Applied Linguistics (ENG 360 and ENG 364)
Handout Chapter 2
CHAPTER 2 PRESCRIBING AND DESCRIBING: POPULAR AND ACADEMIC VIEWS OF
“CORRECTNESS” Heart of the aspiration to relate theory to practice tension BETWEEN Language as
view by the expert AND Language as everyone's lived experience.
□
Children’s language at home and school Young children speaks idiosyncratically. Example a
child growing up in a English-speaking family, might say I “brang” it even everyone around
says I brought it to mean the same thing It is clear after all what the child is saying most of it
idiosyncrasies disappear of their own accord. At school, however the situation is very different.
Here the child is expected, and taught to use English “correctly” Within the school context
involves the relationships of standard form of the language to dialects. The standard is
generally used in written communication, taught in schools and codified in dictionaries and
grammar books Dialects are regional and social-class varieties of language which differ from
the standard in pronunciation, grammar and vocabulary, and are seldom written down at all
□
The teaching of the standards can be viewed in two quite contradictory ways *ON THE ONE
HAND Seen as conferring an unfair advantage upon those children who already speak a variety
close to it *ON THE OTHER HAND Prestige and power provides a gateway to written knowledge
In support of this latter view, there is no reason why children cannot grow up knowing both a
dialect and a standard form, valuing both in different ways and using them appropriately
according to the context. Schools are good barometers of both language use and social values,
and their approach to teaching the national language or language, which is most the same all
over the world, arises from two interesting facts: 1. fact Language, any language is subject to
enormous variation. There are differences between individual, social groups, generations and
nations and language is used differently in speech and writing and in formal or informal
situations. 2. fact Many people are intolerant of this variation.
□
Description versus prescription Where in such cases of disagreement over usage can people
appeal for authority? One obvious answer might be to a linguist. The academic discipline
charged with the study of language, there surely decisive and authoritative judgments can be
found? They have argued not for one side or another, but that all variants are equally valid
simply by virtue of the fact that they occur, and that no one form is any more or less than
another Linguistics tend to favour description (saying what does happen) over prescription
(saying what ought happen) and argue that, from a linguistics point of view. To justify their
views they point such facts as the following: If there was never any deviation from the norm
1
then languages would never change. We would never gain independence. Webster’s American
Dictionary Of The English Language would have the same standing as a bad piece of school
work, and it would be as incorrect to write “color” in Washington as in London.
□
Dialects have their own consistent governed grammars in which every bit as complex and
expressive as those of standard form. The so-called double negative:- “I didn’t do nothing” for
example, often castigated as sloppy and illogical-is used with consistency in certain dialects of
English and equivalents can be found in the standard forms of other languages. The standard
form of a language is often very similar to the usage of the most economically and politically
powerful class or region for example southern England in Britain and Castle in Spain. It can be
regarded as a dominant dialect. These arguments depend on a detachment from social reality
and very much at odds with a deeply felt public view of language. Linguistics may asume a
superior air and insist that their concern
2