Random Thoughts On The Decline Of English

Fred On Everything ^ | 010504 | Fred Reed

[Archangelsk]

Random Thoughts On The Decline Of English

Bile, Vitriol, And Lost Clauses

January 5, 2004

Being as I am a shade-tree writer, tinkering with these essays as with a ’54 Merc on blocks behind the garage, I find myself grieving for what was once quite a language. English grows ugly and lapses into deformity. My mail creaks under the weight of misused pronouns and homeless participles. People seem to spell by ear: “Your” and “you’re,” “it’s” and “its” are mixed like salads. The young assert that “me and him was talking,” and really don’t know better. Perhaps three people in the United States know what a contraction is. Many believe that a verb agrees with the object of the nearest preposition.

Words seem to have become more puzzling than they once were, even to the purportedly educated. A list of confusions is easily compiled. “Partly” doesn’t mean “partially;” nor historic, historical; nor philosophic, philosophical; nor sensuous, sensual; nor religiosity, religiousness; nor belligerent, bellicose; nor feminine, effeminate; nor continuous, continual; nor effete, epicene; “It is important that you do not smoke” is not the same as “It is important that you not smoke.” “The new airplane is five times faster than the old” probably doesn’t mean anything at all; if it does, it means “The new airplane is six times as fast as the old.” The word “disingenious” doesn’t exist, though I hear it from the educated. (“Disingenuous” is meant.)

Are there real writers out there under fifty? I mean distinctive writers and fine craftsmen, the Mark Twains and Ambrose Bierces and Hunter Thompsons and Joseph Hellers that once made the United States a font of genuine if eccentric talent. They may exist. If so, they aren’t promoted.

We have allowed the schools to fall into the hands of fools and charlatans, and we pay the price.

A language in a high state of development is a lovely and a precise instrument, but a fragile one. English at its peak—which might, very arbitrarily, have been the time of Chesterton, Galsworthy, C. S. Lewis and Tolkien—was limber, yet hard-edged and surgical when it needed to be. You could write a sonnet in it but also a textbook of physics, without ambiguity. A robust subjunctive gave it a subtlety that is the purpose of subjunctives, and the curious mixture of Anglo-Saxon and Grecolatinate vocabulary gave it a complex but flavorful texture (if textures can be flavorful).

But no longer.

Good English (or French, or Spanish, or Chinese) depends on a cultivated elite to preserve it. A pride in language is needed to prevent degradation from seeping upward from the lower classes, and only careful schooling instills the fine distinctions that make the difference between the literate and those who recognize words vaguely, like half-forgotten relatives.

In England the aristocracy and its schools, as for example Oxford and Cambridge, maintained linguistic standards; in ancient Rome, the ruling classes who studied under the great rhetoricians. In the United States the tradition survived awhile in a variety of schools. My own experience was of Southern colleges such as William and Mary and Hampden-Sydney (in which latter my grandfather was professor of mathematics).

As is usual in civilizations not yet in decline, people at these institutions cared about language and literature. I remember that we played a parlor game in which the contestant called out numbers, as for example 234, 2, 6. He was then read whatever word was found on page 234, column two, entry six of a massive unabridged dictionary. He was expected to spell it, and give its etymology and first and second meanings. People do not, I think, play that game today.

Today of course we have no elites of any influence, and we are prescriptively hostile to what is called “elitism.” Elitism is simply the idea that the better is preferable to the worse. Why anyone with good sense would be against it escapes me. The unwashed have discovered that it is easier to ignore the language than to learn it. Given that the unwashed now run the schools, that, as we say, is that. I do not know how one repairs the chain once it is broken.

The unworthy like to argue, almost as if they had some slight idea what they were talking about, that any language is acceptable provided that it communicates. The problem with unschooled and degraded English is precisely that it doesn’t communicate well. In an America that has embraced the tastes and standards of the black ghetto, I occasionally see it written that Ebonics is a language to be respected as much as English. Oh? It is an unwritten language, which might seem to put it at some slight disadvantage to a language that has had a rich literature since at least the fourteenth century. (I’m not sure that pre-Chaucerian English is quite what I think of as English.)

But how in Ebonics does one say, “The entropy of a closed system tends to remain the same or to increase”? I will avoid parody. A more important question is how do decreasingly literate professors write textbooks of subjects that have to be explained clearly? As the distinctions between words are lost, as the grammar degenerates toward bumperstickerhood, people can no longer express, and perhaps cannot think, things that once they could have.

Language does not exist only to convey logical complexities or to make abstractions crystalline. Words can be as beautiful as a sunset, a truth probably discovered five thousand years ago. The difference is that a sunset is accessible to anyone. No training is needed to love those great gaudy skyscapes that flow across the heavens like incandescent dunes. They stand on their own.

To appreciate literature requires intimate familiarity with the language. Art is freedom exercised within rules. (There. We’ve settled that.) Just as you cannot tell good jitterbugging from bad if you do not know the structure of the dance, so you cannot tell good writing from bad if you don’t know the language works. Few any longer learn the rules.

Of what provenance is this awful drabness? I can only guess. We fill the universities with people who have no business being there. We then accept their values. The country has embraced almost lasciviously a radical egalitarianism whose pretences can be maintained only by dragging all to the level of the lowest. Television bathes us all in the moral and cultural drains from which there is no escape. Elites can exist only when they can isolate themselves. They no longer can.

What we have lost we will be a long while in getting back.

[Archangelsk]

Indeed.

[Archangelsk]

Ping

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
	Kenya						20.00	1

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[baltodog]

"What we have lost we will be a long while in getting back."

Wrong. What we have lost will never be found. How sad.

[antiRepublicrat]

Apparently I'm not alone. Good.

[Age of Reason]

Malicious guttersnipes.

[Diogenesis]

He be makin' ebonics seem double-plus-ungood.

[jigsaw]

Well, Fred, these days it all depends on what the meaning of is is.

[Consort]

But how in Ebonics does one say, “The entropy of a closed system tends to remain the same or to increase”?

Ebonics:
The entropy o' uh closed system tends ta remain da same or ta increase what 'chew trippin foo'

Jive:
Da entropy o' some closed system tends t' remain da same o' t'incraise.

[centurion316]

I cannot agree more. Where is Gwendolyn Ritchie (Columbus HS, English, circa 1963) when we really need her? The art and practice of the language are fading away before our very eyes. How will the generations yet born be able to communicate in some meaningful way?

Faint hope remains, however, on this forum. I recently misused the word "misogyny" when I meant to use "miscengenation". The lateness of the hour, the effects of copious amounts of Jack Daniels, and my reliance on Microsoft's Spellchecker were my only excuses -- they were flimsy defense. But, I was quickly and firmly set straight by fellow freepers. Light the torch and hold it high. Welcome those who choose to come close to the light, and share the knowledge. We shall prevail.

[Professional Engineer]

ping

[Wonder Warthog]

"Indeed."

Yea, verily, and forsooth!!!

[Ophiucus]

The author omitted the their, there, and they're confusion. That misuse drives me abso-freaking-lutely nuts.

[freedumb2003]

But how in Ebonics does one say, “The entropy of a closed system tends to remain the same or to increase”?

Tings stays the same. O' dey gets worser.

[BeerSwillr]

I dunno, I think ol' Fred's kinda good with them thar words an' all that kinda stuff.

[Billthedrill]

Beautiful essay, rather better than Fred has been wont to produce of late. Good writing requires a decent vocabulary, built slowly by reading the works of better writers, which is one reason Fred might ask "Are there real writers out there under fifty?" Of course there are, but they are rather rare. They seem to occur most often in poetry - Shelley and Rimbaud come to mind as examples of very young poets who displayed an artistry with language that they developed with astonishing rapidity in their tragically short span of years.

But essayists, now they're another matter. Montaigne, the master and progenitor of them all, did not flower until quite late in life. This, I think, may be a consequence of the clarity of thought born of long practice and the fund of life's experience that the really good essayist brings to bear on his subject, which are the fruits of maturity.

But I don't think the appreciation of writing as a high art has diminished any more than the appreciation of painting or sculpture; it was, as Fred suggests, always the characteristic of a self-selecting elite rather than a self-proclaimed and undeserving one (that, parenthetically, has given the odor to the term "elite" that it currently quite rightfully carries), and it is a taste that must be cultivated. It may be that an age of instant gratification such as the television offers tends to obscure the existence of the more patient appreciations, but kill them off altogether? Never! Why else would anyone write this sort of composition? Why would anyone think it worth offering to an audience of readers, and why would anyone think it worthy of comment?

I don't always - well, often - agree with Mr. Reed, but he can certainly craft a well-turned phrase. Thanks for posting!

[FreepLady]

As an English major, reading the above makes me sad. Fred is saying what I have thought for years.

[nopardons]

What a sad and wonderful article.

And there is NO such word as " ANYWAYS "; it does NOT exist, no mater how many times FREEPERs type it. :-(

[bonfire]

What REALLY drives me nuts is all the commentators on TV saying "Take a listen...". It sounds so stupid to me.

And why does EVERYONE say "Where are you AT?" Good grief!

[Positive]

"miscengenation" = miscegenation.

[nopardons]

Ye gods and little fishes...who says that junk ?

Since I don't watch anything but cable T.V. and two shows on PBS,I seem to have missed hearing any of that.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Too many passives. Doesn't the writer know that "The bridge is being built," is improper (circa 1700) and "The bridge is building," is correct?

[SouthernClaire]

One fine writing. However, it does discount the fact that not all are given the opportunity to secure a fine edumacation.

I agreed up to the PORTION that seemed to convey that those of a certain status need not apply and need not try. "We fill the universities with people who have no business being there." (Words exist for what I really want to use here .... but, no, good judjeeement prevails.)

Not all are ignorant by choice. Rather, circumstance has left some of usn's in positions we'd, given the choice, not be. Takes no genius to figure that one.

Proper is great. However, it's not topping my list tonight. I have work to do in order to pay to send my child to ... what? A university to teach her how UNwell-spoken I beeze. Great.

In the end, the entire article is garbage. It places no burden on intelligence, but all on chance. It’s an insult to every hardworking man or woman who's not had the same opportunities (or plain luck) as others and who must work to a physical exhaustion that those so fortunate enough to know where properly to place a semi-colon may never know.

“Chance,” it’s called. It’s that thing that happens when I child is born and looks up for the first time and asks:

“Whom did I get?”

[Dog Gone]

While there is much truth to this, language does evolve and anyone who fights this will likely be speaking Chaucer's English a thousand years from now, and be just as hard to understand.

[FrogMom]

My pet peeve lately is lose and loose as in, "Did you loose your wallet?" I get vivid pictures in my fevered mind of a wildly thrashing wallet let loose on the world.

[CrazyIvan]

Our community recently lost one of it's most beloved ladies, a retired English professor from the local college. A nurse approached her on her death bed and asked, "Where does it hurt at?" According to local legend her last words were: "You mean 'Where does it hurt'."

[Nick Danger]

It just wouldn't be Free Republic if somebody didn't catch the grammar cop making a mistake.

you cannot tell good jitterbugging from bad if you do not know the structure of the dance, so you cannot tell good writing from bad if you don’t know the language works.

There. I feel much gooder now.

[Paulus Invictus]

Hey dude, like, you know, like, wats wrong with English? All you need to do is listen to young people struggle to make themselves understood with their limited grasp of the language. It's sad, but English is declining fast.

[bonfire]

How funny! Good for her. I hope my last words are as memorable!

[nopardons]

Barbra Striesand !

In the past, people used to strive to improve themselves and that included how they wrote and spoke. Formal education had little to do with it. Even new immigrants went to the movies, to learn what to emulate, to belong.Now, movies and T.V. script writers use base language, bring everything down into the gutter, and you have middle and upper middle and even upper class kids emulating the lowest of the low, in speech, dress, manners (?), and morals.

[bonfire]

Fox girls say it all the time. The most notorious offender is Nancy Grace.

The "where are you at?" I hear all the freaking time by cell phone users in stores. Makes my skin crawl.

[clodkicker]

Never use a preposition to end a sentence with.

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

Good authors too who once knew better words
Now only use four-letter words
Writing prose.
Anything goes.

Cole Porter - 1934 Broadway musical, Anything Goes! (Act 1 Scene 6)

[nopardons]

Since I turn FNC on around 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. and turn the sound off, when Laurie Due et al come on, I guess I've been lucky to have missed hearing the " girls " say that.

The other, makes my skin crawl and my teeth itch. I share your dislike of the phrase, but I haven't actually heard anyone say it.

The " anyways " and messed up spellings of your/you're, there/they're/their on FR, drives my nuts.

[July 4th]

Fo shizzle.

[SouthernClaire]

Thanks. But, it's "Babs" (?) to you, if you don't mind! :-)

You missed my point.

Or either you made my point. I'm not sure.

Taking your view, I agree: We should emulate best behaviour. However, when that's not to be found, what then?

My point is that we should not take people as idiots or believe they don't want to learn simply because they're in no position to learn.

[nopardons]

Yes, great lyrics and from an equally great musical. But, things are now very much worse, than they were back then, as far as the writing ability of published authors and the general public.

[bonfire]

lol! I live in TX and they have there own version of English.

[scab4faa]

Why English is hard to learn
1) The bandage was wound around the wound.
2) The farm was used to produce produce.
3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.
4) We must polish the Polish furniture.
5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.
6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.
7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.
8) A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.
9) When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.
10) I did not object to the object.
11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.
12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
13) They were too close to the door to close it.
14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.
15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.
16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
17) The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
18) After a number of injections my jaw got number.
19) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.
20) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
21) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?

[nopardons]

There are still people who speak and write well. There are very old movies shown on TCM and AMC, there are old, very well written books for people to read, and though no one gives their children elocution lessons anymore, as was popular when my grandmother was a child,those books still can be found in libraries...not to mention on a shelf in my home. :-)

I may have have missed your point, or you may have missed mine. Are we talkikng at crossed purposes and why don't you know what Barbra Striesand stands for here on FR ?

Just who, WHO is not in a poszition to not know that "anyways" is not a word ?

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

"Anyways" is in my copy of Random House Webster's Unabridged.

[SouthernClaire]

I don’t know what BS stands for here or anywhere else on the Internet. Sorry.

(Well, slight confession: I do know what BS stands for. And I think her views fit perfectly my definition of .... BS. :-))

I do think you locked horns with me agreeing with your stance, however. My sentiment is, and was, that some are not afforded the time, money, associates or what have you, to have their English influenced to a point of perfection.
Not sure what you meant by “WHO is not in a poszition to not know that “anyways” is not a word?” You lost me. I don’t spend as much time here as I should.

SC

[Bernard Marx]

Why English is hard to learn

Ah, the dreaded homonym. Spell checkers are no defense, either; you have to actually LEARN the differences. So few do these days and that's why we have people pouring over books, breaking their cars to a stop, reigning their emotions in, etc. The worst for me are horrible bloopers involving the words affect and effect. Homonyms truly can change language meaning and can even be dangerous in situations where clarity is required, like wars, explosives factories, etc.

[Bernard Marx]

"Anyways" is in my copy of Random House Webster's Unabridged.

So are monstrosities like "irregardless." Dictionaries reflect actual language usage. An illiterate populace fills dictionaries with illiterate words.

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

I've a friend who routinely accepts whatever 'possible' substitutions of grammar and spelling that Word offers. It makes for some very interesting and annoying messages from her. She has informed me that she got straight A's in English. At least she's cute (if I don't have to read her drivel!).

[dk/coro]

I realy unnerstan your coment. But, when there English gits really bad on Fox, etc. I just take s goodly long look at there lucious lips..an legs...and all is fergiven.

Okey doke ??

BTY, I'm almost 75 now...an my prioritys is jimmied up a bit. Wished I was younger ...an them gal talkers would probly have ter talk better'n. OK...?

[luckymom]

I hate it when they say "That's a whole NOTHER story." Nother?!?!?!

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

"Usage. IRREGARDLESS is considered nonstandard because of the two negative elements ir- and -less. It was probably formed on the analogy of such words as irrespective, irrelevant, and irreparable. Those who use it, including on occasion educated speakers, may do so from a desire to add emphasis. IRREGARDLESS first appeared in the early 20th century and was perhaps popularized by its use in a comic radio program of the 1930s."
FROM:Random House Webster's

Language changes. After more than 70 years it's just pompous to pine for the earlier version. I'm sure in Elizabethan England some looked fondly upon Chaucerian usage.
As shown by my earlier Porter quote, complaints about the current state of the language have always existed.
THOUGH: modern music, e.g. rap, is abysmal!

[nopardons]

Well, dear, not being male and far short of your 75 years,those " girls " don't do anything for me and I'd rather they spoke well and that Laurie Due would stop loading her lips with Collogen and lipgloss gloss...szhe's freakish looking.