I was thinking the same as Dick. Most of these items would not strike me as
odd in conversation. Many of them make sense and the only reason to avoid
them is to conform with some verbal etiquette, which isn't a very convincing
reason for most adults and definitely an ineffectual motivator for young
people. As usual, I'm not suggesting that standard language varieties don't
have their uses, but some of the finer points of linguistic "good behavior"
just don't have a leg to stand on.
For example, I find "mothers-in-law" to be irritatingly cumbersome. In
spoken language, it actually slows my mental processing -- I have to slow
down and purposefully choose the prescriptively correct form. Can't we just
accept that "mother-in-law" has become a unit and treat it as such? Would
anyone really get confused at "mother-in-laws" in context?
However, I agree that Trask probably didn't have formal written English in
mind when giving the cited examples.
John
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Dick Veit <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Scott,
>
> I doubt Trask is limiting "normal English grammar" to formal written
> English. I would say that #4,5, 7, 8, and 9 are already "normal" in the
> sense that they would not strike most speakers as odd when heard in a
> conversation. In #3, "between you and I" bugs the hell out of me, but I
> wouldn't want to bet against its becoming accepted even in writing in a few
> generations.
>
> Sentences #1, 2, and 6 are unfamiliar to me. I assume they are from a
> regional dialect I have not encountered.
>
> Dick
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Scott Catledge <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> **
>> Trask in his *Why do Languages Change* includes (p. 10) nine sentences
>> that he considered would be or shortly become
>> accepted as "normal English grammar." One of the sentences (number seven)
>> is strictly conversational and unlikely
>> to be encountered in normal writing: I consider the other eight to have
>> egregious errors. What do you think?
>>
>> (1) I recommend you to take the job.
>> (2) He demanded that the agitators were arrested.
>> (3) This is just between you and I.
>> (4) Due to the rain, we had to cancel the picnic.
>> (5) This paper was written by Susie and myself.
>> (6) Please come between eight a.m. to six p.m.
>> (7) If he'd've played, we would have won.
>> (8) He makes tedious jokes about mother-in-laws.
>> (9) Having said that, there is no feasible alternative.
>>
>> Scott Catledge
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
>> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
>> leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
