4 ms·
That's one way of looking at it. Language can also be looked at as a communication protocol - a way of transferring thoughts and ideas from one mind to another.
by thegrimmest 5y ago
That's one way of looking at it. Language can also be looked at as a communication protocol - a way of transferring thoughts and ideas from one mind to another.
With this perspective, it is extremely important for all users of the protocol to agree on the definitions of the primitives (words). If they don't, they're basically forking the protocol, forcing overhead to clarify terms on every interaction with people who speak a different version.
It's also not how all language works - French for instance has a prescriptive dictionary. Many useful languages do in fact.
- etchalon 5y agoThat's not "one way of looking at it". It's literally how language works. Words are wholly invented things, whose meaning is completely derived from usage and context. We make up sequences of sounds and over time we get each other to accept what ideas those sequences of sounds represent. Yes, the Académie Française exists, but fun fact … it's reactive to usage. And it's by no means an absolute authority on the language as it's used colloquially.
- thegrimmest 5y agoI'm not sure the wider speaking public is driving a lot of this politicization of English, particularly in the US. It seems to be a small minority with an outsized influence. I'm not sure you should discard the perspective of language-as-protocol so readily either. Computing protocols are also languages, specified to a necessary degree of precision, and maintained by a standards body. These also evolve with usage, and there are many instances of common usage being added to the protocol specification for things like HTTP. All I'm suggesting is that we evolve our language consciously, and all together, and not allow a fringe group to hijack the process.
- etchalon 5y agoFringe groups have always hijacked the process. How many new words are minted by a single speaker, or song, or movie, or pop culture moment? How many from a single group who merely entered the zeitgeist at the right time? How many come entirely from corporations, and advertising? Language is always an "all together" process but it is also always a process that starts in the fringe, and spreads out.
- thegrimmest 5y agoI agree that many words are created and spread as memes. But I struggle to come up with examples (outside of religion) where the meanings or usages of words are prescribed by a small group, and great offense is taken when the words are not used according to the prescriptions.
- etchalon 5y agoI present you with the word "literally."
- thegrimmest 5y agoI think it supports my point. It literally has no meaning. The additional definition basically destroyed any value the word had.
- etchalon 5y agoI don't believe language prescriptivism has any merit. Words have value because they imply a meaning and if I can use a word, and you understand my meaning when I use that word, the word has value.
- thegrimmest 5y ago> I don't believe language prescriptivism has any merit Seems to work pretty well for programming languages and communication protocols doesn't it? Why do you think that is?
- etchalon 5y agoPrescriptivism doesn't "work pretty well in programming languages". It's a frustrating requirement of current programming languages and runtimes. If someone were to release a runtime that could reliably do "what a programmer means" instead of "what the programmer types" that runtime would be heralded as one of the greatest advancements in computer science in history. Thankfully, the human mind is not as limited in its ability to parse context.