Playing the Game Called Grammar
God does not much mind bad grammar,
but He does not take any particular pleasure in it.
Erasmus
I Aren't?
There used to be a
perfectly respectable use for "ain't." Jane Austin, the famous 18th century
British author, used it. Ain't was short for "am I not?" or, more accurately,
"am not I?" as in "I'm beautiful, ain't I?" Just as we use contractions like
"didn't" for "did not" and "can't" for "cannot," ain't was the contraction for
"am not." So, what happened to it? Why can't we use ain't now? Today, the
correct form is to say, "Aren't I?" which, put straightforward would be "I are
not," and that sure isn't grammatically correct! Shakespeare also used ain't. He
used double negatives, too. But that's not never permitted by no English teacher
today. So, where do grammar and spelling rules come from anyway? How come Jane
and William could do that, but we can't?
The Genesis of
Rules
Most people don't
get what rules are all about. We grow up thinking of ways to escape them, or
sometimes we live stressed out lives trying really hard to obey them. Overall,
most of us wish there weren't so many. Let's spring our brains a bit on this.
First, say you're playing a board game of some sort and someone new comes in who
wants to play. So what's the first thing you do? You explain the rules. Knowing
the rules makes playing possible. And, not only that, the rules themselves
create the game. Picture a deck of cards. There are hundreds of different
games you can play with that one deck. The deck doesn't change, only the rules.
The rules differ from one game to the next because the rules are the
game. If you were going to make up a new card game, the thing you would be
creating would be a new set of rules. We tend to think of rules as restricting
us. At certain times they do. But at a more fundamental level, rules are the
description of how something operates, and knowing them doesn't restrict you, it
frees you.
A language is a lot
like a card game. It consists of vocabulary and grammar. The vocabulary is the
deck of cards and the grammar is the set of rules. Without grammar there would
be no real communication at all. No one could play the game.
All some at understand without basic other could
rules we each not!
The unintelligible
sentence above has a proper set of vocabulary (the deck of cards), but it breaks
every rule of syntax, or word order. When re-written according to the rules, the
sentence reads:
We could not understand each other at all without
some basic rules!
Grammar, which
includes syntax, penetrates much deeper than just getting a subject and verb to
agree or avoiding ending a sentence with a preposition. Grammar consists of
rules we begin learning as soon as we start saying our first words. Anyone who
can talk with intelligible speech has absorbed and digested grammar rules so
complex that our brightest scholars have taken years to try to fully understand
and describe them. The amount of grammar you already have tucked away inside
your brain, whether you know it or not (and regardless of what your teacher
says), is astounding!
From Descriptive
Rules to Frozen Standards
From the time of
William Shakespeare onward (c.1600), English began to really blossom at the more
educated levels of society and soon it became a serious field of study. Scholars
began tackling English to describe its rules of operation. They also began
describing finer points of how educated writers write. People began studying
these descriptions so they could sound educated, too. Having some guidelines or
rules to follow gives an author assurance that he is writing in the way most
acceptable to the largest number of readers. Larger dictionaries were written,
grammar books were researched and composed and adopted by schools, and, as that
happened, the guidelines, which began as descriptions of how we speak
and write, became standards. The idea of a "right" way and a "wrong"
way to speak and write emerged. Standards became a bit more frozen. All
languages are continually changing over time, but the river of change slows down
as a language goes through this process of maturing.
However, grammar
standards themselves will always continue to shift. Sometimes the shifting is
due to simple fashion. It becomes cliché to say something a certain way and
sophisticated to say it another. "Ain't" falls into that category. Ain't was
often used incorrectly by the uneducated and gradually educated people abandoned
even the correct use of it because it had become associated with the "lower
class."
Sometimes shifting
standards are due to the natural law of language change: All living languages
simplify over time. There were at one time rules for using thee, thou,
ye, and you. As English simplified, the one pronoun you took
over for the other three words. So the standard for what was correct grammar
shifted and simplified with the change in usage.
Sometimes changes
come from overly anxious grammarians. As text books on English grammar come into
print they sometimes do more than just describe how words are used, they affect
them and they set the standards in the schools, which in turn set the standards
for us all.
Whatever the cause,
that which is correct in one decade may not be correct the next, just as ain't
was acceptable at one time, but now it ain't. And, as you might suspect, there
are more changes to come in the future, too. Linguistic sooth-sayers are making
predictions and here are just a few: The word shall shall vanish. Whom
will eventually bite the dust. The subjunctive case is not faring well these
days (you probably don't even know what that is). Split infinitives are on the
increase and barely noticed, and most authors don't fret too much when a
sentence ends in a preposition - especially if re-wording sounds too stilted and
formal. But before you go trying to drop any the above from your list of grammar
do's and don'ts, let me warn you: it takes decades, even centuries, for a common
blunder in English grammar to climb all the way up to the high plateau of
blessed acceptability. And the change must overcome resistance from educators
who live on that plateau.
Are We Degenerates?
As yesterday's
mistakes become today's good prose, grammarians wail and bemoan the degeneration
of English-- "We're losing the beauty of our language!" "No one speaks good
English anymore!" But has it degenerated? Who knows! You can make a case for
trying to hold back the tide of such ignoble changes, allowing only for the type
of infusions that are uplifting, like new words and freshly coined phrases. We
can work hard not to prevent grammatical errors from seeping into refined
society, but a certain amount of downward tilt is inevitable as a language
simplifies. Simplification tends to come from the lower rungs of the ladder.
That's one rule that won't change.
The Case of Which
and That
Admittedly, rule
making has a way of getting out of control once it starts, and it wasn't long
before teachers and educators stopped describing how the educated spoke and
wrote, and began to try to force English into more logical patterns. For
example, have you ever been writing something on your computer and found that
Microsoft Word had underscored an error saying you need to replace a that
with a which, or vice versa? Well, Francis and Henry Fowler invented a
rule for that and which in 1906. This rule did not exist until
these two grammarcrats decided that there should be one. They then put it in
their highly popular grammar text The King's English. Perfectly good
writers, in fact some of the best writers, never have gone by this rule. Yet the
rule has become so embedded in the textbooks and teacher credos of our day that
now even our computers flag it!
The Goal is Freedom
The important thing
with grammar is to learn which rules are the essential ones and to know how and
when to apply those that are less important. There are times when a particular
audience demands a more formal prose, even if that's just the fact that your
English teacher is a real stickler for finicky rules, and she is your audience.
There are also times when you can hang really loose such as when you email a
friend and you don't even use capital letters.
Just remember, good
rules don't restrict you, they free you. They create the language game and make
communication possible. It's ignorance of the rules that drags you down. Knowing
the elements of good grammar and style prepares you to speak and write
effectively for any audience. It empowers you to communicate confidently
with people from all walks of life, from the president of the company to the
janitor who sweeps his office. Speaking well, writing well, these acquired
talents allow you to "play the game" at any level. And that is freedom, and
that's what rules should always be about.
© 2005
www.theshorterword.com