27 thoughts on “Between You and I the English Language is Going to the Dogs

  1. Why did the woman feel the need to qualify her job as a teacher by saying, "…in an inner city school.."? In any case, what is the comparison to an Inner-city school? Are all schools in cities the same? What is an 'inner' city anyway?

    Surely, this manner of communication is a bigger threat?

  2. In addressing some students recently I said, ‘one of the great virtues of Shakespeare is his disinterestedness’.
    The context suggested that the meaning was not pejorative, but the students didn’t know the word meant ‘objective detachment’ and were still confused.
    Context is only helpful if the listener has the competence of a wide vocabulary in the first place.
    In the main, today, ‘they’ don’t.

  3. Beard’s the worst sort of drivelling baby-boomer, who had the benefit of a traditional education but has forgotten its value through the knackered prism of her political correctness.

  4. Gotta love all these normies commenting their hot takes here lmfaooooo
    Anyway grammar is dead, polyglots rise up, oliver kamm says it perfectly

  5. Everything has gone to the dogs. This is not news. Take responsibility for your absurd ways of living. Let fear rule you and money guide you and a society much like the one we have is what you get. Goodluck humanity…

  6. Equistanding is my term for never standing under, whilst discerning the next hyperbolic flow of intellectual grammatically correct bollocks ?

  7. Okurmu Stephen
    Passion of the young people especially the vulnerable is not empowered in many cases. Less listen to the vulnerable has led the whole world 3/4 in poverty. Call to empower the education of the poor vulnerable.

  8. Highly educated people, who know everything about their language, speaking perfect english, pontificating how you don't need the rules, because they only meet other people who know the rules perfectly and speak english to perfection. By not calling it "correct", which seems to be the main objection that was raised, or at least the fallback position, they imply that all "dialects" are equal. Which is just not true. Dialects are important and should be preserved, to not monotonize the language, and it is a shame that many dialects are dying out all over the world, but they can not be the standard by which we measure the speaking ability of people. But sadly we do not live in the enlightenment era, or the romantic era, where it was the goal of thinkers and artists to raise the standards of everybody, or establish standards in the first place, we live in times where "standard" is a dirty word. Everything is equal, nothing can be declared "better" or "worse", there isn't even a "correct" way anymore, apparently. So yes, standards are declining because the concept of standards is rejected in the first place.

  9. People who insist on grammatical and syntactical rigour in accordance with arbitrary rules use it as crutch to support their lack of creativity with language. To these people I say only this… git gud. (By the way, if you are flexing your fingers to type a reply – just know that this is a trap)

  10. Yeah I do hate when people use "them and I"/"them and me" incorrectly. Funnily enough it's often the 'smart' ones going to the extra effort but get it wrong 😀

  11. The side against the motion is unjustifiably satisfied. If you note, they repeat the few simple points they have over and over again. Yes, we understand language is an evolving, live thing. But it is also a valuable human possession that we should obviously take care of. "Speak as you will" cannot exist as advice on how to treat or use language. That is an already existing inclination, we needn't promote it further.

    The lack of humour on the opposition side is also notable, especially as regards the lady – who thinks, incidentally, she is both witty and righteous.

  12. Since the second war perhaps earlier language has been becoming more simple and less colourful. Ironically George Orwell is partly to blame for his style

  13. The absurd thing is that it's absolutely, unambiguously, categorically wrong that "English is going to the dogs". The language is richer, more varied, both more playful and more precise than it has ever been in history. Also, a larger percentage of people is able to speak the language with competence than ever before. What makes it sometimes seem as if this wasn't the case is that the culture has become more tolerant of different varieties of expression and new ways of communicating mean that people are more likely to come across different dialects and slangs than before. That's a good thing! Everything the pedants worry about, the euphemisms, the ambiguous and imprcise usages, the uncertainties what exactly means what, even the plain "wrong" usages that become entrenched and replace the "correct" ones has happened when they were young, before they were born, in the last century, and in all centuries before just as much as they happen now. And the language hasn't gone to the dogs. It's become better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *