3 ms·

Bear in mind that descriptive grammarians determine what is and is not grammatical based not on abstract principles of grammar, most of which originate in the p

Bear in mind that descriptive grammarians determine what is and is not grammatical based not on abstract principles of grammar, most of which originate in the prescriptive tradition of the 18th and 19th centuries, but on actual recorded use (i.e. in the same way that dictionaries determine the meanings of words). In other words, if there is a broad tradition of people saying and writing, "I can do that easy", it is de facto grammatically correct to do so.

Nwallins 17y ago
> if there is a broad tradition of people saying and writing, "I can do that easy" But is there? It sounds awful to my ears. Does this not just boil down to the distinction between prescriptive vs descriptive camps? I believe there is in fact a broad tradition of people saying "I be (going to the store)", but I would say that usage of "be" is incorrect. As well with "I'm gonna ..." or even "Ongonna ...". This type of language can certainly be used "correctly" in prose, to add color and flavor, but I would never expect to see it in a proper non-fiction context.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- scott_s 17y ago
  If people say "I can do that easy," they draw out the "easy."
  - Nwallins 17y ago
    Shoot, even I can do that -- easy!
cromulent 17y ago
I completely agree with baddox. It is the incorrect use of the word "easy" when there is a perfectly good word "easily" at hand. "I can do that. Easy." I would accept. However, this is an interesting point. Good grammar used to be set by those who who were either educated or at the top of society. There were not many recordings of people using bad grammar, by definition. Now we have a million recordings of "i can haz cheezburger". I fear that the mechanism you describe - actual recorded use - has been opened by the web to all, and good grammar in times to come may be dictated by YouTube comments.
- RyanMcGreal 17y ago
  I can see your point, but even the notable works of highly-educated classical writers regarded as producing the best of English literature are rife with the most egregious violations of prescriptive grammar.

Nwallins 17y ago

> if there is a broad tradition of people saying and writing, "I can do that easy" But is there? It sounds awful to my ears. Does this not just boil down to the distinction between prescriptive vs descriptive camps? I believe there is in fact a broad tradition of people saying "I be (going to the store)", but I would say that usage of "be" is incorrect. As well with "I'm gonna ..." or even "Ongonna ...". This type of language can certainly be used "correctly" in prose, to add color and flavor, but I would never expect to see it in a proper non-fiction context.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
scott_s 17y ago
If people say "I can do that easy," they draw out the "easy."
- Nwallins 17y ago
  Shoot, even I can do that -- easy!

cromulent 17y ago

I completely agree with baddox. It is the incorrect use of the word "easy" when there is a perfectly good word "easily" at hand. "I can do that. Easy." I would accept. However, this is an interesting point. Good grammar used to be set by those who who were either educated or at the top of society. There were not many recordings of people using bad grammar, by definition. Now we have a million recordings of "i can haz cheezburger". I fear that the mechanism you describe - actual recorded use - has been opened by the web to all, and good grammar in times to come may be dictated by YouTube comments.

RyanMcGreal 17y ago
I can see your point, but even the notable works of highly-educated classical writers regarded as producing the best of English literature are rife with the most egregious violations of prescriptive grammar.