CMKM Diamonds Inc (fka CMKX)

[Investorman]

It might be a bit of a stretch to say that Bud is making an "educated" choice.

(idea) by fnordian (2.9 y) (print) ? (I like it!) Sun Aug 05 2001 at 21:38:58


I've never quite understood the argument that we shouldn't piddle over people using "incorrect" grammar because English is a living language.

Doesn't the fact that we recognise that English is changing obligate us to change it for the better? Why not change our language so as to make it more efficient rather than OKing things that detract from the clarity of speech? When we simply integrate into our language things that were previously unacceptable, we make it harder to translate between languages, for people from different dialects to communicate with each other, and for people to learn English.

I also have a personal dislike of many changes that have occured in recent history, because I am aware that they were based in ignorance. My dictionary includes possum as a word because enough people had a problem saying "an opossum" (and "a possum" sounds like "opossum" when one does not enunciate). Ironic has lost all meaning. What's the point? A counter example is the singular use of "they" has a distinct purpose and, while it is rejected by a fair number, I consider "allowing" it a positive change to language.

It seems to me that the best course of action would be to learn "proper" English - as it is - and make changes through educated choice.