Grammar purity is one big Ponzi scheme

User Generated




For this task, I would like you to use this reading

Grammar Purity is One Big Ponzi Scheme

Who Really Decides How Language Works?

July 26, 2018 By June Casagrande

Discuss. APa 2 PAGES

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer


Running Head: Ponzi Scheme

Ponzi Scheme

Ponzi Scheme

These are just a few of the many grammar myths that have been handed down from generation to generation,
often making their way into classrooms. Most trace back to some overzealous language prescriptivism stating
opinion as fact, usually in the pages of misguided textbooks. (Casagrande 4 ).According to the writer, the likes
of Poe, King and Byron do not belong to a state-backed language authority, and neither do they own an
exclusive language academy. Currently, we belong to an age where some people believe that saying "stupider"
is wrong as opposed to saying 'more stupid.' Some will even tell you the word does not exist or is it "not in
existence." In their grammar neurosis, they'll also come up with ideas that 'ain't' to does not exist" although
words like these derivatives of a contiguous alphabetic string of characters that in a real-world sense mean
something to an English speaker. The main question should be, doesn't literature just like poetry employ an
artistic license? In conversation and often in straightforward writing, users can choose to employ stylistic
devices into language that are not strictly supposed to be present but are necessary to achieve a certain flow of
character, language, and conversation. This is the aesthetic dimension of the language that goes beyond
delivering the message and being factual at the same time. We can agree to some point that consistency is key.
That said, differing usage is not equivalent to a crime. Instead, non-standard use of l...

This is great! Exactly what I wanted.


Related Tags