Picture this. You are on a date with a prescriptivist and they call you ‘nice’ and ‘pretty’. Initially, you may feel flattered but upon further inspection, you will work out that by ‘pretty’ they mean ‘cunning’ (OED Online, 2019) and by ‘nice’ they mean ‘stupid’ (OED Online, 2019). This is because prescriptivists like to preserve language, often tracing back the original etymology of a word and using its archaic definition.
A couple of years ago, the politician Jacob Rees-Mogg found himself in an argument with news presenter Jon Snow over Brexit, with Snow referring to Brexit as a âshamblesâ. Rees-Mogg responded âI think you are classically overstating what has in fact happened [âŚ] you call it a shambles, you say that itâs a butcherâs slaughterhouse [âŚ] thatâs what a shambles meansâ (Hunt, 2017). Rees-Mogg was referring to the usage first recorded in 1548; â[t]he place where animals are killed for meat; a slaughter-houseâ (OED Online, 2019). However, in modern usage shambles has multiple definitions, most commonly used as a synonym for âmessâ (OED Online, 2019).
However, prescriptivist attitudes are not limited to word definitions, as many prescriptivists like to dictate their own set of rules on many linguistic levels. In some cases, it even extends to accents and dialects. Prescriptivists believe that language is static and unchanging and needs to âset out rules for what is regarded as correctâ (McArthur, 1996, p.263). This idea that language must be preserved at a certain stage is unrealistic and prescriptivists become hypocritical as their own language usage could be regarded as âincorrectâ by their own rules. Many prescriptivists, such as Simon Heffer, have no academic background in linguistics and are often corrected using their own rules. The linguist David Crystal (2010) reviewed Hefferâs Strictly English, stating that â[t]he problem with people who want to impose their linguistic tastes on others is that they never do so consistentlyâ. So, if prescriptivists themselves struggle to stick to the ârulesâ, why should everyone else?
To a prescriptivist, Received Pronunciation is considered the ideal, an accent strictly used by the BBC when first broadcasting. Now, however, there is diversity when it comes to televised accents and dialects with continuity announcers on Channel 4 including Caribbean and Scottish accents, even including an announcer with a speech impediment (Channel 4, 2016). Despite efforts to normalise such accents, strong regional accents are often still regarded as incorrect by prescriptivists, and often prescriptivists will criticise what they consider to be âlazyâ use of language when in fact, it is a regional way of speaking.
Furthermore, nowadays, we communicate through more than just words. With their introduction in the late 1990s, emojis have become a regular occurrence in most lives since around 2011 (Tauch and Kanjo, 2016). Oxford dictionaries even announced the âFace with Tears of Joyâ as their word of the year back in 2015 (BBC Newsbeat, 2015). Similarly, more recently it was announced that drivers in Queensland, Australia, will be able to include emojis in their personalised number plates (Alton, 2019). This introduction of a viusal image as a form of language has changed how we communicate and further angers prescriptivists who detest the idea of images forming part of language. Overall, prescriptivism is an elitist means of oppression, effectively belittling those who use language in what they consider to be an âincorrectâ way.
However, a language without some rules would not be a successful one. Languages must have basic rules in order to be understandable, but to prescribe rules constantly would take away the natural changing nature of language. For many, their use of language coincides with their social identity. In order to learn English, those learning it begin by following rules, so in a way, prescriptivism can be useful. On the other hand, prescriptivism can extend from simple policing of language to a deeper issue of class and social status as those with RP accents, and considered âcorrectâ language use, are âmore successfulâ (Brandreth, 2018).
So, if you do end up staying out on that date with a prescriptivist, it would be best to avoid ordering cappuccinos and a panini. âPaniniâ is the plural form in its origin language Italian, and âpaninoâ is the singular. Similarly, ordering one cappuccino for yourself would be âcorrectâ but saying âIâd like two cappuccinosâ, according to prescriptivist values, becomes a âcappucciniâ as it would in Italian (Bad Linguistics, 2010). However, âif you did walk into a deli in England and ordered a panino and two cappuccini, you would be judged, rightly, as completely ridiculousâ (Bad Linguistics, 2010).
MAISIE CRAN, English Language undergraduate, University of Chester, UK
References
Bad Linguistics (2010, September 15). Simon Heffer and a cartload of rubbish.
BBC Breakfast (2018, October 12). Gyles Brandrethâs pet hates. BBC.
âLiterallyâ. OED Online. (2019). Oxford University Press.
âNiceâ. OED Online. (2019). Oxford University Press.
Oxford Dictionaries (2015, November 17). Word of the year is the tears of joy emoji. BBC.
âPrettyâ. OED Online. (2019). Oxford University Press.
âShambleâ. OED Online. (2019). Oxford University Press.
Sangster, C. (2014, September 23). Received Pronunciation and BBC English. BBC.
Language Debates 