I just got done reading a comment that said that there is a new school of thought which states that proper grammar should reflect how people really speak. Of course the people they are speaking of are the lowest common denominator. I had read about this before on /pol/, that there were people who complained that correcting black students ebonics on papers was racist, but I just assumed it was /pol/'s typical hyperbole. But know I'm not so sure...
So is this really going on at colleges? Has it begun to creep into grade school as well? Please tell me it's not true. I was already hurt enough when I found out they added a new definition to "literally" that literally means "not literally". And last night I find out that "mansplaining" is in the dictionary now.... And now this.
>>9414183
you're complaining about the state of grammar when you don't even know the difference between prescriptive and descriptive?
>>9414183
>hurr mommy slapped me on the wrist when i ended sentences with prepositions and now i feel superior for learning a few made up grammatical rules
fucking christ when will the prescriptive grammar meme end
You should teach yourself some basic linguistics it will make you better understand it
You can always remain a linguistic prescriptionist
>>9414183
>Have millions of illiterate monkeys living in your country, and millions imported yearly
>Language naturally declines
>Be surprised
>>9414322
Language changes and simplifies but doesn't decline
>>9414322
>not getting that the radical chic are using immigrants as an excuse
>>9414254
It should be noted that the prepositions meme-rule has no basis in the English language as spoken. Dryden just made it up because you can't end a sentence with a preposition in Latin, it was never a thing before him.
>>9414487
...and is upheld as "proper" English aka the definition of prescriptive rules.
>>9414322
>language declines
In what aspect? Can you still understand what people are saying? Have you ever had a single interaction in which meaning wasn't transferred or understood because someone used slang? Or because somebody used a double negative? Or because they can't use the proper "there/their/they're" variant?
>>9414183
Holy living fuck, how can you this retarded?
>we should teach language the same way linguists study it
What am I reading
>>9414183
are you talking about prescriptivism vs descriptivism b/c that's as old as linguistics. i very much so doubt that we'll be getting rid of "proper" (pffbtbtbtbtbt) grammar as a whole