Wednesday, October 27, 2010

regarding the grammar reading

I'm really glad we touched on the issue of grammar the other night in class.  This is a subject I've had changing views on throughout my life, views based upon my atmosphere and experiences.  For example, in high school, I worked almost painstakingly to cultivate an educated voice in my writing and speech.  On second thought, perhaps over-educated is a more appropriate term.  I would actually sometimes take pride in being able to speak in a way that some people couldn't fully understand me... pretentious, I know.  As I aged and matured a bit, I learned that my approach to speaking and writing was not a very diplomatic one, and that in fact I tended to alienate certain people.  Then when I was introduced to the AP style book and the field of news writing, I learned that to communicate very effectively, conciseness and plainness of language is key.  This, however, makes me wonder: just how "condensed" will the English language become, and will the Associated Press or other grammatical standards eventually change to accommodate emoticons or casual abbreviations?  If this would happen, what consequences might we face?  I guess what I'm getting at here is: does the construction/appearance of language ultimately really matter, as long as the meaning is conveyed?

2 comments:

  1. Great post, Eric! The battle between technical, "correct" language and progressive, evolving language is long and involved and might not ever be settled. Thoughtful insight!

    ReplyDelete
  2. There's definitely a delicate balance between what is "correct" and what is "common." I think that's because each of these meanings are subjective - language is constantly changing and evolving. Yet, I think it's an interesting and relevant dialogue to have. Ultimately, I think it's important to write for our audience and to ensure that our meaning is conveyed without sacrificing universally accepted standards of writing/speaking.

    ReplyDelete