Proper rules of English
I enjoyed reading this letter to the editor about what he calls the "feminization" of the English language. He bemoans the sad state of journalism as it uses and misuses language.
The idea that there is one and only one correct set of grammar rules is misguided. As a living, breathing language, English evolves, sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly. What you remember learning in school changes. I don't even know that the examples cited in the letter are taught in school; much of our language practices are picked up along the way.
For instance, I'm not aware of a punctuation rule that requires "president" to be capitalized when referring to the president of the United States. It may be a practice showing respect, but I have consulted a few grammar books and it's not listed.
Check the definition of actor and it makes no reference to gender. Turn to actress and it states: "a woman who is an actor." Same applies to comedian and comedienne. They both make a gender-based distinction where one is unnecessary. It's demeaning.
The AP stylebook, which we use as a guide, isn't a Bible, either. In fact, it instructs us not to capitalize the pronoun "he" when referring to God, a rule that irritates some readers everytime we follow it.
The AP Stylebook simply helps make newspaper usage consistent. Is it Osama or Usama? Is it Burma or Myanmar?
There are other stylebooks, too, including the New York Times Manual of Style and Usage and the Chicago Manual of Style.
Language doesn't always follow popular usage. Take email, for example. I spelled it the way just about everyone does. Not AP or the dictionary. (Insert a hyphen.) Everyone I know writes website; we and the dictionary write Web site.
My point is that we occasionally make mistakes on grammar, but less often than many people think.
Comments (2)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
John:
The scope of acceptable (proper?) English is much narrower than you may have lead others to believe (just ask any English teacher). The fact that we use certain words or grammar doesn't make them acceptable. I am sure that your parents told you (as mine told me) not to use words like "ain't" or other slang that you picked up.
Like most everything, I think it is fair to say that we are "dumbing down" the language to make it more inclusive. We don't want to offend people so we accept the use of silly words. Remember when some rocket scientist suggested that black kids be allowed to speak Ebonics? Another example of absurdity is found in congress, where the august body refers to female members as "gentlewomen." Apparently referring to a woman in congress as a "lady" somehow puts them on a different plane than their male counterparts.
Words mean things. They help us to communicate ideas. When one is able to dictate what one's use of a word means, it robs the word of meaning. As former Boston College President and Massachussets gubernatorial candidate John Silber once said, one can't refer to ones self as furniture.
There is nothing wrong with insisting that people use proper English.
Posted on November 27, 2007 12:21 AM
Hello,
Interested people can read about (and discuss) "lead" vs. "led," style guides, proper usages, language evolution and a large variety of other thoughts on language at my blog, http://dowriteright.blogspot.com/.
-mike
Posted on December 3, 2007 4:11 PM