In the English language there is a set of absolutes that apply to the grammatical structure of language. We commonly try to teach our children to write with correct grammar, and to use the language accurately in their speech. But have you ever wondered why? Why really bother to correct them on a daily basis when the speak incorrectly? As Christian parents there are so many other things we should feel a need to correct, so many other instances when the Law of God should be presented to our children, so why bother to clutter their minds with another, man-made set of laws; why not just allow their teachers to present the right and wrong way to write and speak, and then leave it at that; why "disciple" our children in the way of English language when we have the infinitely more important task of discipling them in the way of the Kingdom?
One answer to this question is, because correct grammar is an integral part of efficient communication. And ntoe here taht wehn I say "garmamr" I am inculding the tsak of splelnig correctly as well. So if my premise is correct, that the primary goal of language is efficient communication, then doesn't correct grammar become a necessary means to that end? In answering this question, I think there are two challenges to consider. One, the trans-linguistic nature relationships today and two, the trans-cultural nature of relationships.
The Trans-Linguistic Nature of Relationships
The world is more and more like a village. In the attempt to communicate (for business or pleasure) the possibility is likely that you will encounter, as you are speaking in your native language, someone speaking in a language that is second to their native tongue.
We are experiencing more homogenization of culture, race and even language, than I believe has been experienced by any previous culture since Babel. Don't get me wrong, I don't see anything inherently sinful in the effort to communicate by building these types of bridges, so don't think that I am trying to compare these efforts to the efforts made by those God judged prior to the confusion at the tower of Babel. Just as language has been, and will remain, fluid over time, it is also, now, increasingly fluid from one language to another as one language adopts and applies a word whose transliteration is to difficult for common usage, and with the onset of the global electronic nature of economy, even the adoption of product names (which use words from the source language) from languages of a different family. For instance, words that transition from Asian to Latin based languages.
The Trans-Cultural Nature of Relationships
If the end is, to efficiently communicate the content of the words being spoken and their idea, then is it actually being accomplished when a person is constantly concerned with using correct English grammar in a context where the application of such a concern in that aspect of audible communication is perceived as arrogant and condescending? What we have is a conflict of competing means. The conclusion must be that, while correctly spoken grammar is a means to the end of efficient communication, it is not a "necessary means", nor is it a "sufficient means".
One answer to this question is, because correct grammar is an integral part of efficient communication. And ntoe here taht wehn I say "garmamr" I am inculding the tsak of splelnig correctly as well. So if my premise is correct, that the primary goal of language is efficient communication, then doesn't correct grammar become a necessary means to that end? In answering this question, I think there are two challenges to consider. One, the trans-linguistic nature relationships today and two, the trans-cultural nature of relationships.
The Trans-Linguistic Nature of Relationships
The world is more and more like a village. In the attempt to communicate (for business or pleasure) the possibility is likely that you will encounter, as you are speaking in your native language, someone speaking in a language that is second to their native tongue.
We are experiencing more homogenization of culture, race and even language, than I believe has been experienced by any previous culture since Babel. Don't get me wrong, I don't see anything inherently sinful in the effort to communicate by building these types of bridges, so don't think that I am trying to compare these efforts to the efforts made by those God judged prior to the confusion at the tower of Babel. Just as language has been, and will remain, fluid over time, it is also, now, increasingly fluid from one language to another as one language adopts and applies a word whose transliteration is to difficult for common usage, and with the onset of the global electronic nature of economy, even the adoption of product names (which use words from the source language) from languages of a different family. For instance, words that transition from Asian to Latin based languages.
The Trans-Cultural Nature of Relationships
If the end is, to efficiently communicate the content of the words being spoken and their idea, then is it actually being accomplished when a person is constantly concerned with using correct English grammar in a context where the application of such a concern in that aspect of audible communication is perceived as arrogant and condescending? What we have is a conflict of competing means. The conclusion must be that, while correctly spoken grammar is a means to the end of efficient communication, it is not a "necessary means", nor is it a "sufficient means".
No comments:
Post a Comment