4 ms·
> The advantage to prescriptive rules for language is that you don't lose the context of a language over time or distance That's assuming that even works. I'm
by kmm 9y ago
> The advantage to prescriptive rules for language is that you don't lose the context of a language over time or distance
That's assuming that even works. I'm not sure it's clear prescribing language rules has ever worked at stopping the natural evolution of language. Most grammar nazi's (if there's a less politically laden term, let me know) focus on a small amount of "common mistakes" but don't seem to care or even notice the avalanche of tiny changes to language occurring at the same time. And do they win with regard to the changes they do focus on? Even in 1874, the "correct" way to say people are building a house in the passive voice was "the house is building", which even in the most formal communications has been completely replaced with the nonsensical and uncouth "the house is being built".[0]
0: http://volokh.com/2011/01/15/the-best-writers-say-the-house-is-building-not-the-house-is-being-built/ http://volokh.com/2011/01/15/the-best-writers-say-the-house-...
- kbenson 9y ago> Most grammar nazi's (if there's a less politically laden term, let me know) Well, from the article, grammar maven. That said, grammar nazi nicely codifies quite a few thoughts very succinctly. Given the content and theme of the article, I'm now fairly certain since you brought it up the whole point of calling the person a grammar maven is a subtle in-joke about grammar nazis, and how that's as good a name as any, and better than most. Why else focus on someone that self-described as a grammar maven, and call out the Yiddish origin? It's likely in my mind the original person described themselves that way with grammar nazi firmly in mind, which makes the in-joke all the better when used in this article. I'm actually fairly pleased with that interpretation (whether it's true or not), as it opens up a whole layer to the article I wasn't thinking of and quite enjoy. I wouldn't have thought of that at all if you hadn't brought up the term in a way that made me examine it, so thanks. :)
- petecox 9y agoFrom the article below: To counter the negative connotations evoked by the term “grammar pedant” and to celebrate their pleasure in language, they invent playful monikers such as “grammartiste”, “grammagician”, “grammardian angel”, “grammar groover”, “grammartuoso” and “grammasseur”. https://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-grammar-pedantry-78670 https://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-grammar-pedantry-7...
- twoodfin 9y agoTo be meta-prescriptive for a moment: I think your example demonstrates why proponents of clear communication frown on the passive voice.