Correct English DOES matter.

[YOUTUBE]MKQCT24_eCA[/YOUTUBE]

Language does evolve.... Are you on the Professor's side of the argument in the video?

 

The purpose of language is communication. Communication is built on the idea that all parties understand each other. If you can understand what someone means when they say "there's" to mean "there are" then there is no reason in being angered.

 

I agree with this. To me, grammatical errors here and there aren't a big deal.

I'd rather listen to someone who makes some mistakes but is very knowledgeable, than someone who has flawless grammar but has no idea what they're talking about.

Btw, I'm not implying that grammar and knowledge are mutually exclusive. Indeed, when people have both, it is just wonderful. I've had professors who speak so lucidly with good grammar, yet they know a lot of stuff too.

 

The only worries I have with communication are (1) when someone's usage is so bad that they are actually unclear and (2) when someone, in the effort to be grammatically correct, comes off as pretentious and is actually incorrect.

I'm not trying to say you're doing (2); it's just something that bothers me.

One of the most bothersome for me is that people constantly entreat their employees in customer service (i.e. retail) to initiate contact with "how may I help you?," as if "may" is correct over "can."

"May" is NOT correct here. Let me say that again. May is not correct, and I don't care how many high school English teachers you want to set on me.

"How may I help you?" is pretentious--you're only saying it because it sounds formal, and somebody told you (uncritically) that it's correct. When you say "how may I help you?," you're asking for permission to help. The "how" part of that question inquires "in what manner." Therefore, the akser of the question presumes the permission she's asking for. The second level of incorrectness with "how may I help you?" is that the permission, once it's granted, does not imply the ability to help. I might be constrained by the fact I literally am unable to help in that situation. I might be barred from doing a particular thing by policy.

"How may I help you?" "You can lower my tax liability to zero." "No, I am unable to assist you with that request."

 

I agree wholeheartedly; English grammar is important but often dismissed by many people.

 

Isn't it interesting how the posts within this thread that stress the importance of grammar each display some of the most basic and avoidable errors?

It is a proven fact that the newer generations of the world display higher degrees of literary and language competence than ever before. We are not about to witness the fall of eloquence within society. We are witnessing the growth of a society in which members are becoming more and more capable of adapting their dialects and vernaculars to fit diverse social groups.

You might adore language. It is something that I have always loved as well; however, the belief that strictly adhering to established rules of grammar should be a priority for all within society can not have been born from anything other than pretension.

 

It's not a big deal, language evolves and changes, as long as you can be understood then it's ok.

 

In certain circumstances it is best to use "proper" grammar because it is seen as a shibboleth of sort; it can make you be perceived as "educated" and "learned," traits that may make you seem desirable to the likes of employers and your partner's parents because of the connotations.

When it comes to written language in more informal settings, people tend to write as they speak. For instance, one of the the more common errors I make is adding commas where I would normally pause for emphasis/breathing should I actually be speaking what I am writing. This is a habit of mine because I gave many presentations growing up (starting around age 8) and I would add commas to my remarks to know when to pause for the audience's benefit; the custom has remained :lol:. Similarly, I think many people write as they talk, which isn't necessarily bad. While I will agree writing styles such as "text speak" can interfere with proper communication, which is one of the main purposes of written language (another being the enduring record it creates), I find most people here on EC (and in the Web and print media) write adequately to convey their thoughts.

There are smaller errors in the English language that can obfuscate the writer's message. Misusing e.g. for i.e. can leave the reader unsure if something was an all-inclusive list or simply a partial list; failing to use the Oxford comma (when called for) can also confuse the reader. While errors like those above do irk me, it's mostly because I cannot understand what the writer is trying to say.

 

I agree with everyone that's said that as long as the meaning is conveyed, it's okay to not use "correct" English. I also agree that there are different levels of English that are appropriate in different situations.

What I find hilarious is this idea of "correct English". Of course I understand that what you mean is 'the English in the textbooks I've been reading all my life' and not an unchanged version of the original English. English was originally a pigeon language, there are approximately 8 languages that went into the creation of the 'original' English (Old English). It takes an especially talented person to be able to read Chaucer or Beowulf on the first try, so obviously the language we speak now, is completely different (you isn't only plural, for one thing).

What I imagine is happening now, and the event that you are objecting to, is simply the next step in the evolution of English. Maybe sometime in the next couple of decades they'll refer to the currently 'correct' English as "Contempory English" or something. If that's the case, then you can see how you're reaction is probably very similar to some people's during the Great Vowel Shift.

 

I get what you are saying. Grammar is important but it's not everything. Some people here don't have English as a first language. Internet is full of people whose mother tongue doesn't even resemble English (including me. It was very difficult for me to learn back then. A lot of my friends can't really communicate in English although we all studied it at school for 7 years or more). Not everyone are from English speaking countries. They say that poor English is the most common language on Earth. I also know some people who are very educated and intelligent but dyslexic so they make mistakes all the time when they write something and it can't be helped by correcting them.

To me my mother tongue is important and I feels a bit bad when people who I know can write correctly won't do it. So I understand. I don't say anything since usually the discussion and the topics are lot more important than the grammar in that situation. On the internet there is too much people who use grammar as a weapon to hit those whose opinions they don't like. I don't want to be one or be mistaken as one. I just want everybody to feel good.

There is some things I still don't really get in English. Like using the comma and there must be many other mistakes I make without even knowing. And when I get tired my English gets worse really fast and if I try to read too fast my brain starts skipping things. Sometimes I can't remember some words or how they are written so I have to check them from dictionary.

By the way. That "you" can mean more people than just one was very difficult to get when I was learning. And gendered pronouns were weird. And why is "I" written as a big letter? (I don't even know the correct term so I = big, i = small) That's odd. :lol:

 

Wait so how exactly does it matter? Your argument says that language is important, but not necessarily why it's proper usage is important.

 

Yeah, its important but human languages evolve and improve. We don't all speak like we did in the middle ages right now do we?

 

In certain situations I suppose you are right. The sentences "I helped my uncle, Jack, off his horse" and "Let's eat, grandpa" would take on completely different meanings without proper grammar. However, for the most part, if I can make out what the person means then it's good enough for me.

 

Exactly this. We may use an incorrect form when it's more accepted where we live. I do that in Dutch too. I know very well that "(the) salt" is "het zout", but since using "de zout" is so much more common here, I use it too.

Language is about communication, not about "what is right and wrong".

 

I try my best and that's all I ask of others. It's well over twenty years since I passed English and I'm the first to admit that my standards have fallen, so I refrain from judging other people. I know that my grammar is far from perfect now and I really have to think about what I'm writing sometimes.

 

There are roughly 6,500 languages spoken in the world and you're gonna judge someone's intelligence based on how well they speak English. Okay. You need to remember that all kinds of people from all over the world use the Internet... Are you just going to ignore that some people have dyslexia? That not everyone's first language is English?

 

People don't often realize that grammar is a description of a particular language, it is not absolutely prescriptive, and there is enough leeway to allow some license with language under certain circumstances. But let every word tell what was meant!

My main concern with grammatical error is that it is distracting. When it is used correctly, and yes creatively, it can be an incredibly powerful way to convey a message. Read Shakespeare to see what I mean, the phrasing is astounding in its complexity and efficiency.

 

I'm glad to see basically all the responses here are sensible.

Uh, I agree with your assessment of the importance of language. But language functions well no matter if you say 'there is many people who' or 'there are many people who'. There's no ambiguity and any 'degradation' you perceive is simply your own prejudice talking.

Languages changes naturally all the time. Extreme changes in English compared to its roots are the loss of genders and the almost complete loss of cases. Nobody complains that they should be reinstated because we all know that English functions perfectly well without them. If it didn't, they'd probably still be here.

Don't get me wrong: I know grammar means a lot to people and it can be used as a means of telling how intelligent/careful somebody is (although in my opinion it shouldn't!), which is why I do actually try to use it correctly. But I see it as a fluid concept and the idea that it naturally changes interests me.

 

Language is indeed fluid. It is not set in stone, however, grammar, mechanics, and diction matter. It defines ones ability to move in society, professionally and socially. It is extremely important that one has mastery over the power discourse. There are secondary discourses, as well, how we speak among our family and friends and how we speak in our work environment. Shaw was not far wrong in observing that with the right training a guttersnipe could be passed off as a duchess. It is true for society today as well, "us" vs. "you". Our language is still one of the great determiner's of our success, despite our egalitarian sentiments. English may be constantly changing, but still we maintain the rules of Latin; the dangling preposition cannot exits in Latin, because it makes nonsense, but in English it sounds fine to our ear and the painfully correct usage sounds stilted and pretentious, forget it at your peril when you write an essay or business letter.