Humphreys on Language

[liadnan]

I've always had a great deal of respect for John Humphreys and this does nothing to lower my esteem. (via Sana)

Language matters.

Comments

[greyarea.livejournal.com]

"My favourite illustration of that is the tale of the gauche young man from rural Mississippi who won a scholarship to Harvard. On his first day there he approached a couple of cocky young New England socialites. "Hey y'all... where's the library at?" One of them replied haughtily: "At Harvard we prefer not to end a sentence with a preposition." The young redneck thought a moment and said: "OK. Where's the library at, asshole?""

That's brilliant.

[booklectica]

Good article and I'd be interested to read the book. I don't agree with all of it, or at least I'm not inclined to worry about a lot of the language he worries about. If I say I 'met' someone, for example, I probably mean I met them for the first time, as opposed to 'meeting up with' a friend. And I can at least understand why 'future plans', 'new initiatives' et al came about - in TV culture you need to say something at least twice if people are going to pick up on it. It doesn't change the meaning of the sentence, which is surely what matters.

Of course, like everyone else, I'm completely inconsistent on which aspects of spelling and grammar I care about and which I don't.

[liadnan]

I think one can argue until the cows come home about any given example: I certainly wouldn't endorse all of his. What matters, I think, is an emphasis on honesty and clarity in what you write, and in what you say.

[booklectica]

Absolutely. And, as a third but still important emphasis, style.

[liadnan]

I lost that word in my brane and therefore decided not to go into that element.
Seriously.

[deililly.livejournal.com]

I wish we had been taught some basic grammar rules at school. I honestly can't remember any teaching of that nature. I learnt almost by accident and my mother wincing at my homework occasionally.

Believe me, I am painfully aware now just how much this lack of education shows. Especially when I read my own lj :S

[brelson.livejournal.com]

It'll be interesting to see how his book compares to Kingsley Amis' "The King's English", a very entertaining and informative look at good and bad English usage that was written in the early 1990s. Amis wasn't so concerned with tautologies as Humphrys seems to be, although I do suspect he'd view them as a lazy device used by many speakers and writers to sound officious and important.

I certainly agree with Humphrys that sticking rigidly to grammar rules can often end up with one not being understood, which pretty much defeats the whole purpose of using language. Amis points to the example of the grammatically incorrect "aren't I?" - you wouldn't say "I are", you'd say "I am". But saying "amn't I?" will either lead to you being misunderstood or taken for a priggish pedant, neither of which are desirable outcomes.

[fi.livejournal.com]

Now that's interesting. I distinctly recall using the word "amn't" as a child and being pulled up on it by various teachers. Ever since, "amn't" has had a ring of childish error about it for me.

I stand (re)corrected!