Prescriptivism – Part 1
I recently found a most excellent quote on the Merriam-Webster Dictionary website.
Many people object to the use of decimate to mean destroy, pointing out that the word originally meant “to reduce by one-tenth.” But this is incorrect: almost every word we use today has moved away from its root meaning. If you object to decimate, you should also make sure that literal is only used to mean “of, relating to, or expressed in letters,” and that’s literally ridiculous.
This points to a phenomenon that comes up frequently in everyday interactions between people called “prescriptivism” though I’m sure that the majority of people employing it have no idea what that word means. Â Which is ironic, since they are essentially, through using it, asserting their “superiority” over the person with whom they are interacting.
Prescriptivism is defined by Thought Co. as:
… the attitude or belief that one variety of a language is superior to others and should be promoted as such.
And explained in this Ted Ed. video.
While prescriptivism has uses – standardizing written language, providing shared conventions to clarify understanding, when it becomes a way to separate the “right” kind of people from the “wrong” kind of people it becomes elitist and a tool for oppression – unfortunately most people who use it to “correct” the speech of others are using it in this way. Â They are creating an underclass, automatically making themselves superior. Â And the choice of WHICH form of English (or any other language) is considered “formal” or “proper” was made arbitrarily and drifts over time as language evolves and changes. Â If this were not true, we’d all still be speaking Old English (or Old Norse, or Latin, or Old French, or Proto-Germanic or whichever etymology your native language claims for roots).
Language changes because language is not frozen. Â It is a tool of communication. Â When people interact, they find ways to make themselves understood and in those interactions, over time, patterns shift and change and this is linguistic drift.
Additionally, dialects reflecting different subgroups within a culture are full, linguistically complete, fully functional vehicles for communication with others of the same subgroup.  If a language is fully functional for communicating ideas – it is a valid  language – equal in worth and integrity to any other.
However most people who practice casual prescriptivism add a VALUE JUDGMENT to a particular form of a language – in this case formal English, and thus when “correcting” how someone else communicates, they are judging that person as inferior for not using the “superior” form of English even if the person’s language use was completely understandable and conveyed their intended meaning without impediment.
Essentially, this kind of “correcting” others’ language and holding one form of language as superior to others is elitism and bullying. Â And worse than that, it is oppression. Â Language use, linguistic coding, the ability to “code-switch” to the “formal” register of English is considered to be an indication of educational achievement and even fundamental intelligence. Â Differences in language have been used, by anthropologists, to claim entire cultures as inferior, and been made grounds to justify imperialism and oppression.
In my own classroom I have had to tell other ADULTS not to tell my students that “ax” (“ask”) is “not a word” and that “ain’t” isn’t “proper English.” Â They’re wrong. Â (The adults, not the students.) Â If a students says, “Can I ax you a question?” I understand perfectly what it is that they are communicating. Â For me to say, “MAY I ASK you a question,” is taking a position of superiority, invalidating their language, and completely unnecessary for us to engage in meaningful communication. Â It just makes me an elitist asshole.
Now, because I’m a teacher, and because we live in an elitist asshole society where the way you speak, especially if you’re not white, but even if you are, is considered an indicator of your very intelligence, and if you’re not white, a potential indicator of your level of threat, I do teach my students how to use “formal English” (note, I do not teach them “proper English” as that is a value judgment that says my form of English is superior to theirs, to the form of their families, and their communities, and that’s a shitty way to behave!)
I teach them that we (especially those of us already behind the eight-ball privilege-wise) get judged by others based on how we speak and write.  It isn’t fair.  It is the world we have.  I teach them that they way they speak at home, the way they speak with friends, they way they speak when we’re just chatting in class is valid, valued, and dignified.  It serves the ultimately incredible purpose of allowing our thoughts to become someone else’s thoughts and vice versa.  It is like a mind reading superpower.  I can say, “Would you hand me that pencil,” and someone across the room from me will give me a pencil.  Language is AMAZING, I tell my kids.
But then I tell them, the world is a tough place. Â They don’t really need me to teach them that, since the world has been teaching them that all their lives, but what they do need from me is, “Here are ways to fight against the toughness…” Â And one of those ways is learning how to speak this thing called “formal English” so when you choose to, or when you feel you need to, you can.
I tell them that there are asshole people in the world who will judge them poorly and block them from opportunities because that’s what asshole people do. Â Asshole people look for any excuse. Â Using their language takes away one of their excuses.
So I teach my students that, “In formal English we would say, ‘May I ask you a question?” Â I teach them that it means the same damn thing as, “Can I ax you a question,” but it cock blocks the assholes looking for an excuse in your language.
I teach my kids that “ain’t” is an informal language word and the formal language word is “isn’t.”
I teach my kids that when they’re talking to me, I value their language. Â I teach them that when we give a presentation, or a speech, or write a paper, we use “formal English.” Â And sometimes we get silly with it and we speak formal English with British accents and colloquialisms because… Formal English is as much an affectation as British English. Â It is a different dialect that they have to learn because the world is an elitist asshole.
And so they learn. Â And I hope for every one of them that the ability to chameleon themselves with their eyes open will provide them with opportunities or safety they couldn’t have had without that ability. Â And I grieve for them having to live in a world where such changeling skills are necessary.
So when someone tries to tell one of my kids that their language is “wrong,” it pisses me off, because, really, when you do that, you’re telling them they are inferior, their culture, their family, their entire means of interacting with other human beings is lesser than yours.
And that’s what makes this world an elitist asshole.
