Prescriptivism: Swift, Humphrey & Truss Flashcards
Jonathan Swift, , a famous prescriptivist has been quoted by Melvin Bragg’s (2003): ‘The Adventures Of English: The Biography of A Language:’ because of the measures who took to try and fix the English Language in his proposal.
What were his rather cynical leasons of trying to fix the English language?
- He wanted his story to be recorded in history.
- He wanted to immortalise his own writing for future generations.
- He believes language is changing at a faster rate than it should be.
What did he want to do?
• He wanted an academy to set a permanent standard for grammar, so that it was able to “formulate rules of grammar, discard improprieties to make, to make corrections and set a permanent standard.”
What step did he take to achieve this?
• Appealed to Queen Anne, argued that her achievements wouldn’t be recognised. Creating an Academy, he argued would contribute to the “Glory of her Majesty’s Reign.”
What use of metaphor help communicate his prescriptivist idea about language?
‘language should be more durable than brass”, “we write in sand, our language grows, and like the tide, our work o’erflows. ‘suggest an unprecedented & uncontrollable growth that is unable to be predicted and attended.
Why does he mention Latin and Greek in his proposal?
Must carve in Latin or Greek’ -> about dead languages. English is a living language. Language cannot change if it’s dead. But Swift want’s it to be dead in order for to become the same as Latin and Greek.
What are 3 notable quotes that you could use in the exam?
Our language is “extremely imperfect”
“Of manglings and abbreviations e.g. Drudg’d, Distrub’d & Rebukt’
“…and in a few years, it is probable, we will all differ from themselves, as Fancy or Fashion shall direct. All which reduced to writing would entirely confound Orthography. “-» This particular quote links with Caxton’s Standardisation where there was a demand to create a form of English that everyone could understand.
What can we evaluate from Swift’s proposal?
What Swift argues for English language need to be controlled and regulated seems purely for cynical reasons. Swift is fixated in the idea that English language must stay Standard English and not have a variety. Unfortunately, varieties exist because there cannot be simply one standard. Like the Functional Theory, language change arises according to our needs. If we want to speak in a certain dialect because of a certain situation then we do so. If we want to create and use slang and colloquialism to fit in, then we do so. Language Change in the words of David Crystal ‘cannot be stopped.’
And can you summarise from Swift’s proposal?
To summarise, whilst Swift celebrates the English language he does not necessarily do the favour of appreciating all varieties of the English language. He wants to spread the legacy of language and stop it from becoming a dead language like Latin and Greek, but he is wrong in the measures that he has carried out to do so such as appealing Queen Anne. The English Language does not need a Swift, who doesn’t appreciate the diversity of the English Language as well as the Standard-form aspect.
Who is John Humphrys?
John Humphrys, a stickler in his 2004 book ‘Lost For Words: The Mangling and Manipulation of the English Language’ follows a similar prescriptivist view like Swift, he reprimands those who he sees as using English incorrectly.
According to him, what are features of ‘Good English’?
- It is clean, simple, plan and unambiguous’
- It is ‘free’ of jargon.
- Easy to read and listen to -> which is subjective to each individual.
- Beautiful / Inspirational
What does Humphrys argue should form the basis for language rules?
- We define the rules “we are the final court of appeal” reason should be would to argue for keeping/breaking rules.
- Language is there to express an entire range of moods and feelings.
As a linguist, we value what Humphrys says why? (Evaluation)
Humphrys takes a more relaxed approach at the English language, perhaps we may define him as a descriptivist as well as a stickler who holds a prescriptivist attitude. Whilst Humphrys may want an English that is ‘clean, simple, plan and unambiguous’ he wants an English language that is able to ‘express an entire range of moods and feelings.’ He argues that ‘we define the rules’ as ultimately ‘we are the final court of appeal.’ Ultimately, this means that as English speakers there is the ability to break the rules in order to fulfil those needs. Although, there are rules that speakers abide to, it is not fixated and if the rules of language need to be broken, then they must do so. To how much of an extent is difficult to say, this is why we have Academies and such to determine such rules. Humphrys, in my opinion is a more preferred than Swift who promotes a rather restricted-English language.
EXTRA: What arguments does Truss give that are agreeable?
2 Arguments
What annoys Truss about punctuation is the ‘ignorance and difference’ ‘the world carries on around us, blind to our plight’
She argues that punctuation is important for clarity and communicating messages such as the title of her book about a panda who ‘eat, shoots and leaves.’
.
Basing on those two arguments, what did a classmate say that is helpful for evaluation?
However, in our class an individual agreed to understand messages in context .An example being the many errors supermarkets fail into when advertising sales for fruits or vegetables. To those who do not take a second notice, the message is still clear and understandable. However, in certain contexts such as the joke that is the title of the book there is an obstruction of clarity which is why, we can agree with Truss that punctuation is essential for communicating messages with clarity.
