"Are you a Grammarian or a Linguist?" Topic

According to the Eggcorn Database:

Linguists collect usage examples. Unlike language teachers or
the often self-styled grammar experts who complain in the press about the decay of English, they are not picky: the actual, real-life use is what counts, and the most interesting bits — those that might reveal something about how real people apprehend their language — often stretch the received rules of correctness.

eggcorns.lascribe.net/about

I think the underlying split in mental 'types' actually has deeper ramifications:
those who strive for the platonic ideal (grammarians) vs.
those who thrive in messy inconsistencies (linguists),
I leave it as a creative exercise to apply the concept more broadly.

1) Proper Grammar is the very Foundation of Civilization,
and Proper Punctuation is the sole indicator of Education
2) Malapropisms, mondegreens, and folk etymologies -are- Culture,
as are Ribald Riddles, Lascivious Limericks, and Other Good, Clean Dirty Fun
4) No Opinion
5) Not Interested
6) Zardoz
7) Needs More Boobies

{Note that I deliberately left out the axiomatic poll choice
"3) Obvious False Dichotomy, you odious poltroon",
as I am actually interested in the division,
not its rational transcendence.}

7

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2.

2

This poll may need an official Wadbag Guide …

1) Proper Grammar is the very Foundation of Civilization,
and Proper Punctuation is the sole indicator of Education.

I would not say "sole".
I come to this discussion through being a chemistry major in college. It became quickly evident that if you misspell a chemical, you invite disaster.
While listening to Rush on the radio, I was shouting at him for saying "ammonia hydroxide". The rest of what he was saying, I agreed with.

Those who allow you to skid on the grounds that "As long as you can understand what I am saying, what difference does it make?" make the false assumption that I DO understand what you mean.
Every speling or grammer error lowers the level of comprehension to the viewer by a finite percentage. They add up.

Give me no guff about this being a hobby forum, and not rocket science. Play as you practice. Practice as you play.

((I leave the enumeration of spelling and grammar errors, not to mention typos, in this post as an exercise to the student.))

3

"I ain't neither."

Language is an art the object of which is to put an idea or impression in another person's mind. Sometimes that can best be accomplished by precise usage according to established rules and sometimes not. The only problem I have is when language is used badly, that is inappropriately to the message. Gross spelling and grammar errors are appropriate if you are trying to present the character of an uneducated boob but not so much if you aim at being regarded as a thoughtful, informed individual.

So, it depends.

I was taught English in the 70s so I barely even know what grammar is. However 'those who strive for the platonic ideal ' sounds jolly good to me, so I'll vote 1.

Time to bring peace and order to the Galaxy.

2

I recommend Webster's Dictionary of English Usage to the grammarians. Many of the constructs they love to rail about have long hallowed and established standing in the English language.

Rick

Philosopher Donald Davidson argues that malapropisms demonstrate that competence in a language is not a matter of applying rigid rules to the decoding of utterances.
Rather, says Davidson, it appears that in interpreting others,
people constantly modify their own understanding of our language.

I, personally, am a cunning linguist;
Nothing Risque, Nothing Gained.

I are agreement in with 1.

I reckon I are in agreement 1 with.

Shouldn't 5 be "disinterested" and 6 be "Zardozification"?

I guess I'm closer to 2 as I derive great pleasure from observing the ignorance of my fellow creatures.

None of the above, I'm a Presbyterian. ;)

Don

I used to know a linguist named Connie.

Whose visage most people thought bonnie.

I took medication for that, the rash is gone now…

I'm a language teacher, and I'm a 2.

Very often, there is more than one way to be right. Just so long as people remember that there are many more ways to be wrong.

8. I can has cheezburger

I am a definite 2. Civilizations developed out of oral traditions, not grammatical traditions. Punctuation, while extremely helpful, is not necessary for communication.

To those who say that "as long as I get the idea across …" I challenge them to say "Repeat" over a military communications net and see what happens.

Words mean things. Our intent doesn't matter.

4, 5, 6, and 7

I always thought that linguists spoke more than one language.

1 and 2

2

As a former linguist in the Navy, I can state definitively that I am quite the cunning linguist.

1-ish, though I agree with John the OFM that it might not be the only thing on the list--flush toilets rate pretty high in my estimation.

This morning I watched a major general give a briefing over the video teleconference system. One of her charts mentioned the Afghan government, but spelled it "afghan." She also used the conjunction "and" when the proper word was "an." I would have thought that she'd have the clerical support to get things like this right. Since she was quoting headlines at that point and the gist of the talk was that, after the latest USAF procurement debacle (Hawker/Beechcraft vs Embraer light attack aircraft), we needed to get our act together, this seemed a bit odd.

Grelber

1.

Your right, theirs nothing more important then grammar and speeling.

I'm a closet 1. Overtly 7.

Urrmm – barbarian I fink.

Volstagg wrote:

I think the underlying split in mental 'types' actually has deeper ramifications:
those who strive for the platonic ideal (grammarians) vs.
those who thrive in messy inconsistencies (linguists),

That's not the split, though. Grammar is one of the things linguists study. And the eggcorn site you refer to makes it quite clear that eggcorns, mondegreens, malapropisms and so forth are malformations; it is not possible to have a malformation without having at least some idea of what the rules are for a well-formed utterance. Presumably nobody can enjoy these things without knowing that is being done wrong, just as "1066 and all that" would be unfunny to anyone who knows no history, and Nigel Molesworth would fail to amuse anyone who couldn't spell.

As for all these fearful prescriptive grammarians who are apparently stalking the land seeking whom they may devour -- can anyone cite an instance of such a one?

All the best,

John.

I, personally, am a cunning linguist;

Same. I insist on some showering first, but once that detail is out of the way I'm as keen as the next man to get my head down, nose the the root of the problem.

regards
dave

Proper grammar and punctuation form the foundation of civilized discourse because they provide a set of constants that are intelligible to all participants. Blithely using, for example, their, there, and they're without regard to the actual, different meaning's of those word's detract's from the dialogue. As does apostrophe abuse.

Malapropisms, mondegreens, and folk etymologies, Ribald Riddles, Lascivious Limericks, and Other Good, Clean Dirty Fun may be linguistically interesting but I would hardly call them Culture. That would be tantamount to calling rap* a language.

LT

*Note that I did not call it "rap music", there being no such thing, nor did I include the initial "c", since that is silent.