I think that there's a fine balance of recognizing modern colloquial
usage while respecting historical meanings, and like you said, to a
large degree it depends on the context.  In my opinion, when you're in
an informal context, such as chatting (I'm talking about face-to-face
here--none of that lame IM stuff), emailing, etc., you can pretty much
say things however you want.  However, when you are in a formal context,
it's important to be a little more articulate and observant of correct
grammatical principles.  Certain things, like formal letters, job
applications/interviews, and most books, just don't call for "Yo, 'sup?"
language.  In any case, I think it's important that everyone know the
rules of "grammatical" English, so that they can appear polished when
necessary.

Some people say, "Well, if it's commonly accepted, then it becomes
correct."  I agree with that in many cases, i.e., you shouldn't say, "I
certainly feel gay today," when you're trying to say you're in a good
mood.  Here are a few examples of when I will always disagree with that
rule.

1) Spelling errors and homynyms.  They're, their, and there are
different things, and just because everyone writes, "Theirs a great
restaurant over there," doesn't make it moral.  Same goes for its and
it's.

2) I'm not sure what to call this type of abomination, but you often
hear people confusing long words that sound alike and using them in the
completely wrong context or pronouncing/spelling them completely wrong.
The Priesthood never was and never will be "patriartical."  You often
hear people say in ordinances that they're "confirming" the Melchizedek
Priesthood when they mean to say "confer."  That's just plain wrong, and
no amount of common usage will change that.  I think this type of
mistake happens most often with mis-quoted cliches.

I could come up with tons of examples, but here's just one more: When
you're talking about something that can catch fire, the correct word is
technically "inflammable."  Over the years, the word "flammable" has
come into existence, and in my opinion, it's used commonly enough that
it's now a correct word in and of itself.  However, when people say that
something that cannot catch fire is "inflammable," that's grossly wrong.
I don't care how often people do it, it should never be accepted as
correct.

My final pet peeve is when people pronounce the Biblical spelling of the
word "shew" as "shoe."  "Shew" is pronounced "show" (as it is simply an
archaic spelling of that word), and I think that that mistake is
involved with a lot of people not understanding the scriptures.  Anyway,
just because a word ends in "ew" doesn't mean it's an "ue" sound.  The
only people that sue their clothes when they fall apart are SCO
executives.  Everyone else sews them.

Anyway, there's my little rant.  It's horribly off-topic, but I think
it's pretty interesting stuff.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

____________________
BYU Unix Users Group 
http://uug.byu.edu/ 
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list

Reply via email to