This Language Myth was very philosophical in its take on the origins of words and their meanings. The myth for this week was that there are multiple meanings of words that change over time based on speakers and the context and there are skeptics who believe that changes in language is not right. These skeptics argue that language is meant to be set in stone and that a word’s meaning and importance should be defined based on its origins. The example the author gave was how aggravate means “to irritate” in English although this word is derived from the Latin word “aggravare”, which means “to make heavier”. The thing though with this myth is that in English, there are many words which have changed their meanings over the centuries. Thus, the one thing I seek to understand is how many words even came into existence and what in particular caused their meanings to change over time. Going off this, I also want to understand how definitions of words have evolved and changed to what they are now.
Language Myths
LM 8: Children can’t speak or write properly anymore
This week’s Language Myth was very intriguing. The overarching idea is that language is in decline and that it is associated with moral decline. Furthermore, one common complaint is that young people can misuse the language often or not learn it properly. However, this is not true because today’s children are equally, if not more, competent in reading and writing their language than older generations in children were. There are some reasons out there, though, that can cause people to think today’s children are not competent in language. One reason is that children learn to read and write in school, but they learn to speak with instruction. Thus, people complain that children have problem in that their knowledge of words and variety is not that expansive. This problem can be attributed to the rising standards of English every year in that students are expected to be more knowledgeable earlier in life. The major flaw with this assumption is that it does not take into account that speaking is a natural skill that is not taught and takes time to learn. Thus, with this myth, a question I seek to explore is how have grammar tests evolved over the last 100 years and how they might evolve in the future.
LM 12: Bad Grammar is Slovenly.
While reading this chapter, one thing that really stood out to me was how the author broke down the different types of grammar based on each speaker. He talked about the fact that bad grammar can stem from prescriptive grammar, which is a linguistic etiquette that is basically an arbitrary set of do’s and don’ts. This, in turn, can cause speakers to have a disparity between what they believe is correct and what they actually do. This type of grammar often occurs with native speakers because they take the rules for granted. On the other hand, there is descriptive grammar, which describes how words are patterned and put together to form sentences. The major difference in this grammar is that the rules the underlie patterns that form sentences are acquired by speakers of different languages, while English speakers are typically instinctive to the prescriptive grammar and they take the English rules for granted. This is one observation I have always noticed when I speak with native English speakers. I am not a native English speaker and had to learn English but when I speak with other native speakers, I often have to correct their grammar, whether it is spoken or written. The point of interest in this topic, though, is the idea that prescriptive grammar is not always right and instincts might pose mistakes. Typically, English speakers develop their language skills right after they are born but even then, they can be subject to mistakes that other non-native English speakers point out. Overall, the different types of grammar and ways we process language are concepts I seek to explore further.