Language column disregards history, development of English
Tweet
Dan Faas’ column, Abbreviations Killing English (SN 10/14), is more exasperating than educational. The notion that the English language ever could undergo “complete bastardization” cheerfully ignores the fact that English is itself a bastard language.
In the wake of invasions by the Norse Vikings and the Norman French, English speakers adopted thousands of loan words from those two languages. The grammatical structure of English has, over time, shifted dramatically: Old English nouns were once inflected for case, gender, number and class, whereas present-day English nouns generally are inflected only for number. Since the invention of the printing press, English vowel sounds have shifted to such a degree that our orthographical system no longer matches our oral pronunciation.
Most importantly, all of this is normal and none of this impedes our ability to use English as a means of effective communication. And nothing ever will. The idea that any English speakers could “(denigrate) our language down to the bare minimum” is based on feelings, not facts.
Does Mr. Faas intend to prove that our vocab is shrinking to include only the words Miley Cyrus, with assorted grunting sounds thrown in for good measure, and that we will soon find ourselves unable to express OMG sry i txted so much i killed the eng lang? Unlikely.
The fact that Mr. Faas is the proud owner of a student newspaper column and three-quarters of a college degree does not necessarily lend academic legitimacy to his linguistic pet peeves. I would totes LOL if I weren’t so over it.
Reese Havlatka
graduate student
Commentary
Add your $0.02, go to the comment form or follow the comment feed
Student
(10/19/09 12:44pm)Report
THANK YOU! Languages have been changing for centuries and “simplifying” or even “bastardizing” completely ignores how languages come about: gradual change.
What do people think Spanish and French are? They’re, essentially, “bastardized” forms of Latin and yet they are no less useful for communication than Latin. I could go on. Once again, thank you for shedding the light of reason on this ill-informed article.
Amie
(10/20/09 2:00pm)Report
Yes!
While I do appreciate a well placed semicolon, grammatical elitism is hardly attractive… or helpful.
I think the original article could have been more solution oriented had the author discussed his concerns in a broader context (education, literacy in the U.S., etc.) followed by some suggestions for improving the problem he identified.
Call me crazy, but I turn to newspapers for news. Rants can be saved for blogs or journals.
J
(10/20/09 10:28pm)Report
The problem we need to properly address is the widening knowledge and language gap among different education levels of citizens. Today, the average citizen is hopelessly unequipped to understand written laws he is supposed to honor and obey.
The written laws could be written in a very bare-bones way so that anyone with a high school education could easily understand them. If this were done, then knowledge tyranny could not take place.
Knowledge and language tyranny takes place when a professional, or someone with decorum and apparent expertise, especially attorneys, politicians, and physicians, purposely use opaque language when it is not necessary, merely for legitimizing their own fees, salaries, and overeducation.
This doesn’t mean that all medical and legal Latin should be tossed out of the United States of America. But, it does mean that we should remember the Catholic Church did the same thing to the average French, Italian, British, and German peoples who did not know Latin. (I edited the last paragraph to change words I thought were being purposely overly-complicated).
J
(10/20/09 10:31pm)Report
So, I will say this as clearly as I can. The Federal Tax Laws are tyranny because they are impossible for individuals to understand and follow in good faith.
I invite everyone to go to the Law Library between Eli Broad and the Cyclotron. Go to the federal statutes, and ask the Librarian where the “Interval Revenue Code” is. Behold the beast! It is volumes, and volumes, of obtuse, meaningless, language tyranny.
Repeal the whole thing with one number: a flat tax percentage, or nothing at all.
Dan
(10/21/09 10:30am)Report
This article is fantastic for anyone who enjoys making up words. I’ll admit it, I do.