A veteran English professor at the University of Michigan, Anne Curzan, is a linguist. Her new book, “Says Who?” argues that our choice of words in the English language is determined by context, and that this context is often cultural or based on class. The core of Curzan’s book coalesces around three observations. One is that language evolves and therefore it is never constant. We are better off welcoming its changing nature than resisting it. Two, although we live in a hyper verbal time, language must be more inclusive, more sensitive and less judgmental. Three, the rules and conventions of language can be arbitrary. For the above reasons, she finds nothing objectionable with conversational tics such as “awesome,” “like,” “nice,” etc that are really lazy shorthands for certain adjectives. She also does not find fault with the propensity where nouns and corporate tags are turned into verbs. “Go Google that,” is one example of the latter. (I recall that almost 30 years ago, this inventive tagline, “Do you Yahoo?” defined some aspects of our generation’s lingua.)
At an abstract level, it is easy to accept the premises of Curzan’s book. But, because she encourages us to accept all language however slovenly it is, she fails to draw attention to the insidious effect of bad or incorrect English grammar, or careless and vulgar language. First, there is a correlation between thinking coherently and writing coherently. One who fails to write coherently is one who doesn't think coherently. Second, every conscientious writer wants his or her reader to know exactly what he or she means. This minimizes the odds of being misunderstood. The rules of the English language (on grammar, spelling, usage, punctuation, etc) are a necessary guardrail because they help a conscientious writer in his or her quest to be well understood. Three, the inclination to observe and not pass judgment on how others use language is probably acceptable to those who study but won’t judge the culture of others. Prominent among this group of people would be lexicographers and anthropologists. But bad language is unacceptable to a lot of other people. These would be readers, listeners, editors, publishers, etc - whose judgment of language matters and thus ought to be made. Readers of Curzan's book need to be reminded that language defines who we are; good language even more so...
