Description or prescription?
Two schools of thought swim in the seas of linguistics. I call then the describers and the prescribers.
Describers say “This is how people use language.” They make no value judgements about language, and (IMO) consider themselves to be scientists.
Describer
Prescribers say “This is how language ought to be used.” Their premise is that if you don’t follow the rules, you will not be understood. I think they consider themselves to be communicators and teachers.
Prescriber
If you follow this site with any regularity, you know that a lot of the material here is prescriptive. Well, I’m a communicator. You need some rules to avoid ambiguity. But there’s a place for the purely descriptive, too, and debates between the two schools are mostly unnecessary; and they tend to concentrate in the boundary where change in language affects the rules. I think the describers tell the prescribers where they will be in the future, and the prescribers hate having to give in to the describers all the time.
I said all that to give you a link to a wonderful describer site. Check it out. It’s called Wordnik, and it’s a huge purely descriptive database (dictionary) of words as they are used now on the internet. No comments about rightness or wrongness. You can look for my own neologism, pretentiousism. I don’t think you’ll find it. Yet.
Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed
In which I bemoan the state of editing in…
…The New York Times, of all places. This newspaper, whatever you say about its politics, used to be the standard of good and correct writing to which any writer of non-fiction could aspire. Now I must say Beware of imitating how the NYT is written. I’m in the middle of a photo article that reviews [...]
One resolution
If you ever put pen to paper (perhaps I should be more general—words to paper or screen), you should make one resolution this year if it’s not already part of your lifestyle. It’s this: PROOFREAD EVERYTHING! Resolve never to commit anything to writing without at least re-reading it. Look for two things. First, look for [...]
I couldn’t resist
I was going to skip posting today, but I saw today’s Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal and had to share it with all you grammar-lovers out there in case you missed it. (The link is for the SMBC main site. You have to navigate to the one for Dec 31, 2011 if you click the link [...]
Grammar in comics
I seem to be on a comics jag lately. As it happens, comic writers generally have a pretty good grasp of English, and they have well-developed senses of humor, so I suppose comics are naturally a fertile field for humorous references to our language. Here are two more. Bob Thaves, he of Frank and Ernest, [...]
