• Comment105@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    50
    ·
    1 month ago

    They don’t.

    Language requires intelligent design from intelligent people sometimes. When needed, prescriptivists in legion can make a literate civilization out of illiterate primitives.

    The asinine and the arcane can both make learning unnecessarily difficult.

    • Reddfugee42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I knew after the first FOUR WORDS of your comment that you don’t know what you’re talking about. Language literally evolves organically, constantly.

      • lugal@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Took me much longer. I was like “this has to be a joke about intelligent design or something”. Only at the very end I realized it’s serious

        • Reddfugee42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          The English they think is perfectly correct proper English would make the language prescriptivist from a couple centuries ago puke and kick them in the groin

      • Comment105@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        You don’t consider the simplification of Chinese “language”, nor the ordering of Nynorsk, or the creation of the Korean alphabet.

        You don’t think the efforts of thousands of teachers across a nation teaching the language prescriptively according to the designs of the state constitutes language. You seem to consider it forceful meddling in a natural evolution that should be left to just do what it does, unrestrained and undisturbed by judgmental nerds.

        • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          People are taught how to write in an academic style in school.

          There’s different applications for writing. Some examples in include but are not limited to academic, creative, and conversational/casual writing. Education tends to focus on academic(correct grammar, writing essays, doing research papers) followed by creative writing which is storytelling and poetry.

          Expecting people to write academically in casual settings is weird. If I write a letter or email to my friend it’s going to include slang and have looser grammar.

          Casual and academic writing have their place and time. Suggesting casual writing is inferior is just silly. If people always wrote everything like some formal essay it’d be fucking boring. No humor, no colorful language. Just boring ass academic writing everywhere.

          Plus, believe it or not some of my most brilliant professors had a very casual way of speaking and writing. Academic use of language does not indicate intelligence. It just means they know how to write in an academic setting. Nothing more, nothing less.

          • Reddfugee42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            There are some cases in history where academic writing (seen in government and religious documents) differs so greatly from the actual language of the people (which those very same government employees and clergy use when outside of their professional environments) that the two languages are more like distant cousins.

            Of course, it’s the popular language which evolves into the language of today, while leaving the ancient, once “proper” language behind where it belongs.

            And then, that region’s language prescriptivists of today say that the version they were taught is the right one, all over again 😅

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      oof, no. “in legion”? lol wtf, do you think this is Warhammer or something?

      we started speaking way before we started writing. literacy had been irrelevant in the evolution of a language. and even today it barely matters; thanks to the the current ubiquity of media and communication, people can start using a new word, or start pronouncing a word a different way, or spelling something a new way, and it can spread faster than it ever did before. some dickwad insisting that this is “incorrect” is not going to change anything if most people disagree.

      speaking of which, why are you not speaking or spelling the way Shakespeare did? what are these newfangled bullshit words and spellings you’re using like some illiterate primitive?

      • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean writing systems are not a part of the real spoken language and how it evolved. I think it’s fine to be prescriptivist about writing systems as many did not evolve naturally anyway, and many could be made far easier to learn and use. You shouldn’t mess with spoken language as that’s the part that did evolve naturally and is still subject to evolution. The focus though should always be on making these writing systems simpler and a better reflection of the spoken language. Hangul is a great example of prescriptivism over writing systems.