the hell was he doing with the pound cake in his hand?

We cannot blame white people.

John McWhorter

Almost nobody in the black community is happy about our high dropout rates or the number of black men in prison. But for assorted black columnists and radio hosts, Bill Cosby is a traitor for implying that black people have power to help themselves.

These people are under the illusion that black problems cannot change until white America gets down on its knees and blesses us with a Marshall Plan. But this self-medicating notion neglects our history.

Before the 1970s, black ghettos were no picnic but were still true communities. There was much less violence and unemployment, and big cities had thriving black business districts.

Two things changed. Whites, convinced that we were powerless, loosened welfare requirements and wooed millions of blacks onto the dole, while among us, integrationism gave way to separatism.

Too many blacks stopped keeping their eyes on the prize, but it certainly wasn't because whites became more racist. The idea that we can only achieve under perfect conditions is a disabling fiction.

As for those worried that Mr. Cosby's remarks may encourage white racists, it's time we stopped lobbing this charge. For decades many black writers have strayed from the blame game, and last time I checked, the number of poor black families has kept going down while the number of blacks in high positions has gone up. The inner cities are slowly improving.

Yes, we still have some work to do. But when a longtime advocate of black improvement reminds us that we are self-directed human beings, we should listen.

John McWhorter is a fellow of the Manhattan Institute (http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/mcwhorter.htm).

[Mini-Me]

yeah, and here's his take on Cosby and the crap Cosby has got for his comments:

Hahaha...for those particular comments, particularly the pound cake comment, I can certainly sympathize with the people giving Cosby some crap. After all, all of us here seem to be very much against police brutality and disproportionate use of violence by the state. Still, I'm a big fan of Cosby's general message of self-determination, and I'm glad some other more-or-less prominent black people like John McWhorter are willing to stand with him on it.

[Pericles]

Would you agree that the sad state of national culture encourages imprecise thinking, or is it a localized phenomenon limited to certain cities/states? :)

My view is that it is not a localized phenomenon, but endemic in western culture. The ill educated seldom become critical thinkers, and are thus the more easily manipulated. I consider this the great danger in socialist thinking - socialists are elitists who recognize the key to their power is via deluding others into thinking all are made equal by measures taken by government to "prevent inequality". They well understand the usefulness of doublespeak.

[heavenlyboy34]

great posts, everyone. I really appreciate your insight. :D

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Noam Chomsky sucks. What are you going to do about it? Ever read his books on linguistics?

[angelatc]

Also, I think that "formal speech" is on the way out. I think language is a fluid thing that can and should change with a culture that is becoming less formal on all fronts.

They're becoming less formal because they're becoming less educated. Why do you think that could be?

I hope everybody abandons proper grammar and capitalization in titles too! It puts my resume right on the very top of the stack.

[Pericles]

They're becoming less formal because they're becoming less educated. Why do you think that could be?

I hope everybody abandons proper grammar and capitalization in titles too! It puts my resume right on the very top of the stack.

Implicit in your statement is the assumption that your resume will be read by someone capable of recognizing the difference, and considers that difference of value to the organization.

[Natalie]

When I have to write a paper for school or something, sometimes I start to put a "lol" in there, before I actually realize what I'm doing.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

When I have to write a paper for school or something, sometimes I start to put a "lol" in there, before I actually realize what I'm doing.

Sometimes I "lol" when I see funny looking people.

[heavenlyboy34]

When I have to write a paper for school or something, sometimes I start to put a "lol" in there, before I actually realize what I'm doing.

Do teachers consider that a mistake anymore? I know that even though I only went to public school, I wasn't allowed to write stupid shit like that! :eek:

[mellamojuana]

I apologize if I'm offbeat here, but I don't have time with my slow computer to read all five pages, not to mention demands of life besides. TQ 4 patience.

I fear that our sloppiness in speech, writing, and efforts to improve our abilities to communicate clearly reflects attitudes that we just don't have to put demands on ourselves--don't have to step up to the plate. I could be 'way off, but I think our pervasive use of expletives that add nothing, and often detract from our message(s), also reflects our self-centeredness, contempt for other people, our increasing disenfranchisement and our loss of community. I am amazed at the rudeness of Us, the People sometimes. Our inability to construct a sensible sentence without regard for our audience or our readers is a strong statement of a remarkable anger. Maybe we have lost or abandoned spiritual roots that would enable us to think outside ourselves, and thus to think, speak, and write clearly. Perhaps a loss of depth within is merely mirrored in our pathetic ;-) words (or lack thereof.) ?Quien sabe? Who knows?

[anaconda]

Poor grammar seems to go hand in hand with the rest of the breakdown in social fabric. I wish I could speak like one of the founding fathers.

Just listen to Sarah Palin mangle her sentences. Bush just dumped it in our faces non-stop.

I think the only eloquent speaker I have heard in Congress in Sen. Robert Byrd. I always thought Jimmy Carter was a fine speaker. I used to like to hear him take questions at press conferences.

[anaconda]

I apologize if I'm offbeat here, but I don't have time with my slow computer to read all five pages, not to mention demands of life besides. TQ 4 patience.

I fear that our sloppiness in speech, writing, and efforts to improve our abilities to communicate clearly reflects attitudes that we just don't have to put demands on ourselves--don't have to step up to the plate. I could be 'way off, but I think our pervasive use of expletives that add nothing, and often detract from our message(s), also reflects our self-centeredness, contempt for other people, our increasing disenfranchisement and our loss of community. I am amazed at the rudeness of Us, the People sometimes. Our inability to construct a sensible sentence without regard for our audience or our readers is a strong statement of a remarkable anger. Maybe we have lost or abandoned spiritual roots that would enable us to think outside ourselves, and thus to think, speak, and write clearly. Perhaps a loss of depth within is merely mirrored in our pathetic ;-) words (or lack thereof.) ?Quien sabe? Who knows?

I agree completely. Very thoughtful and well-written post.

I would only ask if one's anger is not unjustified if one is not part of the rude and clueless mass?

[SimpleName]

Informal grammar is not all that bad. If you understand what it means, what does it really matter? I do get angry when a person CAN'T use formal grammar and doesn't understand the basics. But...blame our schools. The teaching of grammar in high schools, at least in mine, is absolutely miserable. It is basically non existent past 9th grade when you need it most (for research papers, essays).

[mellamojuana]

Informal grammar is not all that bad. If you understand what it means, what does it really matter? I do get angry when a person CAN'T use formal grammar and doesn't understand the basics. But...blame our schools. The teaching of grammar in high schools, at least in mine, is absolutely miserable. It is basically non existent past 9th grade when you need it most (for research papers, essays).

Oops, I think I write a little better than I am able to use computers. I have very little experience with the latter. The post before the one quoted above is the one I was aiming for, and obviously missed. I like 'em both.

Far be it from me to ever condemn anger; I honestly believe the ability to have/feel anger is a gift for our survival. The undefined, generalized, me-first, roll-eyes kind of right-below-the-surface anger, and the lack of understanding of the other person in a society that is supposed to be so-oo-o civilized and well-educated, really bug me.

Now there's a perfectly fine word, bug. Right on up there with stuff!!!:D

I agree mostly with the belief that informal speech and writing don't matter if we are understood, and if we don't drive other people loco with them. I am concerned that we can turn some people away from our cause if we are really careless. Being too careful could do the same. Trying to communicate clearly is a courtesy, however we do it; awareness of the audience is helpful. The RPForums can reach many; I hope no one is ever disgusted enough with my messy thinking/writing to turn away from the message of personal responsibility and freedom. :confused:

[heavenlyboy34]

The RPForums can reach many; I hope no one is ever disgusted enough with my messy thinking/writing to turn away from the message of personal responsibility and freedom. :confused:

I don't think it's such an issue here, as we're generally on the same page linguistics-wise. But when we go out into the world, it makes sense to be as eloquent as possible. Recall how Dr. Paul was extremely effective during the debates precisely because he didn't rely on sloganeering and silly colloquialisms. :) This will also help us distinguish ourselves from our intellectually lazy opponents. :D It works for me in debating republicrats quite well-they tend to resort to foolish/fallacious reasoning, and I come out the bigger man. ;)

[RickyJ]

Have you also noticed the number of people who speak little or no English in the USA. And you are worrying about grammar? LOL! Very funny.

If people would just speak understandable English I would be happy.

[mellamojuana]

Ay no onerstahn Y eeoo no lie my eengleez. Ay doo goo chob espeeke de eengleez. Eeoo eshood lurn de espahn---oooops---ohm, eh, my lahngwees. Ay no have tu lurn de eengleez; ay jus epress tu (2, two). See oh no? Si, amigose. :D

[RickyJ]

Not everyone speaks American--ahem

Yeah I know that. I just wish they would in America!

[lucius]

As researcher Michael Bailey wrote, "In this reality, language is the highway of how we communicate our thoughts. The gradual and intentional erosion of the vocabulary by those who wish to control us, removes the possibility of any undesirable ideas, as without the words to formulate those ideas, we cannot begin to even think them".

[heavenlyboy34]

As researcher Michael Bailey wrote, "In this reality, language is the highway of how we communicate our thoughts. The gradual and intentional erosion of the vocabulary by those who wish to control us, removes the possibility of any undesirable ideas, as without the words to formulate those ideas, we cannot begin to even think them".

+666! Wonderfully well said, my friend. :)

[Kludge]

Worst cases of word-bastardization/glorification:



Liberal

Connotative - Bleeding-heart socialist.
Denotative - Supporter of global free markets and extensive civil liberties.

Globalist

Connotative - New World Order lackey seeking a tyrannical global government to spy on and squelch naysayers in order to "form a more perfect Union".
Denotative - One seeking to weaken or eliminate borders in an attempt to form a more free and diverse global economy.

Patriotism

Connotative - "Being a good American"
Denotative - Blind faith in community and country. Hyper-Nationalism.

[tommyzDad]

Well, spelling's on the way. LOL. ;)

(No offense to the OP of this:) )

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/918/movtivationthefiringswivt8.jpg

[lucius]

'The Grammar of English Grammars' Project Gutenberg, for use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever (these people are great!), spread it around: http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4433652/The_Grammar_Of_English_Grammars_

[sirachman]

language simply evolves, as long as you can still get across the same message there is nothing wrong with saying it with different words or in a different way. If you tried to talk to people in 1776 you would have difficulty probably but that doesn't mean either of our ways of speaking are better or worse.

[satchelmcqueen]

i thank its not going bad at all. just mine opininon.

[mediahasyou]

Language evolves. What we speak reflects, how we write.

Language reflects our society. We are too busy to type, text full sentences anymore. Life is no longer boring in the 21st century.

[mediahasyou]

if yuo can raed tihs, you hvae a sgtrane mnid, too.
Can you raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it.

[heavenlyboy34]

if yuo can raed tihs, you hvae a sgtrane mnid, too.
Can you raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it.

I've seen this before. It's an exercise in gestalt theory. :D This explains why we can understand the backwards lettering in the rEVOLution logo. :) Still not a good substitute for language skills, though. :rolleyes:

[anaconda]

I noticed today that Obama makes one of the same pronunciation gaffes that Sarah Palin makes: neither pronounce the "g" at the end of various words. Obama says "lookin'" instead of "looking," for example. Tina Fey bashed on Palin for this in one of the recent SNL skits.

[ItsTime]

grammar is a myth. english is not a dead language therefore can evolve.

[heavenlyboy34]

grammar is a myth. english is not a dead language therefore can evolve.

grammar is a codified system of language that is developed by linguists. The reason grammar is important is that without something to base our communication, there would be constant misunderstanding. There is plenty of room for colloquialisms, but in serious communications, grammar is important-according to the classical linguists and thinkers, as well as myself.

[constituent]

Really? Please enlighten me on the whole purpose of language. I love language! :D

Writing and spoken (sometimes unspoken) communication 1) between individuals and 2) between an individual and a group or groups are all

language.



Linguistics is the study of the mechanics of those communications, not defining HOW those communications should work. That is for bureaucrats like in France.

[A. Havnes]

My brother says that in his high school, it ok 4 peeple 2 write like this. In fact, u can write hole essays like this and pass! Heck, you can even exclude all these commas and still pass!

So, wut do u think of that?

[Kludge]

My brother says that in his high school, it ok 4 peeple 2 write like this. In fact, u can write hole essays like this and pass! Heck, you can even exclude all these commas and still pass!

So, wut do u think of that?

Probably time to rebuke the mother's decision to enroll him in that particular school.

[A. Havnes]

Probably time to rebuke the mother's decision to enroll him in that particular school.

He's a senior this year, so there's not much chance in that. When I graduated, standards weren't high, but they sure were a lot higher than what today's kids have! That school is falling apart. Luckily, he follows the family tradition of getting most of his education through self study!

[ShowMeLiberty]

grammar is a codified system of language that is developed by linguists. The reason grammar is important is that without something to base our communication, there would be constant misunderstanding. There is plenty of room for colloquialisms, but in serious communications, grammar is important-according to the classical linguists and thinkers, as well as myself.

Grammar is definitely important in formal writing. So much of the argument about whether the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals or the National Guard was about the commas in that text and how they affected the meaning of it. Yes, grammar does matter.

[The_Orlonater]

Haha, this talk about grammar reminds me about school. :D

[Matt Collins]

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5- year phase-in plan that would become known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of "k". This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have one less letter There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like fotograf 20% shorter.


In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where! more komplikated changes are possible.


Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling.



Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and it should go away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as


replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".





During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil sensi bl riten styl.



Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru.


Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze forst plas.


If zis mad you smil, pleas pas on to oza pepl

[RSLudlum]

^^lmao!!!

[kathy88]

NO, you're not being too picky. It drives me crazy, as well!! Then again, I used to diagram sentences for fun, so I may not be sane. :)

Me too! *ah the good old days*

[Truth Warrior]

Oh, about 75 years ago, here in Amerika.<IMHO> :p :(


Deliberate Dumbing Down of America - E Book download is NOW FREE TO ALL!!!
Right click and "Save Link As"
Click here to begin download
File is 6.75 MB (http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf)

[acptulsa]

Matt, that joke is way too old for a font that big.

[A. Havnes]

Matt, that joke is way too old for a font that big.

But the joke was hillarious!

[The_Orlonater]

Lmfao.

[Matt Collins]

Matt, that joke is way too old for a font that big.Really? I had no idea. I just ran across it recently

[Josh_LA]

definitely, worse yet, kids are proud of it because the media and entertainment business embraces it. plus we are too PC to criticize it (when we do, we're called racist bigots because its intolerant to foreigners or blacks).

See Idiocracy, in the future (actually, not so future), people speak a mix of hillbilly, Valleygirl and inner city slang (today we call that redneck, california surfertard, and ebonics)

[orafi]

Grammar dying? Naaaaw, dat bitch just flat-out dead! ;)

My God, you're obviously very uncultured.

it's "Naaaaw, dat bitch ass jus f to the lat-OUUUUT deayadizzle fo shizzle, nucca "

Please don't make this simple mistake again and refrain from insulting our language in the future.

[RSLudlum]

My God, you're obviously very uncultured.

it's "Naaaaw, dat bitch ass jus f to the lat-OUUUUT deayadizzle fo shizzle, nucca "

Please don't make this simple mistake again and refrain from insulting our language in the future.

LOL, I thought it was strictly an oral language not written. ;)

[Theocrat]

This video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6H0i1RAdHk) is an example of how verbal grammar correction can be improved even within urban linguistic and colloquial communications. :D

[heavenlyboy34]

This video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6H0i1RAdHk) is an example of how verbal grammar correction can be improved even within urban linguistic and colloquial communications. :D

lol! That's the funniest thing I've ever seen you post! :):D

[A. Havnes]

That was a funny video, Theocrat! Well, my day just got three times better!

[Pepsi]

My grammar is pretty good I say. Considering todayz ztanderz among da teenz n kidz @t da skoolz! Zo there 1z n0 pr0blemz w1th 10d@yz gr@mme*z Te'koshif Waneti Sele-an-t'li Kastik-goh-yokulsu Fa-wak-glansu Bezhun-masu Kastik-goh-yokulsu sa'alemashaya sa'atik on-kharatik mal-nef-hinek grazhayek!11

[The_Orlonater]

Not at all.

Oh noez, the acronym is bad to Kade.

[akihabro]

I failed all 4 years of high school English. My grammar sucks, my spelling isn't so bad. I am not proud of this. To me its indicative of your intelligence, except when purposely spelling bad in text or internet chats. This is the only place I try to use correct English on the internet. I still think its an important skill. Its hard to communicate with people you can't understand.

[gaazn]

perfect grammar is stupid. the point of language is communicating. and if the best way to communicate is imperfect grammar, then that's the way to go.

[Kludge]

English is a bastard language, anyway. Inefficient, clumsy, and abused to make redundant rambling sound intelligent.

[Fox McCloud]

I the grammar

ok seriously though...I try, whenever possible to use proper grammar, though I must admit my skills often fail me, or at other times I just don't care...never-the-less, I'd argue that the English language is one of the most complex, grammatically, in the world; there's absolutely no stability about it...yes, all languages change over time, but the English language changes on a literally, yearly basis...not only that but we use a wide range of idioms, expressions, and other strange states of speech that it is enough to confuse anyone, even a native English speaker.

all in all though, one shouldn't always judge a book by the cover.

[BuddyRey]

I notice that over the past 20 years, it has become more acceptable to use atrocious grammar in formal speech. It ranges from common beginner level mistakes to borrowing so heavily from colloquialisms that the real meaning of language is lost. WTF?? :confused:

Why are we glorifying stupidity and ignorance? Am I being too picky?

Teenybopper "text lingo" and general Newspeak are the order of the day.

[M House]

English is a bastard language, anyway. Inefficient, clumsy, and abused to make redundant rambling sound intelligent.

I suppose you'd prefer German? Atleast, it's not Polish slurring several consonants to a Z is kinda difficult.

[acptulsa]

Actually, Kludge, the English language's complexity (difficult as it is) is rooted in a combination of elements from almost every language on Earth, and from a desire to make it useful enough to express the most difficult of concepts. The former truly makes it a 'melting pot' of ideas, while the latter makes it a favorite among, for example, theoretical physicists. The tool is useful. And there is a school of thought out there that insists that this language is a large part of the reason that first Britain, then the U.S. have ruled the world (to some degree or another) for a few centuries now. Simply put, such a language makes it possible not only to communicate, but helps us formulate complex theories. So, being able to rigidly use the language properly helps you become a free thinker.

It seems to me that to lose this tool to sabotage is to deprive ourselves of one of our biggest advantages on the world stage. My advice? Don't ever take Microsoft Word's word for it!

[apropos]

You can't kill grammar, but you can stop using it. :)

I heard an interesting definition of grammar recently, which was: grammar defines the rules by which we communicate the symbols of reality. Words like 'apple' or 'dog' are really just representations/symbols of reality - a red fruit or a four-legged furry animal - and in order to transmit ideas from one mind to another, both must have agreed upon rules for one to understand the other.

The more ill-defined these rules (grammar) become between people, the more likely it is people will misunderstand each other. It also provides more well educated people the ability to rule over others, which is why Jefferson was so forceful about an educated populace. It is interesting that if you asked 100 people today to define the words 'republican', 'democrat', 'socialist', or 'Christian', you would hear 100 different definitions. When people can't even agree on what a word means, you can't form an argument for it, against it, or why that thing is good or bad. This is why "diversity" is such a cancer in this society...no one ever defines what it means. It is just a vague notion floating along, sometimes this way, sometimes that, but never is it an actual ideology like Marxism.

When grammar is missing, logic (which is inextricably bound to grammar) becomes impossible. Your arguments are seldom accurate or precise. But this is what happens when you throw away 2000 years of teaching (previously called classical education) in favor of the incoherence of our modern curriculum.

Interestingly, those historical figures who are often called the most influential of the last 1000 years - Jefferson, Marx, Darwin, Freud, Shakespeare, Galileo, etc - all received a classical education. It is also interesting that radical individualism could eschew the parameters of grammar and thus lose their freedom through ignorance.

[lucius]

You can't kill grammar, but you can stop using it. :)

I heard an interesting definition of grammar recently, which was: grammar defines the rules by which we communicate the symbols of reality. Words like 'apple' or 'dog' are really just representations/symbols of reality - a red fruit or a four-legged furry animal - and in order to transmit ideas from one mind to another, both must have agreed upon rules for one to understand the other.

The more ill-defined these rules (grammar) become between people, the more likely it is people will misunderstand each other. It also provides more well educated people the ability to rule over others, which is why Jefferson was so forceful about an educated populace. It is interesting that if you asked 100 people today to define the words 'republican', 'democrat', 'socialist', or 'Christian', you would hear 100 different definitions. When people can't even agree on what a word means, you can't form an argument for it, against it, or why that thing is good or bad. This is why "diversity" is such a cancer in this society...no one ever defines what it means. It is just a vague notion floating along, sometimes this way, sometimes that, but never is it an actual ideology like Marxism.

When grammar is missing, logic (which is inextricably bound to grammar) becomes impossible. Your arguments are seldom accurate or precise. But this is what happens when you throw away 2000 years of teaching (previously called classical education) in favor of the incoherence of our modern curriculum.

Interestingly, those historical figures who are often called the most influential of the last 1000 years - Jefferson, Marx, Darwin, Freud, Shakespeare, Galileo, etc - all received a classical education. It is also interesting that radical individualism could eschew the parameters of grammar and thus lose their freedom through ignorance.

Very well put, but I think this is intentional social-engineering for control.

Download and read The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, whole book at link in pdf: http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf

"Iserbyt does very little hand-holding throughout the book. Commentary is sparse; readers can make their own connections and insert their own personal experiences. Iserbyt has strategically laid down key pieces to a giant jigsaw puzzle. The overall picture is purposefully arranged to portray on point of view. However, reader will be hard-pressed to come up with an alternative view. Just when it seems that one piece of the puzzle is an isolated, insignificant event, suddenly one comes across a stunning new entry that puts the pieces tightly together to form a vivid picture of the overall plan. Try as one might, the reader cannot escape the consistent, deliberate, 100-year plan to dumb down the populace." p. xxvii by

[heavenlyboy34]

Thanx for your input, y'all. :D ~hugs~

[V3n]

Is grammar dying?

[heavenlyboy34]

Is grammar dying?

lol...Sorry-My grammar book doesn't say anything specific in regards to proper capitalization in forum titles. :(

[V3n]

LOL! Just giving you a hard time! :D

[heavenlyboy34]

LOL! Just giving you a hard time! :D

I was being a wiseass myself! :D congrats!

[heavenlyboy34]

Very well put, but I think this is intentional social-engineering for control.

Download and read The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, whole book at link in pdf: http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf

"Iserbyt does very little hand-holding throughout the book. Commentary is sparse; readers can make their own connections and insert their own personal experiences. Iserbyt has strategically laid down key pieces to a giant jigsaw puzzle. The overall picture is purposefully arranged to portray on point of view. However, reader will be hard-pressed to come up with an alternative view. Just when it seems that one piece of the puzzle is an isolated, insignificant event, suddenly one comes across a stunning new entry that puts the pieces tightly together to form a vivid picture of the overall plan. Try as one might, the reader cannot escape the consistent, deliberate, 100-year plan to dumb down the populace." p. xxvii by

"Dumbing Down" is a great book! HB34 approved. :D

[Fox McCloud]

Is grammar dying?

is our children learning?

:p

[heavenlyboy34]

is our children learning?

:p

lol!! Nice GWB impersonation there. ;)

[nodope0695]

I dunno, just as Dubya. He is a master of slaughtering the English Language.

Hookt on foniks werkt fer me!

[Fox McCloud]

lol!! Nice GWB impersonation there. ;)

why thank you :P

[heavenlyboy34]

why thank you :P

y/w, amigo. ~hug~:)

[thasre]

Okay, so I'm a bit late to this whole argument, but I'm just going to throw in my 2 cents.

Being a Linguist, I think the effects of "bad grammar" are WAAAAAAAAAY overexaggerated, and I think part of the reason is that it's easier to point to things like, "Wait, you've got a dangling participle!" than it is to take issue with someone's arguments. I think the problem with our language is not so much how they SPEAK it as it is how they USE it. I mean, just compare Ron Paul with Barack Obama. Paul is infinitely more likely to make "serious" grammatical mistakes when he speaks, but what he says is infinitely more informed and rational. Obama never misSPEAKS, but misUNDERSTANDS a LOT.

The fact is, language changes, and things that were ungrammatical a hundred years ago might not be seen as ungrammatical nowadays (I would be willing to bet, for example, that most people on this forum use "momentarily" to mean what "presently" should mean, and vice versa). Also, with higher rates of literacy, we have more people who speak non-standard, even stigmatized, dialects who are (I think) RIGHTLY more visible and more included in public life than before. A hundred years ago, an intelligent person who spoke "sub-standard" English would have been excluded from public debate for NO OTHER REASON than that he spoke a "sub-standard" variety of English. Now that person can be more intimately involved in sharing his ideas with people. I don't think that's a bad thing. We just have to use better discernment in recognizing when people are ACTUALLY intelligent, compared to people who APPEAR to be.

[heavenlyboy34]

Thanx for contributing to the thread! You linguists are awesome! :D:) ~hugs~


Okay, so I'm a bit late to this whole argument, but I'm just going to throw in my 2 cents.

Being a Linguist, I think the effects of "bad grammar" are WAAAAAAAAAY overexaggerated, and I think part of the reason is that it's easier to point to things like, "Wait, you've got a dangling participle!" than it is to take issue with someone's arguments. I think the problem with our language is not so much how they SPEAK it as it is how they USE it. I mean, just compare Ron Paul with Barack Obama. Paul is infinitely more likely to make "serious" grammatical mistakes when he speaks, but what he says is infinitely more informed and rational. Obama never misSPEAKS, but misUNDERSTANDS a LOT.

The fact is, language changes, and things that were ungrammatical a hundred years ago might not be seen as ungrammatical nowadays (I would be willing to bet, for example, that most people on this forum use "momentarily" to mean what "presently" should mean, and vice versa). Also, with higher rates of literacy, we have more people who speak non-standard, even stigmatized, dialects who are (I think) RIGHTLY more visible and more included in public life than before. A hundred years ago, an intelligent person who spoke "sub-standard" English would have been excluded from public debate for NO OTHER REASON than that he spoke a "sub-standard" variety of English. Now that person can be more intimately involved in sharing his ideas with people. I don't think that's a bad thing. We just have to use better discernment in recognizing when people are ACTUALLY intelligent, compared to people who APPEAR to be.

[mellamojuana]

It's great to know that the men were excluded because of inferior [sic] English. I wonder why the women were excluded from public debate. :D Maybe their perfume was bad.

[Fox McCloud]

y/w, amigo. ~hug~:)

*hugs back* thanks. :)


Okay, so I'm a bit late to this whole argument, but I'm just going to throw in my 2 cents.

Being a Linguist, I think the effects of "bad grammar" are WAAAAAAAAAY overexaggerated, and I think part of the reason is that it's easier to point to things like, "Wait, you've got a dangling participle!" than it is to take issue with someone's arguments. I think the problem with our language is not so much how they SPEAK it as it is how they USE it. I mean, just compare Ron Paul with Barack Obama. Paul is infinitely more likely to make "serious" grammatical mistakes when he speaks, but what he says is infinitely more informed and rational. Obama never misSPEAKS, but misUNDERSTANDS a LOT.

The fact is, language changes, and things that were ungrammatical a hundred years ago might not be seen as ungrammatical nowadays (I would be willing to bet, for example, that most people on this forum use "momentarily" to mean what "presently" should mean, and vice versa). Also, with higher rates of literacy, we have more people who speak non-standard, even stigmatized, dialects who are (I think) RIGHTLY more visible and more included in public life than before. A hundred years ago, an intelligent person who spoke "sub-standard" English would have been excluded from public debate for NO OTHER REASON than that he spoke a "sub-standard" variety of English. Now that person can be more intimately involved in sharing his ideas with people. I don't think that's a bad thing. We just have to use better discernment in recognizing when people are ACTUALLY intelligent, compared to people who APPEAR to be.

I agree whole-heartedly, but at the same time, how difficult is it to use proper tenses, and arrange sentences in a somewhat logical fashion? It's just like the line with Bush that I comedically put up there "Is our children learning?" a line like that can make you seem like a below-average person of intelligence, when, as a matter of fact, it may be because you're just not taking the time to arrange/think things through properly.

[steve005]

QUOTE]Is grammer dying?[[/QUOTE]
no, its changing though. I say what I mean, and mean what I say,

[The Rebel Poet]

I notice that over the past 20 years, it has become more acceptable to use atrocious grammar in formal speech. It ranges from common beginner level mistakes to borrowing so heavily from colloquialisms that the real meaning of language is lost. WTF?? :confused:

Why are we glorifying stupidity and ignorance? Am I being too picky?

I know English grammar fairly well, and this change in grammar is a topic I have thought a lot about. I believe it is very complicated, so I'll leave you with this: Good English grammar is just bad Ingvaeonic.

[kcchiefs6465]

tl;dr

[luctor-et-emergo]

I try to do my best, English however is not my first language.
The quality of the grammar - how much time I spend thinking about what I type - totally depends on where I type it.
Private communication with friends probably has the lowest priority for correct spelling and grammar while anything work related has a high priority.

[Lindsey]

My grammar has a lot of room for improvement. The one thing that bothers me though, is the death of the adverb. Why do so few people use adverbs anymore? Sometimes it takes a lot not to say, "ly", when other people are using adjectives in place of an adverb, or to correct "good" with "well'.

[Seraphim]

Grammar ain't dying, whatchu talking 'bout foo'!

[oyarde]

Looks as thought there are at least five people in this thread who are banned.What do you make of that ?

[juleswin]

I think your overreacting. There just trying to be folksy, appealing to the common man and not trying to butcher you're precious English language :)

[Barrex]

Yes.... and I killed it on this forum....

[osan]

I notice that over the past 20 years, it has become more acceptable to use atrocious grammar in formal speech. It ranges from common beginner level mistakes to borrowing so heavily from colloquialisms that the real meaning of language is lost. WTF?? :confused:

Why are we glorifying stupidity and ignorance? Am I being too picky?


Grammar is not alive as such and therefore cannot "die". It's use, however, can and indeed is. This is not by accident. This has been very carefully crafted for effect and the result has been devastating.

Language is the single most important skill any human being ever learns. Period. Any other non-reflexive capability anyone cares to name as being superior in significance I can rapidly demote as the falsehood that it is. Grammar, of course, is the foundation of language. As grammar use decays, so goes the ability to communicate and think. I am very confident in my assertion that 99.999% of everything you have ever explicitly thought would have been impossible were it not for the facility of language. Without it there would be no abstract thought - not even of the most rudimentary nature.

You are not being too picky. You are on the money - dead center.

As to your questions - are you serious? Stupidity and ignorance are the conditions most necessary to the success of the tyrant's designs. He can go nowhere without them because even apathy is largely founded upon them. Theye need the critical mass of the mob to be as intellectually pliable as possible or they fail. The smarter the people, the less able is Tyrannis Rex to gain consent. On the average, Americans are shockingly stupid people on an almost stupefying array of fronts.

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

The ongoing radio program/Internet downloadable podcast A Way with Words (http://www.waywordradio.org/) discusses etymology, grammar and takes listener questions about the English language. It's free.

Forum members with a little money may be interested in The Story of Human Language by John McWhorter (http://www.amazon.com/Story-Human-Language-Great-Courses/dp/1565859472). It is part of the Great Courses lecture series from The Teaching Company. For the curious, below is a list of titles for each lecture:


1 What Is Language?
2 When Language Began
3 How Language Changes—Sound Change
4 How Language Changes—Building New Material
5 How Language Changes—Meaning and Order
6 How Language Changes—Many Directions
7 How Language Changes—Modern English
8 Language Families—Indo-European
9 Language Families—Tracing Indo-European
10 Language Families—Diversity of Structures
11 Language Families—Clues to the Past
12 The Case Against the World’s First Language
13 The Case For the World’s First Language
14 Dialects—Subspecies of Species
15 Dialects—Where Do You Draw the Line?
16 Dialects—Two Tongues in One Mouth
17 Dialects—The Standard as Token of the Past
18 Dialects—Spoken Style, Written Style
19 Dialects—The Fallacy of Blackboard Grammar
20 Language Mixture—Words
21 Language Mixture—Grammar
22 Language Mixture—Language Areas
23 Language Develops Beyond the Call of Duty
24 Language Interrupted
25 A New Perspective on the Story of English
26 Does Culture Drive Language Change?
27 Language Starts Over—Pidgins
28 Language Starts Over—Creoles I
29 Language Starts Over—Creoles II
30 Language Starts Over—Signs of the New
31 Language Starts Over—The Creole Continuum
32 What Is Black English?
33 Language Death—The Problem
34 Language Death—Prognosis
35 Artificial Languages
36 Finale—Master Class

I listened to the series and found the professor to be very enjoyable in terms of delivery and content.

[bolil]

Yes, and Huck Finn as well. However, the language in those books was used for artistic effect and depiction of a historical period. Scholars still use those books to understand the culture of Twain's time. You should also note that when Twain was writing essays/non fiction, he used standard english.

What this discussion is about is deliberate dumbing down of language in day-to-day as well as "academic" use.
Not being too picky at all, are you.

[The Rebel Poet]

NO, you're not being too picky. It drives me crazy, as well!! Then again, I used to diagram sentences for fun, so I may not be sane. :)
I LOVE sentence diagramming!

[osan]

Also, I think that "formal speech" is on the way out. I think language is a fluid thing that can and should change with a culture that is becoming less formal on all fronts.

It is precisely this sort of thinking that dooms the human race. You need a rethink.

[osan]

I failed all 4 years of high school English. My grammar sucks, my spelling isn't so bad. I am not proud of this. To me its indicative of your intelligence, except when purposely spelling bad in text or internet chats. This is the only place I try to use correct English on the internet. I still think its an important skill. Its hard to communicate with people you can't understand.


I like the fact that you recognize and admit the shortcoming. The good news is you can correct it to a great degree. Nothing is perfect, save perhaps myself of course, but you can do great things for yourself of you so choose. Kudos.

[heavenlyboy34]

The ongoing radio program/Internet downloadable podcast A Way with Words (http://www.waywordradio.org/) discusses etymology, grammar and takes listener questions about the English language. It's free.

Forum members with a little money may be interested in The Story of Human Language by John McWhorter (http://www.amazon.com/Story-Human-Language-Great-Courses/dp/1565859472). It is part of the Great Courses lecture series from The Teaching Company. For the curious, below is a list of titles for each lecture:

1 What Is Language?
2 When Language Began
3 How Language Changes—Sound Change
4 How Language Changes—Building New Material
5 How Language Changes—Meaning and Order
6 How Language Changes—Many Directions
7 How Language Changes—Modern English
8 Language Families—Indo-European
9 Language Families—Tracing Indo-European
10 Language Families—Diversity of Structures
11 Language Families—Clues to the Past
12 The Case Against the World’s First Language
13 The Case For the World’s First Language
14 Dialects—Subspecies of Species
15 Dialects—Where Do You Draw the Line?
16 Dialects—Two Tongues in One Mouth
17 Dialects—The Standard as Token of the Past
18 Dialects—Spoken Style, Written Style
19 Dialects—The Fallacy of Blackboard Grammar
20 Language Mixture—Words
21 Language Mixture—Grammar
22 Language Mixture—Language Areas
23 Language Develops Beyond the Call of Duty
24 Language Interrupted
25 A New Perspective on the Story of English
26 Does Culture Drive Language Change?
27 Language Starts Over—Pidgins
28 Language Starts Over—Creoles I
29 Language Starts Over—Creoles II
30 Language Starts Over—Signs of the New
31 Language Starts Over—The Creole Continuum
32 What Is Black English?
33 Language Death—The Problem
34 Language Death—Prognosis
35 Artificial Languages
36 Finale—Master Class

I listened to the series and found the professor to be very enjoyable in terms of delivery and content.
I have a similar course by McWhorter (on the broader topic of "linguistics", but covers most of that material)-got it some ~3 months ago. He distinguishes "dialect", "semantic shift", and so on. IMO, the butchering of language that I've complained about in this thread isn't a true linguistic phenomenon.

[Original_Intent]

Is grammar dying?

No, she just had some bad Mexican food yesterday...

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

I have a similar course by McWhorter (on the broader topic of "linguistics", but covers most of that material)-got it some ~3 months ago. He distinguishes "dialect", "semantic shift", and so on. IMO, the butchering of language that I've complained about in this thread isn't a true linguistic phenomenon.

Is this more along the line of what you were thinking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmvOgW6iV2s

[Matthew5]

Proper grammar should be used irregardless.

[osan]

Okay, so I'm a bit late to this whole argument, but I'm just going to throw in my 2 cents.

Being a Linguist, I think the effects of "bad grammar" are WAAAAAAAAAY overexaggerated, and I think part of the reason is that it's easier to point to things like, "Wait, you've got a dangling participle!" than it is to take issue with someone's arguments.

Firstly, not all grammatical errors are of equal significance. As a "linguist" you should be sorely aware of that.


I think the problem with our language is not so much how they SPEAK it as it is how they USE it. I mean, just compare Ron Paul with Barack Obama. Paul is infinitely more likely to make "serious" grammatical mistakes when he speaks, but what he says is infinitely more informed and rational. Obama never misSPEAKS, but misUNDERSTANDS a LOT.


Grammar is basic to the way in which language is used. It is basic to the way a person thinks. You may be a technical linguist, but it appears that somewhere along the line you missed the cognitive psychological significance of that to which you lay claim as being "your thing".

While I am not a formal linguist, I am an honest to god computer scientist - vis-a-vis a mere programmer. I have done both my under- and graduate work in computer science and have done a fair to middling amount of work on language design and implementation, for business and teaching alike. Because I have taught other people language design it has been central to that ability that I understand the nature of language at the fundamental level. Therefore, I have applied myself to that end and have given the question of language's nature and significance in terms of its characteristics of semantic transport and how it enables conceptual thinking far and away too much air time in my own head. To suggest that grammar is not crucially central to the most basic aspects of a human being's ability to understand and reason is not credibly supportable.


We just have to use better discernment in recognizing when people are ACTUALLY intelligent, compared to people who APPEAR to be.

Here we agree, but that does not in any manner or degree diminish the crucial nature of language and, by extension, grammar.

[heavenlyboy34]

Is this more along the line of what you were thinking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmvOgW6iV2s
Yes indeed! He's a great lecturer. :)

[speciallyblend]

doesn't consider rpf formal speech! or any online forum! dat be da truth! I love pissin off grmmars naziiis.

[jkr]

Proper grammar should be used irregardless.

HEH HEH

[AFPVet]

Kids what do you mean we dont need no proper grammar and no mechanics we talk just fine so lets eat children

:p

[Matthew5]

HEH HEH

"Irregardless" always make me smile. :)

[heavenlyboy34]

My grammar has a lot of room for improvement. The one thing that bothers me though, is the death of the adverb. Why do so few people use adverbs anymore? Sometimes it takes a lot not to say, "ly", when other people are using adjectives in place of an adverb, or to correct "good" with "well'.
I suspect it's because of the written language bias. Adverbs in -ly are considered lazy/weak/"bad" prose-especially in fiction. Unlike cultures without writing, literary conventions tend to spill over into spoken language (and vice-versa sometimes).

[heavenlyboy34]

I like the fact that you recognize and admit the shortcoming. The good news is you can correct it to a great degree. Nothing is perfect, save perhaps myself of course, but you can do great things for yourself of you so choose. Kudos.
What a humble fellow ye be! ;) :D

[osan]

What a humble fellow ye be! ;) :D


My excessive and genuine humility is the cross I bear for being so fab.

Wonka wonka vvvvvt vvvvt vvvt.

[MelissaWV]

how is noam chomsky good at linguistics? I don't understand

This post frightened me for a moment. I thought JTL was back.

[MelissaWV]

The number of errors in this thread make me sad.

[Matthew5]

The number of errors in this thread make me sad.

make(s) :D

[MelissaWV]

make(s) :D

I love you.

[Matthew5]

I love you.

I'm a chronic teacher's pet. Cookie, please!

[I<3Liberty]

It's dying, but not for one single reason. There are many reasons from lack of grammar education to pure carelessness.

Personally, I typically read and post on RPF from my iPad or iPhone during a commercial or while I'm waiting to meet someone, etc., so it's not the same as sitting down at my desk to write an essay for class. I'd obviously put more consideration into an essay or blog post than a tweet or reply on RPF. I think this holds true for most people.

[Carson]

I'm a chronic teacher's pet. Cookie, please!

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/thebegining/29cafec4173c5c33d0b3b77488abecce0_large.jpg

[speciallyblend]

gremmar, isa luv gremmar nezis http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jmF900DHKk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jmF900DHKk

[osan]

Would you agree that the sad state of national culture encourages imprecise thinking

I would assess the statement as accurate

[osan]

I'm a chronic teacher's pet. Cookie, please!


Define "cookie"

[fr33]

If you think my grammar and typing is bad here, you ain't seen nothing. :D


http://youtube.com/watch?v=88V9IcwtIeM

[Matthew5]

Define "cookie"

I like homemade chocolate chip (with walnuts), but I guess peanut butter would do in a pinch.

[Matthew5]

If you think my grammar and typing is bad here, you ain't seen nothing. :D


http://youtube.com/watch?v=88V9IcwtIeM

My first week in Oklahoma was like this.