|
I do. I find this 'development' quite depressing. And before anyone chips in I know my punctuation, spelling and grammar are hardly flawless but I at least try. This is just an other example of dumbing down in my humble opinion. People can speak however they like but I think when you are writing there should be a basic standard and this campaign to drop apostophes is abolishing that standard.
I could go on and on about how Western Culture is regressing rapidly and then be shouted down as an old fuddy-duddy by the Modernists on the board so I'll shut up now and keep my arcane ways to myself.
From the BBC....
According to the laws of language we need them, but are apostrophes really necessary? Not according to those fighting the punctuation purists.
Any advocate of a punctuation cull risks offending a lot of people.
More than 2.5m people have read Lynne Truss's bestseller Eats, Shoots and Leaves, which attacks infringements of the rules of written English language.
But linguist Kate Burridge says punctuation could do with being cut down and the rules of language reviewed.
Her new book Weeds in the Garden of Words considers how the "glorious garden" of the English language has evolved. Just as one weed is another gardener's flower, she says, the same goes for words and their usage in English - sometimes we just haven't realised their virtues.
Public flogging
Burridge's views on punctuation counter those of the self-confessed punctuation pedant, Truss.
Take the possessive apostrophe, described by Truss as "our long-suffering little friend". It is often surplus to requirements, according to Burridge.
When she suggested on Australian radio that the possessive apostrophe be dropped, she received a barrage of criticism.
"I could not have predicted the outcry," she says. "Public flogging would have been too light a punishment. That was the first time I realised people were so passionate about it."
Once after addressing an audience, a man told her how many times she had said "sort of" and concluded her use of it meant she didn't know what she was talking about.
He represents the views of what she calls the "sticklers", who fiercely oppose her views on language.
"Rules are important, but they are not all good," she says. "People can get too worried about these things. The letters I got when I suggested dropping the possessive apostrophe were quite hostile."
The normal apostrophe is useful but not the possessive, she says. Its supporters say it avoids ambiguity in meaning, (like sisters' books / sister's books), but Burridge thinks context makes it redundant.
The hyphen is also surplus to requirements in many cases, she says, because even the editors of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary admitted they're not sure of its proper usage.
Chatroom style
Burridge argues that dictionaries need to acknowledge new words and usages of grammar and punctuation to stay relevant. She is currently backing a campaign to get the "yeah-but-no-but" catchphrase of Little Britain character Vicky Pollard entered into the Collins English Dictionary.
Modern technology is leading the way in streamlining language. The use of words and punctuation in e-mails, texts and internet chatrooms is a type of speech written down and has loosened the straitjacket effect writing had on language, says Burridge.
But the distinction between speech and writing is something that should be kept, argue some.
"Punctuation is a way of showing respect to language," says linguist Tom Daydon.
"We have to learn the distinction between speech and writing because our audience is different with each. When we talk to people they can ask if they don't understand something but they can't if we write a letter to them, so rules are needed."
But the emphasis should be on clarity, rather than rules, argues Burridge and she is not alone. Roy Corden, professor of language and literacy at Nottingham Trent University, says rules often make things more confusing.
"Take the apostrophe, there is so much confusion over how to use it you have to wonder if it has become dysfunctional," he says.
"The fundamentals of grammar will always be needed but people tend to act as if all the rules have been handed down from on high and cannot be altered. The problem with that is language is always changing, the internet and mobile phones have had a dramatic impact on it.
"I think it comes down to a question of clarity, do the rules make language any clearer? If not we need to ask if they are still of use."
But not all change is good. Burridge is quick to criticise "evil weed" words, such as dishonest euphemisms that try to sound neutral when really they are negative, such as friendly fire and downsize.
Despite her approach, she does not think punctuation will die out because it provides the "props" of writing.
'Ignorance'
And as the success of Truss's bestseller shows for every person who wants the rules of language reviewed, there is another who feels passionately towards preserving them.
But Truss herself believes her campaign to retain the rules of the written word will fail.
"It's quite depressing to be standing up for a system of marks that's dying," she says. "There's no point doing it because it will die."
Punctuation clarifies complex sentences and without it, nuances would be lost, she says.
And the possessive apostrophe?
Despite the confusion among many, it's there to help and clarify, says Truss. Dropping it would be "capitulating to ignorance".
_________________
He has arrived, the mountebank from Bohemia, he has arrived, preceded by his reputation.
Evil Dr. K "The Jimmy McNulty of Payment Protection Insurance"
|
eter, aka 
usty 
halk