Decline of Language

[Mechablob]

I remember I used to sort of consider it as a simple change that language may take over the decades. What I mean there is that, well, over decades, colloquialisms change and language in general seems to make changes over centuries (we definitely speak differently to what was recorded in the 1800s). I used to consider this until I actually started taking the A level English language course and I realised people seemed to make these simple spelling and grammatical mistakes a lot in the class, which sort of surprised me that such ignorance in language was not a barrier for people selecting the course to study.

It's a bit peculiar to think that the informalities in language a century or so ago would seem the utmost of formalities nowadays. I can understand if it's a simple spelling mistake every now and again, be it online or on paper - we're all human and we all make mistakes. If the same mistake is continued to be, though, then it's just plain ignorance. I think we may just be living in more ignorant times, but we should not really blame the ignorant for this, but maybe those that have made our lives more convenient and easier to manage - we have become so used to being dependent now.

[Vendetta21]

Man that Chaucer sure was an annoying twat he barely spells anything right how frustrating

Whan that Aprill, with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote
And bathed every veyne in swich licour,
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
5 Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the Ram his halfe cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye,
10 That slepen al the nyght with open eye-
(So priketh hem Nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes
To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes;
15 And specially from every shires ende
Of Engelond, to Caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke
That hem hath holpen, whan that they were seeke.
Bifil that in that seson, on a day,
20 In Southwerk at the Tabard as I lay
Redy to wenden on my pilgrymage
To Caunterbury with ful devout corage,
At nyght was come into that hostelrye
Wel nyne and twenty in a compaignye
25 Of sondry folk, by aventure yfalle
In felaweshipe, and pilgrimes were they alle,
That toward Caunterbury wolden ryde.
The chambres and the stables weren wyde,
And wel we weren esed atte beste;
30 And shortly, whan the sonne was to reste,
So hadde I spoken with hem everichon
That I was of hir felaweshipe anon,
And made forward erly for to ryse
To take our wey, ther as I yow devyse.
35 But nathelees, whil I have tyme and space,
Er that I ferther in this tale pace,
Me thynketh it acordaunt to resoun
To telle yow al the condicioun
Of ech of hem, so as it semed me,
40 And whiche they weren, and of what degree,
And eek in what array that they were inne;
And at a knyght than wol I first bigynne.
A KNYGHT ther was, and that a worthy man,
That fro the tyme that he first bigan
45 To riden out, he loved chivalrie,
Trouthe and honour, fredom and curteisie.
Ful worthy was he in his lordes werre,
And therto hadde he riden, no man ferre,
As wel in cristendom as in hethenesse,
50 And evere honoured for his worthynesse.

[Cavernio]

"There is no "literal interpretation" of a double negative because double negatives aren't valid in our grammar. You could argue by saying "Negation in language is like multiplying by -1" or something like that, but then you are still invoking something outside of our grammar."

I beg to differ; if someone uses it, and people understand it, no matter even if its specifically contradictory to the 'official' grammatical rules, it is grammar. Grammar evolves and is made by the people using it, not put upon on us by the educated.

However, the initiation of the thread wasn't seemingly about grammar, but about using the wrong word in the wrong place, and not having people care about it. The problem with things like your and you're and two too to are very specific; the words are pronounced the exact same way. If there's a failing in the human language, its the fact that for someone reason we have common words that means different things, and are pronounced the same, but are spelled totally different. The fact that many of the issues stem from conjoint words, like you're, it's and they're, also seems to be a failing of the language which was developed before cellphones and text-editors. I remember learning in grade school that using 'you're' in an essay was wrong even if you used it correctly, because you should've use 'you are' instead. And now apparently people here, in this thread, have forgotten or were just never taught that contractions themselves are examples of 'poor' language. Which I also find pretty neat, because in no other language do I know of contractions being used in any formality. I don't find it at all surprising that someone who learns english as a second language learns the proper grammar and uses it better than someone who doesn't; it works that way for all languages, doesn't it? I can speak and write french alright, and if you speak to me I can understand it pretty good, and I've even read a couple novels in french. I stumbled into a french chatroom before, and I was totally unable to understand most things said. I feel like my sense of the language is far from 'better' than those people in that chatroom; instead I feel cheated that I can't understand them.

As to the idea that the simplifying and shortening of our language that's happened, I would say that that's largely happened as a result of technology, not the other way around. Being able to write to someone in real-time, we want to communicate as fast as we do when we speak, so we take as many shortcuts as we possibly can. This effect can only be confounded when the communication uses our hands, which we're used to having free to do other things which we talk. I know all my posts are mammoth in size, but you chat with me, and I will be quick and dirty and not bother to correct your and you're, much less most of my other spelling.

And lastly, even if this does mean that overall the language may be in some state of decline on some level, I sincerely doubt its because people are dumber. I think its likely just the opposite in fact. Back in the day, when leaving school when you were 10 to go and help your dad or whatever you have to do, and you didn't learn to read and write very well, or you never even went to school and learned anything...well those people weren't even part of the group of readers and writers. Today, with the number of literate people we have (or semi-literate if you want to call them), who all have a cellphone, who all have the internet, and who all communicate in writing using the technology we have, of course the written language is going to change much differently than if only a highly educated clique uses it.


And what Vendetta said. We all just sorta assume that things were different back in the day, whenever that day was...

[Cavernio]

As an aside, english is notoriously bad for spelling. Its so bad that studies have found that people who are english speakers are more likely to have dyslexia than people who speak italian and spanish. (Or at least less likely to be diagnosed, which is in a sense in this case, the same thing, since reading is perhaps the most prominent problem a dyslexic has.) Finetik is definitely the way to go.

[dore]

Originally Posted by Cavernio

Which I also find pretty neat, because in no other language do I know of contractions being used in any formality.

just a couple examples that I know where contractions are ubiquitous even in writing

Spanish -- a el -> al, de el -> del
German -- in dem -> im which applies to some other prepositions too

[Phlegmatism]

Originally Posted by Cavernio

As an aside, english is notoriously bad for spelling. Its so bad that studies have found that people who are english speakers are more likely to have dyslexia than people who speak italian and spanish. (Or at least less likely to be diagnosed, which is in a sense in this case, the same thing, since reading is perhaps the most prominent problem a dyslexic has.) Finetik is definitely the way to go.

English probably has the highest amount of dialects since all walks of the world speak it. Sure it's notorious for many reasons, but it's also a difficult language to learn by its inherent nature.

[Vendetta21]

also the internet has done wonders to the way we structure sentences and paragraphs but you don't hear the grammar nazis narkin on about that

probably because it's harder to do and reveals how shallow and OCD their whole approach to language is

i wonder if grammar nazism is a now antiquated cultural relic of a generation of baby boomers whose self-conception was strongly rooted in the fact that they went to college at a time when not nearly as many people did

typin like this tells people you dont give two shits

lol

[Cavernio]

Originally Posted by dore

just a couple examples that I know where contractions are ubiquitous even in writing

Spanish -- a el -> al, de el -> del
German -- in dem -> im which applies to some other prepositions too

The spanish examples seem to be a proper rule to not have 2 vowels side by side like that. Is it proper to ever use a el instead of al? Seems like the english a and an to me.

[GamerShadow]

There is no real decline in language. What you are observing is merely a change in the way people express their stupidity and carelessness through their writing and language usage.

[ddrxero64]

Response to OP: It all depends on the situation. Through typing and texting, people have proven to cut time and quicken communication through shortcuts. It's human nature to find an easier way to do something. The problem is how people utilize this to exploit for profit.

If you're writing an essay and want your message to come across clearly, use proper grammar. If you're texting from a phone without a keyboard with a maximum amount of space for characters, use shortcuts.

Anything that really isn't a shortcut has evolved into a stylistic preference, such as our usernames. You obviously know cry4eternity isn't correct, but you don't need it to be. You aren't a grammar Nazi, you are probably annoyed with how poorly people try to make a serious argument wile talkin liek dis.

People would never do that in a job. They know that being clear and proper makes the money. For the few that don't, they probably flip burgers for a living. Very few people actually lack the knowledge to properly write and read. So it really is style, preference, and resourcefulness.