Personal Response Paper

Prompt #3
20 March 2015
Rules or Guidelines?
For centuries, there has long been a debate among linguists, scholars, and grammarians. It
involves differentiating between two different but important schools of thought regarding
language. Im going to compare and contrast the following two ideas on two separate levels and
from two different perspectives. First, we have grammar and usage. And second, we have
prescriptivism and descriptivism. Ancient scholars would argue in favor of one side or the
other, but I personally believe that both schools of thought are equally important.
According the Chicago Manual of Style, grammar consists of the rules governing how
words are put together into sentences. These rules, which native speakers of a language learn
largely by osmosis, govern most constructions in a given language. The small minority of
constructions that lie outside these rules fall mostly into the category of idiom and usage (203).
In my own terms, grammar is following sets of rules that organize how a language ought to be
used in order to communicate. Usage, however, is a term that implies a certain looseness
withlooser view of language. Chicago says that usage is the collective habits of a languages
native speakers (261). Lets tie these two terms into broader schools of thought.
In language, prescriptivism is the act of prescribing how things should or ought
to be used. It is based on clear highly defined sets of rules that some say should not be broken.
This termPrescriptivism is related to language grammar, as there are sets of rules that one should
follow. The Ffollowing is an example of a grammar problem: John and I likes macaroni and
cheese. The previous sentence lacks the inclusion of a principle called sSubject-vVerb

Mitchell 2
aAgreement. The correct way to write the sentence is like this: John and I like macaroni and
cheese. This example of a grammatical error is something that needs to be corrected because its
format is based on a concrete rule in English.
On the other hand, we have descriptivism. It is the act practice of describing how
things are actually used, even if this usage is considered incorrect. Often, these descriptions types
of usage break formal rules, and they include slang, jargon, or colloquial language. Grammarians
actually tend to be descriptivists. Many grammariansThey seem less interested in fault-finding
and hair-splitting and more fascinated by examples of the variety of ways in which well-educated
writers use, reinvent, and reinvigorate the language (Einsohn 61).
The ways in which language is the most flexible tend to fall under the category of usage.
Lets look at an example of a usage problem. When should one use the word further and when
should one use the word farther? Usage is typically divided. A distinction between the
two should be made, especially in formal writing, because prescriptively they mean different
things. In informal speech, however, the distinction is generally not made (which is acceptable).
The word further should be used figuratively. Look at the following example: His sculpture
is further along than her sculpture. The word farther should be used for physical distances, as it
is in. Look at the following example: My house is farther than yours. Both of these two examples
show prescriptively correct usage of the words further and farther. In informal speech,
however, the distinction is generally not made (which is acceptable to descriptivists).
While keeping prescriptivism and descriptivism in mind, lets consider a fact that is
evident everywhere: language has been evolving since the very beginning of its use. As a
linguistics major, one specific topic has come up in all of my classes: language is changing. It is
a common and completely natural occurrence. Many people feel that language change is

Mitchell 3
language decay, but I dont think that is the case. There are countless factors that influence
language. Some of them include, geography, culture, outside influences, migration, and religion,
among many others. These factors contribute to the beauty of language development. There isI
see an enormous number of changes in language that I see every day. Let me tell you about a
recurring instance from my childhood.
My father, Steve, grew up with very strict parents. His mother was a nurse, and his father
was a sea captain in the merchant marines and later a Supreme Court judge. Steve grew up with
structure. He eventually began a career in human resources after graduating from BYU and then
receiving his bachelors degree and then his masters degree in behavioral organization from
BYU. Steves career choice led him from city to city, living in nine different states throughout
his career. He also traveled world-wide. Steve was frequently gone for weeks at a time in Europe
or Australia or Asia for business meetings and presentations. In short, Steves successful
experience in corporate America helped him become a very smart, clever, and intelligent man in
various fields.
I remember that Steve, my father, would correct me on the most trivial matters all
throughout my childhood. The first instance that comes to mind was this situationa situation in
which I often found myself.: eEvery single time that I used the word lit, my father would
correct me and make me say the word lighted ten times in a row and out loud. Whenever the
word lit was uttered, it was as if the universe froze for a few seconds because I had offended
language itself. I am certain that my father never consulted a usage dictionary about the matter,
but he always insisted that he was correct. As he is my father, I respectfully accepted the
correction and moved on.

Mitchell 4
Last year, however, I was in a class called Modern American Usage at BYU. For a
personal project, I decided to thoroughly study the subject and present my findings to the class.
Here is what I found. Usage is divided between lit and lighted. Lighted is more for more
formal situations, especially in writing. Lit is a shortened colloquial term that has become more
and more popular. BHistorically and currently, both words were used historically and are used
currently just about equally. Prescriptivists would argue that lit should be reserved for drunks
(Merriam-Webster 599). However, both forms are acceptable. Lighted is often considered more
formal and lit is often considered less formal. When it comes down to it, though, the preference
of the author is all that matters.
Before presenting to my classmates, I called my parents and spoke specifically to my
father about the evidence that I had found. I told him that both words are equally acceptable, and
that if someone was going to be a stickler about it, lit is informal and lighted is formal. I
continued and began to talk about his prescriptive approach to the matter, as well as my
descriptive approach. He immediately responded with the following. Josh. I believe youre
right. But regardless of what any book says, which one should you use? Lighted is always the
best choice because its formal. If you get in the habit of using lit,, it might accidentally slip out
during an interview with an employer and that would reflect poorly on you. It felt good to
finally correct my father after so many years of suffering, but he still offered a good point.
In 1961, Merriam-Webster came out with the first descriptive dictionary. Before this time,
the ideas of prescriptivism had prevailed. The publication of this new kind of dictionary was
appalling. Scholars and grammarians argued that language neededs rules and structure. Anything
that didnt fall under theirat umbrella of correct usage was unconventional and thus outlandish.

Mitchell 5
The idea of describing how language is used, rather than prescribing language, was rejected, and
it still is commonly rejected to this day.
In fact, I recently did a small survey about the importance of prescriptivism and
descriptivism to see if people think that one is more important than the other. I will quote two of
my interviewees. A 46-year-old woman named Sharyl said, Of course they both are important,
but I think prescriptivism is a basic building block, and so it is more critical. A fellow college
student named Michelle said the following: Prescriptivism is more important to do correctly,
because if you do that one wrong, you sound stupid. The other one doesnt make you sound like
you are uneducated. Both Sharyl and Michelle see the importance of prescriptivism. However,
they dont have the language linguistics background that I have; therefore, a lack of
understanding might be present. Regardless, Sharyl and Michelle bring up another good point
that I agree with: prescriptivism is crucial for language foundation. Without grammatical rules
valued by the prescriptivists, nobody would be able to understand each other because language is
always changing. Due toBecause of that same fact, though, being able to describe how language
is used is important. Dialectal differences, humorous slang, and geographic colloquialisms,
among others, are factors that contribute to the uniqueness of our world as a melting pot. Every
culture throughout the world is rich with tradition and customs, all evident through language.
I personally believe that prescriptivism and descriptivism are equally important concepts,
as are grammar and usage. There are endless considerations within this debate. The reason I love
it so much is because it has been a topic for discussion for so long in the past. As far as I can tell,
it will continue to be debated in the future. But both prescriptivism and descriptivism will remain
acceptedimportant.

Mitchell 6

Work Cited
Edmiston, Sharyl. Personal interview. 18 March 2015.
Einsohn, Amy. The Copyeditors Handbook: A Guide for Book Publishing and Corporate
Communications. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2011. Print.
Madison, Michelle. Personal interview. 19 March 2015.
Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Websters Dictionary of English Usage. Springfield: MerriamWebster Incorporated Publishers, 1994. Print.
The University of Chicago Press. The Chicago Manual of Style. 16th ed. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 2010. Print.