Language is largely not prescriptive, no matter how much people want it to be. Prescriptivism is like holding your hand out to stop a river, it completely misunderstands how language flows over time.
A language simply “is”. If you’re trying to tell people what it is, you’re being descriptive; if you tell them how it should be, you’re being prescriptive. Both things have their place, even if linguists (when studying a language) focus on one to the detriment of other.
The problem is that short-sighted prescriptions are so bloody common that they take the spotlight from more reasonable things like “don’t use slurs, you’re demeaning people” or “write in a way suitable for your target audience”, etc.
Yes, this. Nobody came along and decreed the dictionary was descriptive - which would itself be a prescriptivist view of the world - it just is.
Linguistics rejected prescriptivism because it is a failed model of reality. I think the reason so many people cling to a prescriptive model is because in school we were taught obedience above all else, which is a terrible way of educating people, but maybe it helps to maintain a subservient class of workers.
Depends on what you mean by that. I’m not a linguist, but I’ve heard a lot of them speak, so I hope someone more qualified will correct me where I am wrong.
At an early age language needs to be taught in it’s present localized state to give a base structure for learning. With that language learning we need to teach structure of language locally and also more generally. Later in their learning, if we taught everyone in society the reality that linguists already know, that language changes and evolves over time and place, and teach language basics like how language itself works, we see better outcomes. The worst outcomes we see in language learning is when we teach only rote memorization of sounds, spelling, and rigid grammar. We can still teach that stuff, but it needs to be taught along side general language structures, language theory, and an understanding of practical realities to see better outcomes.
Whatever we do, language will always change rapidly over time. It’s better to teach in a way that prepares people for the fluidity of language, than to teach people only the rigid structures that will inevitably change.
I recently had a conversation with someone 1/3 my age. Allegedly, we both spoke english. Neither of us understood a damn thing the other said. I know this is an extreme example, and not representative of most contexts, but I think it’s worth looking at as an extreme example of how lack of language prescription can go horribly wrong.
But I bet you could understand someone that used most if not all of those words right? Because you learnt them, even after adulthood? You can learn and understand these new words too.
Also I find it incredibly hard to believe they couldn’t understand you. Even if the young generation uses a ton of slang with each other, they interact with teachers, parents, grandparents, media such as TV and movies etc I could go on. Unless you were intentionally using very old or foreign slang heavily I find it near unthinkable they actually couldn’t understand you.
Edit: I just noticed you’re the same person I replied to in another comment. I wanna be clear I wasn’t seeking you out or something, I barely look at user names, it was coincidence.
On one hand, inappropriate use of language like “literally” bugs me too. On the other hand, difficulty understanding other English speakers is an attitude thing.
If you don’t know what a word or a new use of a word means… you should find out.
Trying to assert that language should stay the way it was when you learned it is frankly lazy.
‘Cap’ means ‘lie’. If someone says “No cap?”, they’re asking “For real?” or “Are you serious?”. If someone says “You’re capping”, they’re saying you are not telling the truth.
Language is largely not prescriptive, no matter how much people want it to be. Prescriptivism is like holding your hand out to stop a river, it completely misunderstands how language flows over time.
A language simply “is”. If you’re trying to tell people what it is, you’re being descriptive; if you tell them how it should be, you’re being prescriptive. Both things have their place, even if linguists (when studying a language) focus on one to the detriment of other.
The problem is that short-sighted prescriptions are so bloody common that they take the spotlight from more reasonable things like “don’t use slurs, you’re demeaning people” or “write in a way suitable for your target audience”, etc.
Yes, this. Nobody came along and decreed the dictionary was descriptive - which would itself be a prescriptivist view of the world - it just is.
Linguistics rejected prescriptivism because it is a failed model of reality. I think the reason so many people cling to a prescriptive model is because in school we were taught obedience above all else, which is a terrible way of educating people, but maybe it helps to maintain a subservient class of workers.
Then what’s the point of teaching language to children in school?
Depends on what you mean by that. I’m not a linguist, but I’ve heard a lot of them speak, so I hope someone more qualified will correct me where I am wrong.
At an early age language needs to be taught in it’s present localized state to give a base structure for learning. With that language learning we need to teach structure of language locally and also more generally. Later in their learning, if we taught everyone in society the reality that linguists already know, that language changes and evolves over time and place, and teach language basics like how language itself works, we see better outcomes. The worst outcomes we see in language learning is when we teach only rote memorization of sounds, spelling, and rigid grammar. We can still teach that stuff, but it needs to be taught along side general language structures, language theory, and an understanding of practical realities to see better outcomes.
Whatever we do, language will always change rapidly over time. It’s better to teach in a way that prepares people for the fluidity of language, than to teach people only the rigid structures that will inevitably change.
I recently had a conversation with someone 1/3 my age. Allegedly, we both spoke english. Neither of us understood a damn thing the other said. I know this is an extreme example, and not representative of most contexts, but I think it’s worth looking at as an extreme example of how lack of language prescription can go horribly wrong.
Here’s a bunch of words that either didn’t exist at all, or didn’t exist in their current form/meaning when you were growing up:
smartphone, app, emoji, meme, livestream, crowdfunding, cryptocurrency, blockchain, NFT, ransomware, selfie, vlog, podcast, cloud computing, Al, algorithmic bias, social distancing, contact tracing, microaggression, cancel culture, virtue signalling, gamification, enshitification, deepfake, influencer, cybersecurity, carbon footprint, microplastic, drone, smart home, loT, cryptocurrency, biohacking, wearable, crowdsourcing, clickbait.
But I bet you could understand someone that used most if not all of those words right? Because you learnt them, even after adulthood? You can learn and understand these new words too.
Also I find it incredibly hard to believe they couldn’t understand you. Even if the young generation uses a ton of slang with each other, they interact with teachers, parents, grandparents, media such as TV and movies etc I could go on. Unless you were intentionally using very old or foreign slang heavily I find it near unthinkable they actually couldn’t understand you.
Edit: I just noticed you’re the same person I replied to in another comment. I wanna be clear I wasn’t seeking you out or something, I barely look at user names, it was coincidence.
No cap?
no one has successfully explained to me what that means.
On one hand, inappropriate use of language like “literally” bugs me too. On the other hand, difficulty understanding other English speakers is an attitude thing.
If you don’t know what a word or a new use of a word means… you should find out.
Trying to assert that language should stay the way it was when you learned it is frankly lazy.
‘Cap’ means ‘lie’. If someone says “No cap?”, they’re asking “For real?” or “Are you serious?”. If someone says “You’re capping”, they’re saying you are not telling the truth.