# Does descriptive linguistics mean "anything goes"? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 5, 2022, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005 "2022-09-05T17:29:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/281 "2022-09-23T18:45:30Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Whereas if you write “alot,” you’re likely not breaking the #1 rule. The real problem with “alot” is that an alot is a large, furry animal, as has been demonstrated on many grammar sites by people who are obviously tired of hearing about this fictitious creature. It’s unclear whether it makes a good pet. [https://scontent.fyzd1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/421854\_370620046290325\_1868314352\_n.jpg?\_nc\_cat=109&ccb=1-7&\_nc\_sid=84a396&\_nc\_ohc=xEULGvdv1QkAX9v8Ko1&\_nc\_ht=scontent.fyzd1-2.fna&oh=00\_AT\_R4Z6MmfEuM5Zwnypzl-MOJjFfhCoEUmkt71sdqP3DtQ&oe=6353F943](https://scontent.fyzd1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/421854_370620046290325_1868314352_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=84a396&_nc_ohc=xEULGvdv1QkAX9v8Ko1&_nc_ht=scontent.fyzd1-2.fna&oh=00_AT_R4Z6MmfEuM5Zwnypzl-MOJjFfhCoEUmkt71sdqP3DtQ&oe=6353F943) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/282 "2022-09-23T19:02:49Z")
Sure, it’s a silly comic, but you’d be well-advised not to take it as permission to look down on people with different orthography. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/283 "2022-09-23T19:43:06Z")
“Alot” is an interesting word - one that was apparently created by the same process that created “Alone” (and the reverse of the process that created “onion”). Whether or not it’s a word currently in style is not of interest to a linguist studying how languages change (a linguist who studies how society and language change interact would be interested, of course), any more than a physicist is interested in the legality of some bullet trajectories and the illegality of other bullet trajectories (a physicist can testify about physical facts that society will use to determine legality or illegality, but that’s not quite the same thing). ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/284 "2022-09-23T20:33:30Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > There are very, very few etiquette matters where it’s considered acceptable to correct a stranger. I appreciate the analysis and this line is part of what I was including in the “social contexts of the room.” Right off, it is not okay if the intent or the reception of the correction is to put down or “other” the receiver. The risk of that being minimally perceived as the intent makes doing such off limits with most strangers. OTOH in the room that is a SDMB forum I’ve never read a correction as being of that intent or read as one. Oh sometimes it’s to intellectually peacock, sure, but more often there is an understanding that people are here hoping to come away a bit less ignorant for their time. Seeing the alot cartoon for the first time (long ago now) was entertaining too! Reading aside discussions about why it’s attorneys general … they were not, I do not, think the subject of the thread, but I learned! Of course the posters here are real life strangers to each other, but I still don’t think the stranger rule necessarily applies to these virtual communities. If you know the room. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/285 "2022-09-23T21:28:55Z")
@wolfpup do you know the original source of that comic? It was here: > **[The Alot is Better Than You at Everything](http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html)** > > As a grammatically conscientious person who frequents internet forums and YouTube, I have found it necessary to develop a few coping mechani... The overall point being made was sharing tools to deal with their urge to correct. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/286 "2022-09-23T22:18:12Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > The overall point being made was sharing tools to deal with their urge to correct. That’s a horribly patronizing article. The message from this “grammatically conscientious person” is that people are just so dumb all the time, but she must try to rise above it. The author doesn’t need a “coping mechanism” for her urge to correct. She needs to do something about her own ignorance, then the urge would go away. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/287 "2022-09-23T22:49:47Z")
I read it differently. I read a person who recognizes that their impulse to “correct” is a problem, their problem, and who has found ways to avoid feeling annoyed. Some of us benefit from devices like that. I read no implication of “dumb”. I am in fact quite sure that the writer does not believe that those who type “u” are so stupid that they think that is how the word is spelled; they understand the usage is choice. Nor do I read the writer as “ignorant.” Highly likely that person understands the concepts of the science of linguistics fairly well. Her work mostly deals with issues related to her struggle with mental health challenges though. Maybe she is not enlightened enough for you but enough people have enjoyed her work that two books based on her blog have made the NYT bestseller list. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/288 "2022-09-23T23:03:07Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > That’s a horribly patronizing article. The message from this “grammatically conscientious person” is that people are just so dumb all the time, but she must try to rise above it. The author doesn’t need a “coping mechanism” for her urge to correct. She needs to do something about her own ignorance, then the urge would go away. The author talks a lot about her struggles with anxiety and depression, and she’s pretty into making fun of herself, so it’s probably worth reading the comic with all that in mind. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/289 "2022-09-23T23:04:04Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Nor do I read the writer as “ignorant.” Highly likely that person understands the concepts of the science of linguistics fairly well. I just don’t agree. I have never encountered a linguist who suffers from any “urge to correct”. > [@DSeid](#): > > Her work mostly deals with issues related to her struggle with mental health challenges though. Maybe she is not enlightened enough for you but enough people have enjoyed her work that two books based on her blog have made the NYT bestseller list. If her “urge to correct” derives from an atypical mental state, of course that’s a different kettle of fish. But I’m not sure why my criticism of her prescriptivism would lead to you to comment that she’s “not enlightened enough for [me]” with respect to her writing about something completely different. I criticized the article you linked, based on its content. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/290 "2022-09-23T23:24:59Z")
It is not required to be a linguist to understand some of the concepts of linguistics. There ARE conventions that are currently accepted as “correct” for the dialect of English used in educated venues. There are reasons to employ usage of that dialect, in its current form. I prefer knowing that it “should” be “sleight” and not “slight of hand” and why. I correct myself all the time on editing. I can appreciate the natural evolution of usage, appreciate the variety of forms as having their own usage rules and own words that are also evolving, and even how those forms all cross pollinate influencing each other. I can also personally prefer reading things that are written in the dialect of educated venues and try my best to learn to write well in that form. > [@Riemann](#): > > I’m not sure why my criticism of her prescriptivism would lead to you to comment that she’s “not enlightened enough for [me]” You assume she thinks others are dumb and called her ignorant. That’s why. Those are condescending remarks. Frankly they reek of an ivory tower classism of its own sort. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2022, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/291 "2022-09-23T23:46:56Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > It is not required to be a linguist to understand some of the concepts of linguistics. I didn’t claim it was. But in my experience, knowledge of language (including social and historical aspects) is inversely correlated with an “urge to correct” inappropriately. > [@DSeid](#): > > You assume she thinks others are dumb and called her ignorant. I’m hardly _assuming_ that she thinks other people [specifically people who write and speak in ways that she dislikes] are dumb when she says she feels an urge to “correct” them. And I expressed the view that she is ignorant _about language_ based on the content of that article. That has no relevance whatsoever to anything that she may have written about mental health issues. “Ignorance” is lack of knowledge about something, not some overarching character defect. > [@DSeid](#): > > Those are condescending remarks. I am criticizing _her_ condescension. > [@DSeid](#): > > Frankly they reek of an ivory tower classism of its own sort. Classism? What on earth are you talking about? If you are accusing me of intolerance for being critical of _her_ intolerance of other people’s usage, there’s a term for that. [Paradox of tolerance - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance) ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/292 "2022-09-24T00:18:10Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > in my experience, knowledge of language (including social and historical aspects) is inversely correlated with an “urge to correct” inappropriately. FWIW I seriously doubt there is any simple linear relationship. What I see much more is an urge to correct that increases with greater knowledge up to a point that is often albeit not exclusively associated with specialization in linguistics or pedagogy. Then the relationship becomes inverse sharply. It is to no small degree the position held by a subgroup of the elite of the elite. The merely college educated are more often those with more desire to correct. You see intolerance where there is none and refer to those who do not possess your academically obtained appreciation of linguistic diversity as not merely wrong but ignorant in a very demeaning sense of the word. That’s what I am reading. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/293 "2022-09-24T00:22:10Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > I am criticizing _her_ condescension. I’m not getting that. She’s describing silly coping mechanisms for dealing with her own irritation, _which is what we all need to do._ Ain’t nothing wrong with being irritated by people wearing white after Labor Day, or saying, “No worries” in response to your thanks, or cracking their knuckles, or eliding the space in “alot.” The only problem comes when you act on your irritation. I get super annoyed when I see apostrophes used in nonstandard ways. That’s what you call a me problem. If I judged people as stupid based on their apostrophe use, that’d be me being a jerk. But if I fanwank their use of apostrophes, that’s just me dealing with my problem. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/294 "2022-09-24T00:51:07Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I’m not getting that. Then why call it an “urge to correct”? Why describe yourself as a “grammatically conscientious person”? That’s explicitly saying that people are _wrong_ because they are _careless_. That seems quite some way from the position you are describing, where you acknowledge that something is within the range of perfectly normal behavior, but just happens to bug you. I think with respect to language the evidence of that post implies that she’s a run-of-the-mill tiresome prescriptivist, notwithstanding the fact that she has a good imagination and draws cute cartoons (and apparently has written some very good books about mental health issues). ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/295 "2022-09-24T01:43:30Z")
I just re-read it, trying to use fresh eyes, but really - > instead of getting mad, I imagine them having only one finger on each hand and then their actions seem reasonable. I don’t understand how you fail to see condescension in “you write really well for a one-fingered person”. Or: > I like to imagine that they actually _are_ an eagle typing with their talons You write really well for a person with no hands. Set aside the _cuteness_ of the imagery, and the message is clearly that if she _lowers her expectations_ far enough, these people will no longer disappoint her. How about the less cute but conceptually equivalent “you write really well for a five-year-old”, or “you write really well for someone with the intelligence of a banana slug”? I think the “alot” thing is _genuinely_ cute, and if that part is all she’d written here I’d interpret it much more generously as just the phenomenon of seeing “alot” in writing and doing a misparse and double take leading to an internal stream-of-consciousness/imagination thing, something I remember doing myself before “alot” was commonplace. ---
**Author:** ![Paxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/50afbb/32.png) [@Paxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paxx)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/296 "2022-09-24T02:08:54Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > Any ideas for a better analogy, involving hard science and the laws of nature? First, I’m not sure that an analogy is required to explain the fundamental differences between prescriptivist vs. descriptivist approaches to language. You do a good job in the OP, despite your analogy, If you’re looking for an example of adherence to authority vs. systematic observation, there’s Aristotelian motion vs. Galilean motion. But that doesn’t capture the complexity of language. Another type of comparison is the mistaken belief that evolution leads to inherently superior species, just as some dialects are “superior”. BTW, why hard science? Isn’t linguistics a soft science? ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/297 "2022-09-24T02:33:28Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > Any ideas for a better analogy, involving hard science and the laws of nature? How about: Evolutionary biologists look at how dogs have evolved in various ways to better fit into the niche of human companions/aides, **describing** these changes without favoritism. Show dog judges evaluate individual dogs based on how weach one fits a **prescribed** ideal for a particular breed. An evolutionary biologist is unlikely to say (in a professional context) that Lucky, a retriever/beagle/greyhound mix, is a bad or ugly or invalid, but a show dog judge would reject Lucky as unfit (even if his particular combination of traits made him well suited to be a watch dog, or a pet, or to survive in the wold without human help). ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/298 "2022-09-24T03:39:46Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > It is not required to be a linguist to understand some of the concepts of linguistics. Of course not. OTOH, That doesn’t prohibit a huge number of people commenting on “language” online with limited or null understanding of the concepts of linguistics. My using OTOH is contrary to formal usage. It started on the [internet ages ago](https://www.howtogeek.com/660368/what-does-otoh-mean-and-how-do-you-use-it/) and has remained in steady use since. However, it would not be acceptable outside casual posts or texts. Just starting a sentence with an abbreviation would be frowned upon and so would capitalizing the first word after the abbreviation. Yet not even our most fervent pedants here would think twice about such usage in a thread. It makes too much sense. Alot is in the process of being accepted. There’s no terribly good reason to avoid it, except that it still constitutes a marker to those who only grudgingly accept variations decades after the fact long after everyone else has forgotten they were in dispute. Alright is in a similar position, although it too is perfectly understandable at a glance and Google ngrams shows a steady growth in its use in the 21st century. Most of the sillier “language” discussions - it’s hard to dignify them as arguments - fall into these two fallacies I keep harping on: the lack of recognition of the differences between formal and casual usages and the level of acceptance a modified term has achieved. If this were a discussion about hard sciences, failure to indicate the parameters - a term chosen deliberately because its nontechnical expanded meaning is denigrated by some - of the issue would cause the experts to rant and rave against the lack of precision. Yet people keep doing that here and in most online discussions without ever mentioning context. That’s why I’ve been trying to stay out of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/299 "2022-09-24T04:10:05Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > OTOH, That doesn’t prohibit a huge number of people commenting on “language” online with limited or null understanding of the concepts of linguistics. I’m not quite sure I fully understand your meaning. FWIW (and yes the appropriateness use of these sorts of abbreviations is contextually dependent and has varied across time), I do not believe that participation in a discussion about language requires pre-existing knowledge of the concepts of linguistics. We are all users of language and likely of several variant forms that we automatically transition between, sometimes not even consciously aware that we have done so. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2022, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005/300 "2022-09-24T06:10:20Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > I do not believe that participation in a discussion about language requires pre-existing knowledge of the concepts of linguistics. You keep repeating that as though someone is disputing it. And I have seen no evidence here (or anywhere else on SDMB) of anyone being unwelcoming to people with any level of technical knowledge - I’m hardly an expert - when what they want to do is actually _discuss_ language. But a lot of people with limited or non-existent knowledge don’t have any motivation to engage in good faith discussion or to learn anything. The most popular language threads are always “it really bugs me when…” or “what is your pet peeve”, which quickly attract dozens of posts from people with no curiosity whatsoever about novel or unfamiliar usage, who want to say their piece (invariably disparaging) and have it confirmed by “grammar experts”, and just get annoyed if someone questions the empirical validity of their pet prescriptivist precept. You made this baseless accusation: > [@DSeid](#): > > You see intolerance where there is none and refer to those who do not possess your academically obtained appreciation of linguistic diversity as not merely wrong but ignorant in a very demeaning sense of the word. Did I really imagine the intolerance in that blog post? An accurate summary of the sentiments expressed in the first part, minus the cute imagery, is: > I am conscientious and correct in my use of language. > They are careless are wrong in their use of language. > They write well _for people with one finger_. > They write well _for people with no hands_. > If I imagine people to be suffering from these kinds of physical handicaps when they write so badly, I lower my expectations and it helps me resist the urge to correct them to my own standards. It’s not me doing the demeaning here. What’s unwelcome and what gets harsh pushback is when people, with a certainty that comes only with ignorance, _disparage others_. The culture of linguistic supremacism causes substantial harm. Why do those whose commentary consists principally of sneering at the way other people use language deserve to be treated generously? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-descriptive-linguistics-mean-anything-goes/971005.md?page=16)