Colin McEnroe Show: The 'Glamour Of Grammar'

E-mail from J

I would love to toss in my 2 cents. I am a lover of language and a student of its development and its pathologies. I feel it is what makes us human and that thinking about thinking and talking about talking are the highest and most fruitful challenges. I taught a course in language development of young children at St. Joseph College for over 20 years. During the early years, I searched for an analogy for language in general, one that underscored the arbitrary yet fantastically complex nature of human language. Analogies, I feel, are the strongest teaching tool we have...even the imperfections in analogies are the Velcro on which we can attach new learning. One evening I was sitting with my husband "watching" the NCAA semifinals, when it occurred to me that it is the NCAA which can be compared to language. Here goes...read on if I have not already bored you:

The NCAA has at its disposal all "rules": you can touch the ball, you can't touch the ball, you can push an opponent, you cannot, you can use an instrument like a bat, you cannot. It covers all rules and these rules are limited by the set of things that people can do and perceive ... so there is no rule that says a person must be in the air for 4 seconds or that s/he must touch an ear with an elbow. You get the idea. BUT, interestingly the NCAA also determines whether a student can accept money for this or that, or what that person's grades must be in order to participate. So too are there social and behavioral rules for language: How close do speaker and listener stand, do they make eye contact, formal or informal pronoun usage, etc.

Each sport governed by the NCAA is then composed of some combination of rules. Several sports may share rules but there are differences that make each sport unique. In the world of sports it is somewhat easier to not be threatened by recognizing the arbitrary nature of the selection of the rules. So few would argue that raising or lowering the basket 2 inches would be significant. If suddenly "three point territory" became "four point territory" the game would not be significantly different. (I'm not too strong on the sports end of this!)

So the rules in all the worlds languages are a set of rules again defined by that which people can do and perceive. Each language pulls down its own set, some overlapping, some unique in an arbitrary way. My message is that we cannot say one language is "better" than another, since the compilation of rules is arbitrary. The job of the child is then to get in the game and figure out the rules. If the child is not successful at that very complex task, there are people who, as I am, speech language pathologist.

So now for my pet peeve: other people's pet peeves in the language usage arena. I know what pathological, ineffective, unintelligible language sounds like and it is nothing like incorrect pronoun usage. One of your guests today inserted "sort of" as a filler many times. One could argue that this could be more detrimental to the communication process that a poorly chosen pronoun. Though, it's fine by me! Language and speech that sends the intended message and does not itself detract from that message is what we work so very hard for. (Think of how my phraseology would draw attention to itself-especially orally- if I had constructed that sentence without a preposition at the end.)

OK, just one more thing. That telegraphic speech you talked about is what the developing child does as he or she learns to do the fancier stuff. The kids know it works!

Thanks for letting me ramble! Love your show! J

E-mail from J.P.

Great show! I am a big fan of communication themed shows. I would be happy if you did a whole week long series of shows on language and communication.

Some questions and ideas I wanted to contribute:

Flamable vs Inflamable - how did we let that happen?

"Impactful" is NOT a word, right?

How language shapes the way we think. This article was fascinating. (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/magazine/29language-t.html?_r=3&pagewa...)

Is language changing faster now because of the ease and accessibility of mass communication devices available to the masses? It used to take years for a word to make it into the dictionary now - McJob, staycation, bling,- they are all there.

My last and most favorite topic of discussion: the detrimental and destructive power of the word "should" and how life can be better, and can exist, without it.

Thanks for a great show

E-mail from Marc

I wanted to mention a book I found at a tag sale recently--the Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language published in 1995. 500+ dense pages that take the reader through the origins of english, then syntax, pronunciation, eventually finding its way to evolution and personal usage-- kind of goes from history to phenomenology to philosophy of the silly characters and sounds we throw at each other. don't know if there is an updated version discussing the effects of the interwebs. anyway, i give it a thumbs up for supernerds!

E-mail from Paul

Do people use "which" and "that" incorrectly very often? Does it matter?

-Paul

P.S. I have to say I love the way Chion pronounces "W!"