Grammar-isms

In an effort to practice positive thinking towards (hopefully!) getting a job in the fall, I recently started to tentatively plan a super cool linguistics unit. I think it's kind of ridiculous that most English classes absolutely ignore linguistics (you know, the study of language). I think it's crucial, because looking at linguistics makes grammar so much more approachable and studying English so much more enjoyable.

There are essentially two schools of thought when it comes to grammar: the prescriptivists, and the descriptivists.

Prescriptivists= people who are all about the rules of language. They love Latin, and try to make English seem Latin. They have some French cousins who created a whole government department to keep their language "pure." They are also the people who will correct your grammar. (Don't hate me if you're a prescriptivist; I just think you make grammar no fun at all and give people headaches about split infinitives and other such nonsense.)

Descriptivists= people who believe that language is all about how you use it. These people understand that standard English is only of many dialects; each dialect follows unique linguistic rules, and is legitimate in its own right. If they were to talk about correctness, they would tell you that it depends on the context of the usage (beautiful thing called pragmatics). So, standard grammar in scholastic or business settings is entirely appropriate, but using nonstandard dialects (think of things like ain't, ya'll, etc.) is equally appropriate in other settings. To these people, it's all about using the dialect that will lead to effective communication. I am totally a descriptivist.

Is anyone still reading?

It feels so great to be thinking about this stuff again! Here are some things to think about should you like to ponder the English language with me:

*The word "you" is such an interesting word. This word is both singular and plural; in order to clarify people have applied logical pluralizing patterns and came up with ya'll and youse. At one time it was formal, but now it's informal (somewhere in language history "thee/thou" and "you" just straight up switched places- weird!). Who even knew such a little word had so much behind it?

*When someone asks you "How are you?" It is not at all incorrect to answer "I'm good." Am is a linking verb that should be followed by adjectives (like good) and well is mostly an adverb and only kind of an adjective. Well would be appropriate for talking about your health, but not so much your state of being. I was so happy when I learned that. I hate, hate, hate it when people have some snobby comment about how you really meant to say you're well; similarly the "may/can" thing. From now on, I'm just going to say, "Nope. I use adjectives after linking verbs, pal." (Thank you Grammar Girl.)

*Something I've seen a lot lately is people using an instead of a in front of an "h." Unless you're British, or it's a silent "h," it's unnecessary. The whole point is to make sentences more fluid. Two vowels next to each other is not fluid; try saying a 'istoric. Not easy. Now try an 'istoric. Piece of cake. But, if you don't have a charming British accent, you can say a historic just fine, and probably the deceptively sophisticated-looking an historic is actually kind of awkward to get out. Neat, huh?

If you have any thoughts, I'd love to hear them. I'm kind of curious if anyone stuck with me through the whole post.