Starshadw at aol.com <Starshadw at aol.com> writes on 16 August 2002 at 10:02:09 -0400 > (Text is snipped below from two Emails) > > Well, the reason I ask the question again is that #1: I don't think > anyone can honestly say that they like every single new word that's > ever been added to the English language, or that they like every > single new way of using an old word, and #2: to point out the > inconsistency that should be blatantly apparent. Steve's and > David's responses beg the questions: > > Who gets to decide what is a good change and what is a bad change?? > > Where is this "line" to be drawn, or will it be completely > arbitrary and there will be no guidelines?? > > Are we supposed to have a new department in the US government that > decides how people get to use words to communicate? Or perhaps the > Department of Education can handle it? But this only covers the US > - I supposed we should approach ALL countries that speak English > and get them involved, too. > > I think you see where I'm headed here. Yes. You can't conceive of anything happening by any method other than central regulation. Whereas this is so completely foreign to the way I think that it has no bearing on my position at all. If I don't like a new usage, I avoid using it and I complain when other people use it, and attempt to explain why it's bad. Individually, it's very unlikely that I will make or break a new usage. However, *everybody* does this, consciously or not. And, in the end, the usage is widely adopted for a while, or it isn't. None of this involves the American Academy pronouncing on the usage. I've never suggested such an approach. I've never done anything but express my own opinions and the reasoning behind them. > As I stated previously, I don't think anyone would say they like > every single language change or addition. I know I certainly > don't, and I myself often cringe at certain words or turns of > phrase. Voicing a small complaint is one thing, but this > discussion has gone past that to the point where it seems more > like....well, like whining. "Why, oh why can't everyone use just > the words *I* like in the ways *I* like to use them? People who > "abuse" the language [according to the speaker's definition of > abuse] should stop!" Well, please. That's not going to happen. > I could understand your stridency a little better if you (plural > here, not singular) were at least CONSISTENT about it. If you at > least could say "I hate every single time the English language > evolves and I wish it would stop" then I might not find this > discussion increasingly silly because then your arguments would be > logical. But that's not what you're saying. Essentially, you seem > to be saying that you know better, and so anyone who dares step off > the same use of language path that you're on is nasty, ignorant, or > somehow defective. In which case, you're never going to be happy > because there never will be an office whose job it is to tell > people what words they can and can not use (at least let us > sincerely hope not). If you think *this* is strident, I guess you don't watch the news or read the newspaper much. This is a calm, rational, discussion, with no name-calling (until yours just now) or insults being thrown around, a respectful discussion among adults. Compare to politics, or newspaper letter columns sometime. > Or I guess you could simply publish your addresses, phone numbers, > and Emails and tell people that you know better, and if they use a > word they should give you a call and ask if they are using it > properly. Always happy to provide advice. I'm in the phone book. > This post is pretty blunt, but I'm really not trying to be > offensive. Maybe my question should be: > > So what do you want to do about it? Is it just that you need to > vent and complain for a bit? If so, OK then, vent away. Do you > honestly think you can fix it or control it? If so, then please > explain how. In other words, what is the point of the arguing and > complaining? Just to argue for argument's sake, or is something > actually supposed to be accomplished? This is one stall in the "marketplace of ideas", the language section. People discuss new stuff coming around, and each day by how they speak and write they spread their decisions. I hope to change some people's decisions, of course; at least to make them think more, and I hope sometimes to change their minds about certain things. You accuse me of being inconsistent because I don't have the same opinion about every single proposed change. Why do you want or expect that? I don't have the same opinion about every new proposed law, or every new book, or every new food. Why would you expect or want me to have the same opinion about every proposed change to the language? Do *you* have the same opinion about every single proposed change to the language? Do you support *every single one*? You say above that you don't. The whole point is to *not* mindlessly accept or reject, but to consider the effects, look at the costs and the benefits, and make a *considered* choice for or against each case. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net / New TMDA anti-spam in test John Dyer-Bennet 1915-2002 Memorial Site http://john.dyer-bennet.net Book log: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/Ouroboros/booknotes/ New Dragaera mailing lists, see http://dragaera.info