A side thought about language

So I was trying to find an image of Rose McGowan, because she is beautiful. This led, as anyone would reasonably guess, to a grammar quiz. Someone was urging whoever read his writing to preserve the english language. Pardon: the English language. I felt I should respond.

One has to understand that language changes over time, like it or lump it. Over a long enough time it becomes a new language. It is fun to toy with those high school teachers who lament any change whatsoever, any usage that is less than "good english." This concept varies from teacher to teacher, of course - try comparing some teachers and see for yourself.

You see, the argument is quite old. Back in the 1600s there were also people of influence (men, primarily, because the patriarchy kept women down) who made the same complaints. The usage that bothered them is now standard english. At one point for instance, the use of contractions was abominable and low class. Incidentally, the vulgar and vernacular tend to be the crucible for new language - the birthplace of new language. It is of course foolish to resist the creation of new language. It is futile. All language changes.

Personally, I have always found it one of the more charming aspects of english that its adaptability, flexibility and willingness to expand its horizons have made it the largest language in history (by lexicon). The upshot? Speakers have more ways to express themselves. Language Is about communicating, after all.

I know there are those of you out there who carry an utter disdain for ebonics, 1337, and other lower forms. Ironically, this attitude comes primarily from academia, an area with such elitistly developed modes of language use that 'hypocrisy' hardly covers what is going on. Nonetheless, I will agree wholeheartedly that they Are Lower forms.

Perhaps the reason I am so surprised at people who most want to 'preserve' the language, is that they are often the ones who seem to claim most vehemently their love of the language. Yet there is no joy, no laughter, no creation to their relationship with the language. Sorry. Of course there is, but only in rigidly prescribed manners. I'm not trying to slag these people, because I see some validity in what they are saying. I feel that a little must be added to it, though.

I think, (and I hope people will throw in their two cents), that the idea is people should understand the Formal Usage of a language before using other modes. Some will say this is essential. I would say important, but not essential. remember that the basic value of language is getting the idea across. If you hear something like ebonics and don't understand it, perhaps you haven't considered that the message is not intended for you. On the other hand, I do insist that if one is speaking ebonics to an academic, the speaker is at fault for not choosing clearly understandable speech. Not to let the 'learned' off the hook though, this principle goes both ways, a double edged knife!

The forging of new language is a wonderful, enjoyable and often intellectual pursuit. I cannot suggest it strongly enough as an activity befitting the rich, the poor, the woman, the boy, the smart, the stupid, the black, white, yellow and red - Everybody! The trick lies in how you impart your meaning to others.

Since I have already asked for responses, I shall make a more specific request: why not reply with a word or phrase of your own devising? State the meaning or intended usage. I promise I will try to use as many of them as I can. If anyone reading this loves language, then let us forge our own additions to english together.