11/19/13 7:27 PM

I really enjoyed this! I hadnt ever thought through this problem before, and you had strong ideas presented in an interesting way that made me want to read more. Overall, there are not any big-picture issues I would change. Well done! Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:49 PM Added: Tab Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:50 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:50 PM Deleted: e Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:50 PM Deleted: common enough Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:50 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:50 PM Deleted: be Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:50 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:51 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:51 PM Deleted: , Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:51 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:51 PM Deleted: b Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:51 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:51 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:51 PM Deleted: the Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:52 PM Deleted: in this regard Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:52 PM Deleted: Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:52 PM Deleted:

Rules Are Made to Be Broken I support the need for language boundaries. Structural 0 and linguistic rules help keep speakers of the same language on 0 ground that is common enough to communicate thoughts and ideas effectively and efficiently. Language used correctly benefits everyone, whether they 0 are native speakers or foreign learners. I believe that general rules provide structure to what can seem like sporadic sounds; they turn random knotted strings of words into a beautifully woven blanket of meaning. 0 But, 0 I dont think there is just one pattern to be made to convey a specific meaning. My dilemma with language convention is 0 how the word correct is defined. 0 The prescriptivist viewpoint suggests that spoken and written rhetoric is declining in quality as the years go by, that their rules and applications should be used by every speakerthat only their way is 0 correct. 0Yet, how can this outlook on language be right if the very language that prescriptivists use to voice their displeasure is actually made up of pronunciations and word ordering that would be completely foreign to a speaker of that same language only a century before? All you need to do is look at a manuscript from the 1800s or earlier, and you will see just how 0 much language has changed. 0 Because language changes constantly, correct usage should 0 not be determined by the opinions of stubborn linguistic mules; rather, it should be based on a view that says, What will convey the most understandable message in a way the author would actually say it? I began my journey into the realm of linguistics, usage, and grammar only with what people had told me throughout my life. The basic dos and donts of English grammar (Ive since

11/19/13 7:27 PM
For clarity, it may be better to just use this term from the beginning instead of starting with grammar and then switching over to usage.

learned that the more appropriate term here is usage) were pretty well ingrained in my mind when I chose to pursue a major in linguistics and a minor in editing. I was part of the prescriptivist bandwagon because thats all I was ever told was an option: mind your who and whom and lay and lie, and dont forget, you cant split an infinitive verb. Then I took my first linguistics course and discovered an obvious fact: language is not ingrained in stone like I had been taught. Language changes. 0 Colloquial speech is language in its purest formcurrent, communicative, and constantly changing. This is the way of the descriptivists, describing language as it is, not as it is supposed to be. Section 5.220 of the Chicago Manual of Style says, Good usage should make only reasonable demands without setting outlandishly high standards (263). As I stated before, I believe certain rules are a necessity to 0 clear communication. These are the reasonable

11/19/13 7:27 PM
It is a little repetitive to use the same sentence structure twice in a row. Is there another way that you could format this? Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:57 PM Deleted: The c Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:57 PM Added Text

Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:58 PM Deleted: understandable and

demands. However, there are other rules that the term outlandishly high standards definitely apply to. For example, in my junior year of high school, I was required to write what was called

Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:59 PM Deleted: manuscript Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:59 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:59 PM Deleted: from Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 6:59 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:00 PM Deleted: , but Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:00 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:00 PM Deleted: just

the scholarly paper. It was the first ten-page 0 text I had ever written. When I received my first draft back, I noticed that I had been marked off for using first-person voice, misusing the word who, beginning a sentence with a conjunction, and other things that were marked for sounding like it was spoken in dialogue instead of read 0 in a textbook. What was wrong with using firstperson? Was I unclear in what I was saying? Is it actually easier for readers to comprehend the writings of a textbook than to hear someone explain it to them vocally in words that are used every day? I of course had to change my writing style to conform to that of the schools rubric so I would be able to move on to my senior year. 0 I0 had to accept that the schools way was correct, no questions asked.

Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:01 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:00 PM Deleted: is Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:01 PM Deleted: A Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:01 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:02 PM Added Text Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:01 PM Deleted: s

The 0 mentality that I was forced to adopt is echoed in the words of author James M. Williams: Unlike clarity . . . correctness seems not a matter of choice, but of obedience (11). He then goes on to explain why some rules are necessary for language, just as I did earlier, but then says that many other rules do nothing more than eliminate choice. Some are not even real rules, he writes, and 0 if you obsess over them all, you prevent yourself from writing quickly and clearly (11). That sense of obedience is 0 how I felt when I was writing my scholarly paper; my choices in writing style were being made for me, and towards the end I was struggling to write clearly because I was trying to keep all the rules in mind while I was typing. When I turned in my final draft for grading, I didnt know if my voice was in it at all. The final form of my scholarly paper may be 0 an extreme example in terms of the

Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:03 PM Deleted: kind of Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:03 PM Deleted: I think

downside of prescriptivism, but 0 it illustrates my point rather nicely. Another quote, this one from William Bridgewater in the 1985 edition of Editors on Editing, is further positive support for descriptivism as the main source of language knowledge. He says, Too great stress upon rules upon correctnessis perilous. If the worst disease in copyediting is arrogance [toward authors], the second worst is rigidity (quoted in Einsohn, page 9). As Bridgewater says, rigidity in writing happens because there is too much structure; there are too many rules being followed. It takes away the creativity that makes some articles, documents, or books into a true piece of art. Other examples from my own experiences are the many times that I have been corrected because

Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:04 PM Deleted: none Holly Smith Nov 19, '13, 7:04 PM Added Text

of my choice of words in speech, and there is 0 no rule that I remember better than the usage of may and can. Even now when I eat at home, when I ask to be excused (I always try to be polite), I say, Can I be excused? Without fail, my father will respond, I dont know, can you? Its kind of a running joke in my family, I suppose, but there are real cases of grammar Nazis that

stare in shock and disgust whenever this common phrase is uttered or written in a way that is contrary to their opinion. A final passage of evidence to my case: while I am writing this paper, I am looking at 11/19/13 7:27 PM
Chicago says that semicolons should be preceded by a complete sentence. Is there a way that you could revise the introduction to follow this rule? (It feels odd editing a paper prescriptively when it is written about the downsides of prescriptivism, ha.)

every word, rethinking every sentence I write because of the way many usage rules were drilled into my brain. It helps me catch mistakes that truly need better structure, but sometimes it seems like I cant really write what Im thinking the way Im thinking it. I am not calling for a bloody revolution against the current rules of language and the powers that dictate them, but I do think that the process of incorporating new allowances into written word needs to be sped up. The way that people talk is typically how they understand, so why not write that way? If the main purpose of language is to communicate in an efficient manner, then I think we need more medical journal articles written in laymans terms. We need more textbooks to be linguistically accessible to the students who read them. And we need fewer grammar books that say something is accepted in spoken word but frowned upon in writ.

Works Cited Einsohn, Amy. The Copyeditors Handbook: A Guide for Book Publishing and Corporate Communications. The Chicago Manual of Style Williams, James M. Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace.