Article View: sci.lang
Article #1948Re: myself
From: Chris Malcolm
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:32
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:32
57 lines
3579 bytes
3579 bytes
In article <kh-rv7a@lynx.unm.edu> lgorbet@carina.unm.edu (Larry P Gorbet ANTHROPOLOGY) writes: >In article <29384@castle.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes: >>Oddly enough, very few people have problems with "he" and "him", quite a >>few have problems with "me" and "I", and most people have problems with >>"who" and "whom", yet the rules in each case are identical. >This is true only if by "rules" you mean "'objective' descriptions of >distribution"---and then only if you ignore speaker-internal variation and >if you are in certain varieties of English which are not spoken often by >most English speakers. If, on the other hand, "rule" refers to the >principle in the speaker's head which characterizes their language, then >the troubles to which this thread has been devoted are prima facie evidence >that the rules are *not* the same. Well my posting did point out that people's behaviour varies, so I presume you are in fact arguing against the notion of prescriptive linguistic rules, and suggesting that rules of linguistic usage can only be descriptive. Since we are quite happy in most (if not all) other aspects of our social life to accept both descriptive and prescriptive rules, e.g., the distinctions between legal and illegal behaviour, moral and immoral behaviour, etc., why should language be different? Some nations actually have set up bodies whose purpose is to define proper usage of their language. Most nations do so for the subset of their language constituting the proposal and acceptance of contracts. And at the level of small social groups, such as groups of friends or colleagues, there is always a consensus about what constitutes proper linguistic behaviour, although that differs between groups, changes with time, and usually has some disputable questions. As far as the meanings of words are concerned, it has been generally agreed that there are authoritative dictionaries one can consult, and that one needs a particularly strong case if one wishes to dispute with one of these dictionaries. Where written language is concerned there also exist prescriptive guides to grammar and usage. Like dictionaries, there are areas of dispute, but like dictionaries, one needs a good case to quarrel with one. All large organisations whose business largely involves writing adopt their own prescriptive standards, often by adopting a particular dictionary and style guide. My point is that human linguistic behaviour involves the notions of both descriptive and prescriptive standards. The fact that there is no one true absolute prescription no more negates the utility of the notion of prescriptive rules than the fact that there is no single absolute description negates descriptive rules. So, as I said, it is odd that people's observed behaviour wrt who/whom, he/him, me/I, is so inconsistent, when there exists such a very simple prescriptive rule which most authoritative language users will agree with. -- Chris Malcolm cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh +44 (0)31 650 3085 Department of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh University 5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK DoD #205
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<29702@castle.ed.ac.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!camReferences:
<1g36cvINNlf0@bHARs12c.bnr.co.uk> <29384@castle.ed.ac.uk> <kh-rv7a@lynx.unm.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!cam From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) Newsgroups: sci.lang Subject: Re: myself Message-ID: <29702@castle.ed.ac.uk> Date: 17 Dec 92 16:32:53 GMT References: <1g36cvINNlf0@bHARs12c.bnr.co.uk> <29384@castle.ed.ac.uk> <kh-rv7a@lynx.unm.edu> Distribution: sci Organization: Edinburgh University Lines: 57