Standardization
The impression I got from the beginning of chapter one was that the writers of our textbook seemed to be kind of negative about strict standards for grammar. While they made distinctions between different types of grammar, the language they used to describe the traditional grammar (in what we think of as the "correct" way of writing/speaking) was largely (in my opinion) negative. But I think a flip side to being negative about standardization is that there could be a sense of gratefulness that it does exist. Language was such a mess in the medieval period (at least to read today) because there was no standardization. I think it's good that we have something standard to fall back on (and I am in no way one of those grammar policemen who interrupt people in conversation to correct their grammar) but it's also nice that we have the flexibility for different types of grammar that allows our language to morph as time goes on.
So my question is, do you think it's necessary to have a standard set of rules for language or not?
posted by feebeef @ 8:52 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Unfortunately, the world in which we take part, will judge us based on our grammar and how we speak and write, therefore, a standard set of rules is necessary. While grammar may not change very much, I think the words we use do change. The example the author gave about Pinocchio is a good one because while every translation is grammatically correct, only the words have changed. I think our society has grown more open to different ways of speaking, whether they are traditional or not as long as professionalism is maintained. Many of us, after taking this class, will probably continue to speak and write with our own personal grammar but with more awareness of the “correct” way we should write.
I say yes, there should be rules, because otherwise it would be like Middle English with people making up random spellings, and grammar could be everywhere. At least if there's standardization then people can all understand each other when they all know the standard. It's like playing D&D: you have to be able to speak Common because there are so many different races interacting, and everyone knows Common so they can communicate with each other. I don't know if that made sense, but I'm tying it back to English and the different dialects people speak.
I definitely think there should be rules, because without them the language would be incredibly difficult to learn (with all our exceptions, English is hard anyway, but this would simply make it worse).
I agree with Marilyn in that we won't have a lifelong-grammar-changing experience in this class, as far as what we produce is concerned, but we will be forever more aware of how we ought to be writing in order to be perceived as well-educated.
I can't imagine a language without rules. Even if you never wrote them down there would be certain ways to say things. All languages are not universal, but it is universal that all languages have rules.
I think that our language needs more rules and standards. We have so many exceptions to our rules that learning English is exceedingly difficult. Many native speakers (myself included) have difficulties being correct all of the time, which is quite irritating. It seems to me that rules and standards exist (or should exist) to make language easier.
Post a Comment
<< Home