|
LANGUAGE USE.
Term Paper ID:29281
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Difference between prescriptive and descriptive language.... More...
|
4 Pages / 900 Words
5 sources, 17 Citations,
MLA Format
$16.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Difference between prescriptive and descriptive language. How words are used. Emphasis on grammar, not acceptance of new words. Simon Winchester's account of how the OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (OED) came into being. Samuel Johnson's DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH. Conflict between academic linguists and popular language proponents.
Paper Introduction:
This research takes the form of an informative essay on the subject of the distinction between prescriptive and descriptive language use. The topic of research was chosen based on Winchester's account of how the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) came into being, in particular the section that describes a view held by many mid-nineteenth-century English lexicographers that all of the dictionaries that had been compiled to that time were products of prescription. Even the great Dr. Johnson, who in the mid-eighteenth century had produced his Dictionary of the English, had not been completely comprehensive. As Winchester puts it, Johnson and others were "guilty" of "selecting words for inclusion on the basis of whether they were good or bad" (104). Indeed, Boswell's biography of Johnson says as much. Boswell describes Johnson's method of writing etymology, defin
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
The prescriptivist and descriptivist positions on language do notappear to be reconcilable, especially where neologisms are concerned, butalso where grammatical usage is concerned. In other words, those who shaped the OED project weredetermined to create first of all a comprehensive collection of Englishwords and definitions, including "the history of the life span of each andevery word" (Winchester 1 4). Even the great Dr. Johnson, who in themid-eighteenth century had produced his Dictionary of the English, had notbeen completely comprehensive. . A he is used for a man and a she for a woman, along with many usages that would now be regarded as breaking the normal rules of English (McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil 96). Linguistic novelty could not be kept out, and English emerged as alanguage described as being "of unsurpassed richness and beauty, which,however, defies all the rules" (McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil 96). Moreover, traditional grammar books frequently "combine[]description and prescription" (Greenbaum, Aitchison, and McArthur 286),which means that some academic linguists, as well as popular languagecommentators, regard standards as having some relevance to language use. The most extreme descriptivistview of prescriptivist grammar is that "imposing the norms of some groupson all users of a language" (Greenbaum, Aitchison, and McArthur 286) isinappropriate, even though a cursory examination of bookstore shelvesreveals dozens of titles dealing with how to achieve good language andwriting skills. "Descriptive and Prescriptive Grammar." The Oxford Companion to the English Language. and an airline reports a fatal aircrash to its stockholders as "the involuntary conversion of a 727" (McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil 345).McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil cite the increased advocacy for "standards" inpopular discussions of the language, noting that the best-known standardsadvocates are newspaper and magazine columnists. This research takes the form of an informative essay on the subject ofthe distinction between prescriptive and descriptive language use. Because, as Winchester notes, entries for each word wereto include usages in literary passages "that showed where each word wasused first," the definitions in the OED would chart the evolution of aword, whether used according to specified norms or not (Winchester 1 5).Greenbaum (286) characterizes mid-2 th-century US linguists as mainlydescriptivist. . The OED project was conceptualized in descriptivist rather thanpedagogical terms. Tom McArthur. . The Professor and the Madman: A Tale of Murder, Insanity and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary. The [Reagan] White House, describing the invasion (or, as it preferred, "incursion") of Grenada, referred to a parachute drop as a "pre-dawn vertical insertion." . Tom McArthur. The question of how the words ought to beused the OED lexicographers appear to have been willing to leave to others. play toa wide public anxiety about the changing language" (345). Indeed, Boswell's biography of Johnson saysas much. "Descriptivism and Prescriptivism." The Oxford Companion to the English Language. The OED project was neither the first nor the last instance in whichthe content and shape of the English language was a controversial issue.McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil cite the addition of some 12, new words to theEnglish lexicon during the English Renaissance (from the high Tudor periodto the Protectorate). Prescriptivism, on the other hand, "sets out rules forwhat is regarded as correct in language" (286). Almost any word could be used in almost any part of speech. They also observethat some linguists (mainly academics and not journalists) say that "anyvariety of a language is as 'good' or 'correct' as any other variety"(346). Works CitedBoswell, James. What is striking about this passage is that Boswell is not beingcritical but laudatory when he describes Johnson's method of selectiveinclusion. The world of euphemistic jargon is the world in which "second-hand" cars become "experienced . New York: Oxford UP, 1992. Frequently they arecharacterized as "language vigilantes" and "pop grammarians." However,McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil point out that "these commentators . . It is conceivable that a descriptivist could point towhat some might see as problematic usage as an example of an evolvinglanguage. New York: Penguin, 1986.Winchester, Simon. London: Penguin Classics, 1986.Greenbaum, Sidney, Aitchison, Jean, and McArthur, Tom. Boswell describes Johnson's method of writing etymology,definition, and "various significations" of each word, and documenting hissource materials. Ed. But Johnson can also be said to have "edited" words outof his dictionary: It is remarkable, that he was so attentive in the choice of the passages in which words were authorised that one may read page after page of his Dictionary with improvement and pleasure; an it should not pass unobserved, that he has quoted no authour whose writings had a tendency to hurt sound religion and morality (Boswell 61). Descriptivists can be said to watch the language evolve andrecord the process. The Story of English. . Adverbs could be used for verbs, nouns for adjectives; nouns and adjectives could take the place of verbs and adverbs. Ed. 286.Greenbaum, Sidney. Thecurrent controversy has less to do with which new words are to be acceptedinto the language than with how such words are used. The view of those who conceived the OED was that it should be"'an inventory of the language' and decidedly not a guide to proper usage"(Winchester 1 4). New York: Harper Perennial, 1998. The words came from multiple sources: science,encounters of war and trade between England, the countries of continentalEurope, and the Americas. . In the modern period there is controversy about the language that iscomparable to the plainnesse-inkorn disputes of the Elizabethan period. Basically, theconfrontation is between descriptivists and prescriptivists of the languageand of grammar. There developed a tension between advocates oflanguage "plainnesse" and those who used so-called "inkhorn terms," areference to the fact that "much ink was spilt arguing their merits for thelanguage" (McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil 95). Linguistic descriptivism, as the term implies, "proposesthe objective and systematic description of language, in whichinvestigators confine themselves to facts as they can be observed"(Greenbaum 286). McCrum, Cran, and MacNeil refer to this as "an effort toplease," though the examples they give to illustrate the way language isused could also be characterized as an effort to avoid clear communication. As Winchester puts it, Johnson and otherswere "guilty" of "selecting words for inclusion on the basis of whetherthey were good or bad" (1 4). or fall an axe on his neck. Thetopic of research was chosen based on Winchester's account of how theOxford English Dictionary (OED) came into being, in particular the sectionthat describes a view held by many mid-nineteenth-century Englishlexicographers that all of the dictionaries that had been compiled to thattime were products of prescription. . 286.McCrum, Robert, Cran, William and MacNeil, Robert. In Elizabethan English you could happy your friend . . However, prescriptivists also have a significant voice in the moderndiscourse of language, due in part to evidence that, in the "permissiveage" of contemporary Western culture, language has been deployed in theservice of jargon, euphemism, scientistic locutions, and indeedobfuscation. New York: Oxford UP, 1992. The Life of Samuel Johnson. Greenbaum's descriptionnotes that those who debate which approach to language is most satisfactory"often use the label for the other side dismissively" (286).
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
