2 ms·
I’ll cop to the tedious bit. But consider that, while “English” may not be prescriptive (odd idea, that), people can be. For example, the people who wrote this
by leephillips 6y ago
I’ll cop to the tedious bit. But consider that, while “English” may not be prescriptive (odd idea, that), people can be. For example, the people who wrote this style guide: they were exactly prescribing usage for Times editors and writers. Yes, the thing I am tediously complaining about follows this guide. But the guide is wrong.
- maxerickson 6y agoIncoherent. Usage at the times is prescriptive, English ain't.
- meepmorp 6y ago>”English” may not be prescriptive (odd idea, that) Natural languages can’t be descriptive or prescriptive, they merely are. Grammars for those languages can be either descriptive (i.e., describing the language as used by speakers) or prescriptive (i.e., prescribe how the language should be used). In the former case, it’s perfectly fine to freely split infinitives; in the latter it is something up with which one does not put.
- leobabauta 6y agoJust a note that the split infinitive prohibition was largely a 19th century thing: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive
- meepmorp 6y agoOk?