Superfluous linguistic funness!

Props to my good friend Meng for this engrossing and interesting video. I have no idea why he posted it on my wall (I think he may have been taking a dig at me). But it's good stuff. I highly recommend that you watch/listen.

I did a bit of research to find out the background of this speech/video. This website explains it quite well. Essentially, it's a well-constructed rant on language change and overly-pedantic people.

This, along with my Linguistics lecturer this semester (goes by the name of Howie), have re-affirmed my belief that language should be fun, and that we shouldn't be all that pedantic about languagy things. I still do think, however (and I think this is where I disagree with Fry...I think), that there's wrong, and then there's wrong. I still think that well-written prose, or, at least, readable prose, has its place in society. Yes, often we can infer from context what something means. Yes, we all get things wrong, and we think they're right.

But surely I'm not the only person who cringes when people write 'your' instead of 'you're'. To me, it just looks stupid. And yes, I do think it is a marker of education. And it is a very important indication of whether someone cares about something or not.

I have never read something beautiful, or moving, or has any sort of impact on me, written in text speak. Well, maybe that time I got rejected by that girl. But you know what I mean. And that wasn't even in text speak.

So, I guess, to clarify, there's wrong, and then there's really, really, hurt-your-eyes kind of wrong. There's no point getting into a fluster about the fine points of grammar that nobody knows about, but I think the basics, like there, their and they're, shouldn't even need to be thought about.

I am aware that language change occurs. All the time. The English that we speak now is very different to English spoken a hundred years ago. Which is fine. I just don't think that that should be used as an excuse for screwing up 'you're' and 'your'.

Finally, I would like to agree with Stephen Fry about his point regarding how nobody has fun with language anymore. I would know. I get shot down for using 'big' words. Most of the time, they're not even big. They're just slightly obscure. Often they're not even that obscure. But sometimes, I just find it difficult to convey ideas without using them. And other times, I may think that it's a really suitable word to use in the circumstances. But I'll get shot down because of it, because people think I'm being pretentious, or whatever.

It's this horrible social pressure of dumbing yourself down to fit in, I think. It kind of relates to this thing that Sarah and I were discussing the other day. People worship pop stars, or whatever. But when a guy is in high school, any high school (probably bar Melbourne High), he will get ridiculed. It's odd how people think that pop stars just appear out of thin air. So the guy in high school stops singing.

It's the same with language. It's the reason why black people, if you've ever read Freakonomics, speak the way they do. Because they get picked on for speaking 'white'.

I'm thankful that most of the people I know aren't like that, but I know there are people that think, and act in this way.

Anyway, that's my little (big) rant for the day (or possibly the week. Or month). Watch the video, and have some fun.

Word of the Day: Engrossing