Whose in charge of the English Language?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the authority and evolution of the English language, particularly focusing on spelling conventions, informal versus formal usage, and the role of dictionaries in shaping language. Participants express curiosity about who governs language changes and the implications of these changes on accepted forms of communication.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the authority of dictionaries like Webster's in determining correct language usage, suggesting that language evolves based on popular usage.
  • There is a distinction made between formal and informal English, with some arguing that informal language can change quickly while formal language evolves more slowly.
  • One participant notes that Noah Webster's dictionary established standard spellings, but questions the arbitrary nature of these conventions.
  • Another participant argues that spelling conventions are arbitrary and challenges the notion that there are universal truths governing language.
  • Concerns are raised about the acceptance of informal contractions like "gonna" and the implications for language integrity.
  • Some participants express frustration with the inclusion of certain words in dictionaries, viewing it as a corruption of the language.
  • There is a discussion about pronunciation variations and how they relate to the concept of correct language use.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on who controls the English language or the implications of evolving language conventions. Disagreements exist regarding the validity of informal language and the role of dictionaries in language standardization.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the limitations of language conventions, noting that spelling and pronunciation can vary widely and are subject to change over time. The discussion reflects a tension between traditional views of language authority and contemporary usage.

  • #31
This thread reminds me: anyone here ever read the book Frindle? For those who haven't, it's a middle school book about a kid who has a grammar Nazi type English teacher who is in love with the dictionary. In order to retaliate he decides to make up a new word, Frindle, which means pen, and hilarity ensues. Really a cute little book. :smile:
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #32
Andromeda321 said:
In order to retaliate he decides to make up a new word, Frindle, which means pen, and hilarity ensues. Really a cute little book. :smile:
Puts me in mind of my grade 10 Marketing course. Nobody else in class had ever heard the word 'widget', which the teacher used when setting up a hypothetical situation. I got into a public, year-long conversation with him regarding what kind of widgets we preferred, and ideas for design variations, and speculation about the future of widgets... The other students were going nuts trying to get us to tell them what the hell a widget was. We never did. :devil:
 
  • #33
Ahhhhh Danger. You're missing out. A few years back, John Smiths (beer) had a lovely advert, showing off the new inclusion of a Widget in their cans. Just a plastic ball which released nitrogen (I think) into the beer when opened, making it lovely and smooth. Mmmmm.

The song went something like this:

"Widget! It's got a widget, a lovely widget, a widget it has got"

Try and sing along!
 
  • #34
brewnog said:
Try and sing along!
Hi Noggie;
I've been known to demolish a pint or two of Smith's bitters whilst playing darts. Haven't had any in over a decade, though. Guinness uses those (what we call 'squibs') for their canned draught, but I didn't know anyone else did.
Some of our language differences put us about half way between you and the Yanks. A lot of our everyday language is shared with them rather than you. I still remember a joke that I thought was hilarious and none of my friends got it. It was in one of Ronny Corbett's monologues from 'The Two Ronnies'. He mentioned that he'd "got a traffic summons for parking on the pavement. Well... I didn't really park, you know, on the pavement. I was overtaking an omnibus on the near side and ran out of petrol." Of course it was his totally benign, innocent delivery that really made it funny, but I had to translate the terms before my mates could get it at all. :rolleyes:
 
  • #35
Good old Ronnie, bless his socks.

I almost wonder if he did it on purpose...
 
  • #36
brewnog said:
Good old Ronnie, bless his socks.

I almost wonder if he did it on purpose...
I don't believe that's something that we mortals are meant to know.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
13K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
7K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
16K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
23K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
18K