Why Good English Is Good For You By John Simon

Having the insight as a former student and a present educator, Linda Christensen wrote about her views on the way English is taught to students in her essay“Teaching Standard English: Whose Standard?” Christensen

Naturally acquiring English comes with time and growth from an infant to a toddler to a child. Even after childhood, time is still spent refining and mastering Standard English skills. The English acquired when we are just learning to talk is incomplete, short, and often incorrect. We use simple words like "Up" to mean "Pick me up", and "Mo" for "I want more". When we collect more words for our vocabularies, we form incorrect sentences like "I goed with mommy". When we study Standard English, we are taught the correct forms. The correct usage of Standard English is an important step in ones English developement. Later on in life, Standard English is expected in environments such as interviews and the workplace. Without Standard English, one's

Author Bryan A. Garner, in his article “Making Peace in the Language Wars” (published in Garner’s Modern American Usage 3rd edition, Oxford University Press, 2009), seeks to negotiate a cease-fire between two fighting countries, the prescriptivists and the descriptivists, by dispelling myths about each of their camps. First and foremost, Garner outlines the war is happening between the lines of our favorite novels and poetry, and he describes what each camp stands for. Prescriptivists desire to instruct the world around them on how to use the language by enforcing, or at the very least informing the general public about the rules of grammar. They are sometimes described as conservative and are very concerned

“Authority and American Usage” written by David Foster Wallace, poses an argument about the English language, and the different beliefs of its usage. This essay was written in defense of Bryan A. Garner’s, A Dictionary of Modern American Usage. His argument in “Authority and American Usage” is the difference the between prescriptivism perception and the descriptivism perception (Linguistic terms that could easily be made into smaller, more understandable words for people like me). Since the beginning of time, language has evolved. From biblical times, to Shakespearean times, to present day; the English language has been continuously changing since it’s birth and has no intentions on stopping.

Each of the authors would disagree on how social change will impact the language within the United States, and whether or not people should encourage the change or try and stop it altogether. Each article however, does agree on the fact that language will always be an ever-changing part in

He quotes John Simon, a major prescriptivist, stating that “No Damsel was ever in such distress, no drayhorse more flogged, no defenseless child more drunkenly abused than the English language today”(Simon, 307). He also shows the other view of this issue that says that English as a language should evolve along with the rest of the world that has been “Swept by a tide of informality”(MacNeil, 311). With the evolution of technology and language instalments on software and computers, English changing so much among races and regions could become a major issue for this generation. Simon states that English should be treated as the original language and should not be simplified. He refers to common day slang by stating that “Just because you can figure out what the person is trying to say, doesn’t mean you should”(Simon, 333). MacNeil highlights the positives and negatives of the evolving English language along with reasons why people speak the way they do. He seems to have a neutral stance on the issue while Simon bluntly argues the fact that proper English is the English that is mean to be spoken. However, both mention the fact that education has a major influence on how this language is

George Orwell’s essay, Politics and the English Language, first published in 1946, talks about some “bad habits”, which have driven the English language in the wrong direction, that is, away from communicating ideas. In his essay he quotes five passages, each from a different author, which embody the faults he is talking about. He lists dying metaphors, operators, pretentious diction, and meaningless words as things to look out for in your own writing and the writing of others (593-595). He talks about political uses of the English language. Our language has become ugly and the ugliness impedes upon communication. Ugly uses of language have been reinforced and passed down in the population “even among people who should and do know

In George Orwell’s essay, “Politics And The English Language” Orwell discusses how the English language is changing negatively. His purpose is to show how modern writers, especially in politics, has become bogged down with the poor use of language. Orwell does this by using examples, critiques, and inductive reasoning. The author also has a serious tone that shows what he is talking about is very important to him and should be to his audience.

After reading Aria I can clearly state that English is so unnecessary and useless for a person's life. I was raised in a Spanish speaking only household and I have turned out to be a responsible, hardworking, and strong person without learning a lick of English. Rodriguez's mentions in his memoir that his mother wanted him and his siblings to learn English because the school nun's wanted them, when really who needs it? Back in my day you could get by just knowing how to say yes or no.

George Orwell states that, “our civilization is decadent and our language…must inevitably share in the general collapse” (Orwell 2000, 1), when he argues for prescriptivism (though toned down from what was taught and accepted in his day). While Garner posits that, “describers, meanwhile, remind us that linguistic change is a fact of life – and conclude that it’s therefore not worth opposing” (Garner, Making Peace in the Language Wars 2008, 272). When David Foster Wallace discusses descriptivism, he makes a historical reference to, “Philip Gove’s now classic introduction to Webster’s Third [which] outlines this type of Descriptivism’s five basic edicts: ‘1 – Language changes constantly; 2 – change is normal; 3 – spoken language is the language; 4 – correctness rests upon usage; 5 – All usage is relative.’” (Wallace 2005, 83). Wallace himself argues against most of these edicts, proving himself to uphold his snootitude. Bryan A. Garner creates a list similar to that of Gove’s, while addressing the argument that “learning grammar may seem like an exercise in pedantry,” which is a point argued by many descriptivists:

English can be used amongst friends or with close family because in some cases they will not expect it from you all the time throughout the weeks but, employees should never use Non-Standard English in a workplace or a formal situation. Using Standard English will earn a person a great deal of respect in a business place. Many will see an individual as a very professional worker and will lead to them getting promoted or offered higher opportunities.

In his essay, John Simon was arguing about why is good to keep a good English in American society. Simon is concerned about the way that one wastes time when one talks a English which is not grammatically correct. According to Simon, the standard English saves time to be understood in terms of speaking and writing. The standard or good English also avoids the separation between social classes, or races. John Simon thinks that if everyone shows concerns about the good English, such as parents teaching their children while young; correcting their mistakes, perhaps the good English should not be lost nowadays.

His fifth claim is that different forms of speech do not equate to differing levels of achievement in school. As a sixth claim, he argues that ethnographic assumptions offered by Deutsch, Bereiter, Engelmann are wrong. His final claim, is that training a child to learn the logical manner of Standard English doesn’t guarantee that he’ll succeed. Nonstandard English isn’t the problem to learning; it’s the ignorance of the language and the belief that it’s inferior.

The English language is no different than it was a century ago; however, it has been culturally changing over the past few decades. It is common knowledge to humans that each ethnicity has their own formal language they speak and that they perceive various styles of language in different manners. Language style is the choice of words used by a specific group of people when they speak. Although we have the ability to speak to everyone in the same proper way, naturally we, including myself, tend to change our speech depending on where we are, who we are associated with, and the situation we are encountered in.

On Thursday, September 25, 2014, we – a group of graduate students at Carleton University – interviewed Professor David Wood. Dr. Wood is an associate professor in Applied Linguistics & Discourse Studies and, also, a TESL Coordinator at Carleton University. He has worked with several educational bodies including universities, colleges, schools and organizations. He has written three books that were published. Besides, he is now working on another book about the fundamentals of formulaic language, which is his main area of research interest. Likewise, he has written and presented more than 30 research papers and articles. Dr. Wood’s dedication and activeness have led to many valuable contributions to the field. This interview was an attempt to shine our spotlights on his thoughts and beliefs about Applied Linguistics as a field of study and research. We asked him about what he believes as differences between applied and theoretical linguistics, where he situates himself between them, what applied linguistics mean to him, what areas of research interest him the most. We, also, inquired about what issues he faces in his work and what techniques he uses to go about those issues. The interview, also, queried what he has been busy doing recently and what his predictions for the discipline of applied linguistics are.