Who you gonna call?
Discussions about grammar and language are often characterized
as face-offs between prescriptivists (underwear-ironing
purists who can’t die out quickly enough) and descriptionists (lusty progressives who choose to break the rules to
connect with the masses).
These
particular images come from a guest post at the Essay Expert by Steven Sawyer.
You can guess to which camp he swears allegiance.*
It’s descriptionists
who tend to frame the discussion in black and white. Prescriptivists are too
busy enjoying the ebb and flow of living language, weighing riveting usage
dilemmas, and helping friends ford ticklish linguistic waters to be fussed
about being called prissy prudes by those who think the mere fact that people do it makes it right.
I am indeed
a prescriptivist, athough it would never occur to me to iron my underwear. (My
attitude to most housekeeping is: “Who has time?”) What is missing from this scenario—and
too often from the way English is taught—is nuance. Fine editing, like good
writing, is as much art as science. Within the arena of what’s considered acceptable,
there is abundant choice. Serial comma or not? Absolutely, say I, but I defend
your right to choose otherwise—if you understand that it’s not as simple as
choosing whether or not to include a comma before “and.” Meter or metre? It may
depend on where you are, who you are, or what you’re trying to say. In most
cases, what’s important is being consistent, not which option you select.
Most
reasonable prescriptivists understand that language continually evolves. Many
enjoy watching the progression that new usages follow on their way to becoming
accepted. Thus, I enjoy hearing my sons (who use English beautifully) refer to a
seedy area as sketchy, describe
themselves as rocking a particular
look, or use google or friend as verbs. It’s okay. English didn’t get where it is
today (i.e., pretty much everywhere) by being inflexible.
There are
times when you will want to know the difference between its and it’s, when to
deploy whom, and that if you emitted
saliva yesterday you did not spit but
spat. You may wish to use the written
word to sway your sweetie, impress your boss, sail your manuscript into the acceptance
pile, or confound your enemies. You’ll need to use clear, energetic language
that does not distract with errors or ambiguities.
When that day comes, who you gonna call?** The guy who says, “It’s fine, honey. Putting it into words makes it legitimate!”? Or the expert who delights in helping you express yourself in the best English you can possibly muster?
When that day comes, who you gonna call?** The guy who says, “It’s fine, honey. Putting it into words makes it legitimate!”? Or the expert who delights in helping you express yourself in the best English you can possibly muster?
I’m only a query
away.
*Note to descriptionists:
Yes, it would have been equally acceptable to write: “You can guess which camp
he swears allegiance to.” Didn’t wanna.
**Note to Sony
Pictures: Don’t sue me! Not only do I know this is not a proper sentence, I know
it’s yours. But asking “Whom will you phone?” would take all the guts out of my
first-ever blog post and sacrifice a priceless cultural reference. Don’t
worry! 99.9% of my readers will know
this comes from Ghostbusters. That’s
the point!
Although I haven't decided whether I'm a descriptionist or prescriptivist, I love this post! Thanks.
ReplyDeleteNo, no, thank YOU for a very kind comment.
ReplyDeleteI hope it’s apparent between the lines that I’m a flexible prescriptivist. I believe in holding certain lines, but I do recognize that language changes—and even that it’s a good thing.
And really, do descriptivists practice total language anarchy? As with so many things, it’s about finding the middle ground. And your spot on the continuum. Enjoy the pursuit!