Re: off topic: language, long

["Richard W. Tarara" <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

Since this thread isn't going away......

Don't fool yourself into believing that the ability to speak and write
'within the rules' isn't important to employers.  You could easily find
yourself unemployed!

It is also difficult enough to communicate intended meanings (this list is a
prime example) using a reasonably well-defined set of grammatical rules.
Without these rules your 'standard of intelligibility' would soon be lost
and the language degenerate into babble.  Such is already the case with
certain dialects or slangs where the words may be English but the meanings
to be communicated can be very obscure for most English-speaking people.
The comedic example of this was the first Airplane movie, where the dialog
between two 'ghetto' passengers required subtitles.  (Can anyone say
Ebonics?)

Rick



----- Original Message -----
From: "Zach Wolff" <zachary_wolff@YAHOO.COM>
> I disagree that the vast majority of prescriptive
> rules actually facilitate efficient and effective
> communication.  I am not against standards entirely.
> That position is clearly ridiculous.  I only ask that
> the standard of intelligibility by a native speaker be
> the primary standard.  Everything else is neither
> correct nor incorrect, but a matter of style.  I
> believe that teaching an effective writing style
> should be a high priority for our schoools, but I
> believe the best way to do this is through practice,
> feedback, and exposure to large quantities of good
> examples, not through rules like "breech is a noun."
> In the end wee can argue the merits of one style over
> another, but I don't think any style choice deserves
> the reprimand the use of the word breech received.
> This habit of noun to verb conversion seems to be
> remarkably productive and important in the English
> language.
>
> Best,
> Zach Wolff