Is Language Change Good Or Bad?

Question 2

Descriptivism:

Samual Johnson

Answer 2

Descriptivists recognize that language is continuously subject to change. Samuel Johnson, initially a prescriptivist, acknowledged that reforming a language would be like “trying to rope in a river,”

emphasising the natural evolution of language.

Question 3

Descriptivism

Joseph Priestly

Answer 3

Joseph Priestly, an empirical scientist, advocated for observing and recording language as it is used, rather than imposing strict rules. He believed that attempting to reform and fix a language was unsuitable and ill-calculated.

Question 4

Descriptivism

OUP

Answer 4

The oxford university dictorionary serves the language and each of its changes - not trying to control it.

It even reflects slang such as the shortening ‘rizz’ for charisma - chosen as word of the year in 2023

Question 5

Descriptivism

Remedy for the fear of simplification (Who advocated)

Answer 5

(Noah Webster & Phonetic Advocat) –

Simplifying spelling can make language more logical and accessible, as seen in Webster’s American spelling reforms and phonetic spelling advocates.

Question 6

Descriptivism

Political correctness (Who advocated)

Answer 6

(Anne Curzan’s ‘Politically Responsive Prescriptivism’)

Language should adapt to social changes, such as recognizing non-binary identities with inclusive pronouns like they/them.

Question 7

Pescriptivism

Loss of formality (Which grammarian advocated?)

Answer 7

(Robert Lowth on Preposition Stranding) –

Grammatical changes, like ending sentences with prepositions, are seen as making English less refined and structured.

Question 8

Pescriptivism

Against phonetic spelling reform

Answer 8

Radical spelling reforms could disrupt literacy - it dismantles what people have been taught since the age of 4

= That’s a benefit of standardisation its universal

Question 9

Descriptivism

If you are going to vilify language change, than you must start from the beginning (example)

Answer 9

1) Historically, shall was the preferred auxiliary verb for first-person future statements (e.g., I shall go), while will was used for the second and third person (you will go, they will go).

However, over time, will became the dominant form for all persons in spoken and written English.

This shift accelerated in the 20th century due to American influence (where shall had already fallen out of common use), changes in legal and formal writing, and the general trend toward simplifying grammatical distinctions.

Question 10

Descriptivism

The Great vowel shift and its effects

Answer 10

Around 600 years ago the great vowel shift occurred - happening after an attempt to standardise the language had occurred resulting in a mismatch between the way in which words were spelt and how they were pronounced.

Whilst this mismatch most likely caused distress amongst linguistic traditionalists at the time - the English language still thrives to this day, with the effects of the GVS still present in our modern day vowel system.

So the health of a language can’t be determined by its changes, that’s just it adapting - it should be measured by its use to its speakers and clearly that is not an issue.