 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
2ukenkerl
Phoenix
Joined: Jul 20, 2007
Posts: 4958
|
 Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Odin wrote: | ...
The English grammarians of the 18th and 19th centuries were elitist twits, the morons who who went to war against "ain't" just because they didn't understand it's origin as a perfectly reasonable contraction of "am not." I don't have a problem with language change, I have a problem with too much language change in different directions in different areas because it makes it hard for people to understand each other. I have great trouble understanding African-American English, for example. |
Actually, they are STILL against it, and ain't is NOT reasonable. amn't? I could see how someone could change it to ain't, but STILL. And HOW do you explain its use elsewhere like "You ain't going to do that" or "You ain't going to do nothing". Even YOUR claim falls apart like tissue paper in a waterfall in light of that!
BTW there IS a neuter pronoun.
One can always say that one can do this, or that. There is ALSO the passive voice. "This, or that, can be done.". |
|
| Back to top |
|
Hodor
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 18, 2008
Age: 19
Posts: 834
Location: On a dumb island
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 2ukenkerl wrote: | | Odin wrote: | ...
The English grammarians of the 18th and 19th centuries were elitist twits, the morons who who went to war against "ain't" just because they didn't understand it's origin as a perfectly reasonable contraction of "am not." I don't have a problem with language change, I have a problem with too much language change in different directions in different areas because it makes it hard for people to understand each other. I have great trouble understanding African-American English, for example. |
Actually, they are STILL against it, and ain't is NOT reasonable. amn't? I could see how someone could change it to ain't, but STILL. And HOW do you explain its use elsewhere like "You ain't going to do that" or "You ain't going to do nothing". Even YOUR claim falls apart like tissue paper in a waterfall in light of that!
BTW there IS a neuter pronoun.
One can always say that one can do this, or that. There is ALSO the passive voice. "This, or that, can be done.". |
The only reason why ain't isn't part of Standard English is because the prescriptivist grammarians decided against allowing it, presumably because it was restricted to certain dialects. Any dialect other than good old Standard Southern English was frowned upon and considered to be inferior and provincial.
Okay, so ain't can now mean 'are not' as well as 'am not,' but that's a more recent development. Odin is right about the origin of the contraction.
One exists as a sort of gender-neutral pronoun, but it sounds stilted and formal. Consider the sentence If one wants to do well in one's assignment, one should research about one's chosen topic. It sounds awful.
Rephrasing the sentence by using the passive voice to avoid using any pronouns at all is always an option, but some people criticise the passive voice for being bad style.  As the saying goes: The passive voice should always be avoided.
_________________
ACHTUNG all WP'ers...I will not be online from Aug 18th for a while due to a house move. I'm still alive and well but might not have internet access for some time. So long!
[I have updated my blawg.]
Sprecst žu englisc? |
|
| Back to top |
|
tharn
Toucan
Joined: Apr 22, 2008
Age: 29
Posts: 255
Location: Iowa
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hodor wrote: | The only reason why ain't isn't part of Standard English is because the prescriptivist grammarians decided against allowing it, presumably because it was restricted to certain dialects. Any dialect other than good old Standard Southern English was frowned upon and considered to be inferior and provincial.
Okay, so ain't can now mean 'are not' as well as 'am not,' but that's a more recent development. Odin is right about the origin of the contraction.
|
Looks like this is a case of the "experts" acting as gatekeepers (and presumably trying to make themselves authorities), rather than studying language as it's used, which would be their job. [sarcasm] How dare those filthy peasants try to adapt the language they use every day so that it suits their purposes! [/sarcasm]
If I'm checking an academic paper, and I see "ain't", someone's losing points. Likewise, if I'm teaching conversational English, my students would be taught what "ain't" means, in context with the culture that produced it. I'm all for people owning the language they use... but students should learn many facets of their language, and be expected to recognize social context, not just taught the King's English.
| Quote: | One exists as a sort of gender-neutral pronoun, but it sounds stilted and formal. Consider the sentence If one wants to do well in one's assignment, one should research about one's chosen topic. It sounds awful.
Rephrasing the sentence by using the passive voice to avoid using any pronouns at all is always an option, but some people criticise the passive voice for being bad style. As the saying goes: The passive voice should always be avoided. |
"One" is impersonal, and is a pronoun, but it also implies a person who has not been identified, or that can can be ANYONE. It's not the same as "he" or "she", which refers to a person who has been identified:
When Sue is hungry, she eats food.
When Sue is hungry, one eats food. (Genderless, and a pronoun, but does not refer to Sue.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
