Whither English?

Others have men­tioned that blogs will kill the English lan­guage. The idea is that peo­ple in gen­eral — and Americans in par­tic­u­lar — suck at the writ­ten lan­guage they are raised with, and by putting the power of instant pub­lish­ing in the hands of any­one who feels the need to uniron­i­cally trans­pose num­bers and vow­els into their every­day cor­re­spon­dence, one is encour­ag­ing poor spelling, gram­mer gram­mar, and vocabulary.

Blogs won’t kill the English lan­guage. The best cre­ative writ­ing I’ve seen in the last 10 years was from a blog—and I didn’t have to pay for the “priv­i­lege” to read it.

15 Responses

  1. James says:

    Wow. Thank you, sir. I really appre­ci­ate your praise of my writing.

    Usually, peo­ple find my writ­ing too ver­bose and too acidic for blog­ging pur­poses. Thank you very much for your kind words.

  2. Pingback: The Whole is Less than the Sum of the Parts » Death of Language

  3. Pedant says:

    “The idea is that peo­ple in gen­eral – and Americans in par­tic­u­lar – suck at the writ­ten lan­guage they are raised with”

    Should be “…with which they are raised”

    Don’t end a sen­tence with a prepo­si­tion :-)

  4. Paul Jakma says:

    encour­ag­ing poor spelling

    Which reminds me, in your pre­vi­ous blog entry about a dri­ver who cut you up, you said you were “break­ing”, I think you meant “brak­ing” (slightly dif­fer­ent things, one involves use of fric­tion, the other involves your car ceas­ing to func­tion.). Finally what does “uniron­i­cally” mean? Is it some kind of sin­gle or one “ron­i­cally”? What’s a “ron­i­cally”? Or maybe you meant “un-ironically”? ;) And while we’re on the topic of hyphens, what exactly is “gen­eral – and” sup­posed to mean, par­tic­u­larly com­bined with the noun “Americans”? Ditto with “par­tic­u­lar – suck”. Maybe you just for­got the spaces around those hyphens ;) .

    Your blog entry is a pedant’s dream btw. Can’t wait to have my text pedanted to pieces too. :)

  5. James Cape says:

    Paul:

    Regarding the use of hyphen­ated prefixes:

    “Chicago Manual of Style spells most com­pounds with the com­mon pre­fixes solid (pre-, post-, over-, under-, pro-, anti-, re-, un-, non-, semi-, co-, pseud-, intra-, extra-, infra-, ultra-, sub-, super-, supra-). AP Style Manual is more choosy: pro– and co– are hyphen­ated when cer­tain mean­ings are intended; anti– and non– are usu­ally hyphen­ated, with some excep­tions noted; post-, pre-, and over– fol­low the dic­tio­nary in gen­eral; and under-, un-, re-, semi-, intra-, extra-, ultra-, sub-, super-, and supra– are usu­ally spelled solid.” Sonia Jaffe Robbins, Hyphens

    There is also a dif­fer­ence between the hyphen “-” and em-dash “ — ” (double-hyphen). Em-dashes are effec­tively paren­the­ses with­out paren­the­ses, and not sup­posed to be off­set with spaces. While I do not reli­giously fol­low the no-spaces-around-dashes rule, I do ensure con­sis­tency within the same post.

    Breaking vs. brak­ing, was a stu­pid mis­take, which I’ve cor­rected. :-)

  6. James Cape says:

    …And it appears WordPress has recently stopped replac­ing dash-dash with the — entity, pre­fer­ring – — ugh.

  7. Paul Jakma says:

    Hi James,

    The com­pound hyphen is indeed a style thing, how­ever hyphen­at­ing the pre­fix is /always/ cor­rect, and always allows the reader to unam­bi­giously tell what the pre­fix is. There are many com­monly pre­fixed words where the pre­fix gen­er­ally is not hyphen seper­ated (eg, unam­bi­giously for one ;) ), but for some­thing like “iron­i­cally”, where pre­fix­ing with “un” is /not/ com­mon it aids the reader for the writer to use the hyphen, even more so when the pre­fixed word starts with ‘i” and one has to forward-parse the word to tell whether the pre­fix is “un” or “uni”. Forward-parsing sucks and dis­rupts the reader.

    Regarding the em dash, that site you link to con­tra­dicts you:

    “A well designed em dash should not touch any let­ters. If it does, you need to insert a thin space before and after it; do not put word spaces before and after an em dash.”

    I.e. there *must* be space before and after the em dash. Hence if you’re restricted to ASCII then this means you must use a hyphen (or two in series if you wish) with spaces. This is also coin­ci­dent with what we were taught in school (which did not, it must be said, go into the finer typo­graph­i­cal issues of the var­i­ous width of dashes, but then we used pen and paper in school and had to write our exer­cises by hand). Even with em dash (for which this Fedora 4 machine I type from does not appear to have any glyph for), you prob­a­bly still want to seper­ate it with an ASCII space in order to allow ren­der­ers to recog­nise the dis­tinct words and recog­nise it may flow the text before and after the em dash, as I sus­pect em dash could simul­ta­ne­ously be both a mem­ber of and not a mem­ber of the “space” and/or “blank” char­ac­ter classes. ;)

  8. Paul Jakma says:

    Err, oops, that last sen­tence should read “I sus­pect em dash could not”, obviously.

  9. James Cape says:

    OK, I’ll grant you the “use a hyphen to dis­am­biguate,” but I think that after five years of medieval­ist con­trol of the gov­ern­ment, “uniron­i­cally” has become pretty com­mon­place. At the very least, I’ve seen it before.

    do not put word spaces before or after an em dash”

    In other words, the notes on spac­ing are for font design­ers, and the dash should not lit­ter­ally touch the let­ters, which it doesn’t. I’m not liable if your fonts and/or Gecko sucks at wrap­ping dashes :-) .

  10. Calum Benson says:

    Blogs won’t kill the English lan­guage, because SMS text mes­sag­ing has already taken care of that. Most of the really bad writ­ing I see in blogs is by kids who write entries the same way as they would txt thr m8s.

    (What I always find ironic is that, with all the text pre­dic­tion tech­nol­ogy built into phones these days, it’s actu­ally harder to type all that crappy txt spk than to form actual words. But just not as k3wl, I guess.)

  11. Jesse says:

    The only thing con­stant about lan­guage is that it changes over time. People of every gen­er­a­tion have said of the gen­er­a­tions that fol­low that they are destroy­ing what­ever lan­guage they speak.

    People who com­plain about “ebon­ics” or chil­dren speak­ing “lazily” don’t really under­stand lan­guage. They think English is some­thing you find in a gram­mar book. Chaucer, that rebel of the English lan­guage, had this to say about it:

    Ye knowe ek that in fourme of speche is chaunge, with-inne a thou­sand yeer, and wordes tho that had­den pris, now won­der nyce and straunge us then­keth hem; and yet thei spake hem so, and speede as wel in loue as men now.

    Amen.

Leave a Reply

*