It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study. Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic. Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it. And when opinions differ, emotions can run high. Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education.Q2
Language, moreover, is a very public behaviour, so it is easy for different usages to be noted and criticised. No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival. As a result, it is easy to hurt, and to be hurt, when language use is unfeelingly attacked.
In its most general sense, prescriptivism is the view that one variety of language has an inherently higher value than others, and that this ought to be imposed on the whole of the speech community.Q12 The view is propounded especially in relation to grammar and vocabulary, and frequently with reference to pronunciation. The variety which is favoured, in this account, is usually a version of the 'standard' written language, especially as encountered in literature, or in the formal spoken language which most closely reflects this style. Adherents to this variety are said to speak or write 'correctly'; deviations from it are said to be 'incorrect!
All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries.Q4 The aims of these early grammarians were threefold: (a) they wanted to codify the principles of their languages, to show that there was a system beneath the apparent chaos of usage, (b) they wanted a means of settling disputes over usage, and (c) they wanted to point out what they felt to be common errors, in order to 'improve' the language. The authoritarian nature of the approach is best characterised by its reliance on ‘rules' of grammar. Some usages are 'prescribed,' to be learnt and followed accurately; others are 'proscribed,' to be avoided. In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them.
These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained. Nevertheless, there is an alternative point of view that is concerned less with standards than with the facts of linguistic usage. This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change. In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestiey, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that 'the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language! Linguistic issues, it is argued, cannot be solved by logic and legislation. And this view has become the tenet of the modern linguistic approach to grammatical analysis.
In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists' and 'prescriptivists' has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other.Q8 Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid. Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition. The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms - of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism.
Do the following statements agree with the information given in the Reading Passage?
In following statements below, choose
YES if the statement agrees with the information
NO if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
It is not easy to be systematic and objective about language study.
Popular linguistic debate regularly deteriorates into invective and polemic.
Language belongs to everyone, so most people feel they have a right to hold an opinion about it.
And when opinions differ, emotions can run high.
Question: There are understandable reasons why arguments occur about language.
Understandable = not easy to be systematic and objective about language
Arguments = feel they have a right to hold an opinion
The answer is Yes. The passage opens by noting it is “not easy to be systematic and objective” about language and that, because language belongs to everyone, people “have a right to hold an opinion” — so when opinions differ, disputes naturally arise. This gives a clear, understandable reason for the arguments.
Arguments can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education.
Question: People feel more strongly about language education than about small differences in language usage.
Language n = linguistic adj
Small = minor
The answer is No. The passage states that arguments “can start as easily over minor points of usage as over major policies of linguistic education.” The word “as easily” shows feelings are equally strong about small differences and about education, which contradicts the claim that education provokes stronger feelings.
No part of society or social behaviour is exempt: linguistic factors influence how we judge personality, intelligence, social status, educational standards, job aptitude, and many other areas of identity and social survival.
Question: Our assessment of a person’s intelligence is affected by the way he or she uses language.
Our assessment of a person’s intelligence = how we judge intelligence
Affected verb = influence noun
The answer is Yes. The text says that “linguistic factors influence how we judge” several things, explicitly including “intelligence.” The question’s “assessment” matches “how we judge,” and “the way he or she uses language” matches “linguistic factors.”
All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries.
Question: Prescriptive grammar books cost a lot of money to buy in the 18th century.
In the 18th century = in the 18th century exact phrase
Prescriptive grammar books = the writing of grammars
The answer is Not Given. The passage discusses 18th-century prescriptive grammars and dictionaries and the aims of early grammarians, but it never mentions their price or how much they cost to buy. With no information about cost, the statement cannot be confirmed or contradicted.
All the main languages have been studied prescriptively, especially in the 18th century approach to the writing of grammars and dictionaries.
....
In this early period, there were no half-measures: usage was either right or wrong, and it was the task of the grammarian not simply to record alternatives, but to pronounce judgement upon them.
These attitudes are still with us, and they motivate a widespread concern that linguistic standards should be maintained.
Question: Prescriptivism still exists today.
Prescriptivism = these attitudes
Still exists today = are still with us
The answer is Yes. After describing the 18th-century prescriptive approach, the writer states that “These attitudes are still with us.” “Still with us” directly confirms that prescriptivism continues to exist today.
This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change.
Question: According to descriptivists it is pointless to try to stoplanguage change.
stop language change = halting language change
pointless to try = attempt the impossible tasks
The answer is Yes. The descriptivist view is that the grammarian should not “attempt the impossible tasks of” … “halting language change.” Calling it an “impossible task” means trying to stop language change is pointless.
This approach is summarised in the statement that it is the task of the grammarian to describe, not prescribe to record the facts of linguistic diversity, and not to attempt the impossible tasks of evaluating language variation or halting language change.
In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view, such as Joseph Priestiey, whose Rudiments of English Grammar (1761) insists that 'the custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language!'
Question: Descriptivism only appeared after the 18th century.
Only appeared # already find advocates of this view
After the 18th century # in the second half of the 18th century
The answer is No. The passage says that “In the second half of the 18th century, we already find advocates of this view,” naming Joseph Priestley (1761). Since descriptivism existed during the 18th century, the claim that it appeared only afterwards is contradicted.
In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists' and 'prescriptivists' has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other.
Question: Both descriptivists and prescriptivists have been misrepresented.
descriptivists and prescriptivists = descriptivists and prescriptivists exact phrase
Misrepresented = painting unreal pictures of the other
The answer is Yes. The writer notes that the opposition has become extreme, “with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other.” Painting an “unreal picture” of someone is exactly what it means to be misrepresented, and this applies to both groups.
Complete the summary using the list of words, A-I, below.
Write the correct letter, A-I
Choose appropriate options A, B, C or D.
In our own time, the opposition between 'descriptivists' and 'prescriptivists' has often become extreme, with both sides painting unreal pictures of the other.
Descriptive grammarians have been presented as people who do not care about standards, because of the way they see all forms of usage as equally valid.
Prescriptive grammarians have been presented as blind adherents to a historical tradition.
The opposition has even been presented in quasi-political terms - of radical liberalism vs elitist conservatism.
B. to present a historical account of differing views of language
The answer is B, to present a historical account of differing views of language. The passage traces prescriptivism and descriptivism from the 18th century to “our own time,” describing how the two opposing views developed rather than promoting one.
According to , there is only one correct form of language. Linguists who take this approach to language place great importance on grammatical . Conversely, the view of , such as Joseph Priestley, is that grammar should be based on
According to Hprescriptivists, there is only one correct form of language. Linguists who take this approach to language place great importance on grammatical Frules. Conversely, the view of Adescriptivists, such as Joseph Priestley, is that grammar should be based on Cpopular speech
Word bank