Sunday, November 16, 2014

Re: Confessions of a reformed grammar nazi

I came across this article while browsing Facebook this morning; the title - "confessions of a reformed grammar nazi" - instantly caught my attention. The article itself doesn't say much: the writer talks about her grammar nazi past and, having found redemption after she herself made a grammatical mistake and was 'castigated' by a friend, she goes on to claim that most grammar nazis are driven by one-upmanship, and that most of the time correcting a person's grammar or spelling is an act of snobbery rather than one with educational purposes.

Although I saw part of me reflected in the writer's words, I think the article doesn't go far enough as to make an actual stance against what grammar nazism really is, and how dangerous it could be to stick to certain 'rules.' Don't get me wrong - I do believe in correct usage of grammar and spelling and punctuation, but I also think that language is fluid, and that is what makes language beautiful and lets us be creative with it. Therefore, there are rules I agree with, and rules I don't agree with (hey prescriptivists, call me out for using a preposition at the end of the sentence, I dare you!).

Roughly, my stance on the matter is that it's not an error as long as there's no semantic change. 
I do believe that grammar should take a more central role in education - both in the English-speaking countries and in Italy. However, while it's not easy to overcome the shock of reading an Independent article where the author uses 'your' instead of 'you're' (unforgivable for a person who makes writing their job), there are positions on the matter of language that are obnoxious and that attempt to deny the natural evolution of language. When I say that grammar nazism can be dangerous, here's an example:
If you invite these four people to your party, you can use either the first or the second sentence: there's not semantic difference. If you, instead, mean that Stalin and JFK are strippers, as the second picture suggests, the sentence should read "We invited the strippers: JFK and Stalin." I don't believe in the necessity of the Oxford comma, because - at least in this case - its usage doesn't change the meaning. I do use the Oxford comma, but I use it to give rhythm to a text, especially when the list I've just made is pretty long. I also have flexible views on punctuation - which, again, I use more loosely and based on context. Someone recently called me out for using a comma instead of a semi-colon on an internet comment. On a community that uses acronyms such as "MRW" and "IDK" every other word, you should not be expected to write an essay, and I think it's perfectly acceptable to use less (!) commas in this context, especially when the meaning of your sentence doesn't change based on the punctuation you use; to summarise, as long as you know how to use it, you're good (and you can use it at your advantage and in more creative ways). For example:

"The party, was fantastic." -- this makes no sense.
"The party was fantastic, even Jane showed up." -- you should use a semi-colon here--does it make any difference, though?


What's ironic about how the Guardian article has been received is that most of the readers completely missed the point.

If we were talking mathematics you wouldn't be saying it was OK to occasionally make 2+2 = 5 now would you? And if you would, you're an idiot. [Facebook comment]
Yes, because language is a fixed system, and we all speak Old English; nothing has changed and nothing should. Chapeau.

No comma before though and write "regularly" for "on a regular basis". [article page]
This is how you change the world, eh? I highly recommend having a read at all the comments under the article, they're quite amusing.

Language evolves and it's okay if it does. Language changes when it's used because it's the users that create the language--Esperanto hasn't changed because it's an artificial language, and Latin hasn't changed because it's a dead language. As long as you know how the system works, and as long as you're in the right context to do so, it's okay to use slang words, skip fullstops, or speak African American English. On the other hand, it's okay to point out to a friend that they've just used a possessive pronoun instead of a verb, but acting like an arsehole won't help you make it through life.


PS: this is a post written by a non-native speaker of English. Just so you know before you start insulting. However, corrections are very welcome, and I'd like to hear what you think.