Job Discussion Forums

[Mark-O]

WARNING: Severe whinging follows!

Have you noticed how annoying the English language is becoming? Obviously I'm coming at this with an English/England perspective, but the way the language is communicated these days is really beginning to irritate me.

Off the top of my head - and perhaps top of the list - is this fashionable attempt to speak the language as every other sentence is a question! From this I mean that the end of the sentence is intonated with an ascending pitch. Where on earth has this come from? Is this some kind of 'Friends' talk or something - I wouldn't know as I pride myself in never watching such tripe. All I know is that it grates on me and I'm sure a non-native speaker would find this most confusing if they engaged in a dialogue with a perpetrator of this language crime.

Secondly, and wholly specific to the UK, is the ending of each sentence with the rhetorical "innit?" or "innit, man?" or "isit?". 'In' what exactly?! *GRRRRRRRAAAARRRGH!"*

Someone else must be as big a whinger as me and have some similar language annoyances. So form an orderly queue and let's release all of this repressed aggression ...

[foster]

I read an article recently about how SMS and email is hurting our language. Gr8! C ya L8R! Our kids are learning these short cuts and think that it is ok to abbreviate in everyday language, even spoken language.

We write in broken sentences in emails. We start sentences with verbs but really have no subject in mind. We use sentence fragments often, as we are writing as we are thinking.

A UK friend sent me an SMS once with 'innit' in her message and I was right confused.

Yes, I know I am lazy in emails at times. (gotta, dunno, k) but often I try to use the proper language.

People who answer a question with a question bug me and yes, sometimes the un-needed question tag is annoying. I would not say it is repressed anger...just something that worries me as a teacher. Someday, all my students will be spelling 'night' as 'nite' and thinking they are correct.

We are getting lazier and lazier and our language is starting to show it.

[Mark-O]

Foster, good point.

I can see where the 'text talk' has come from as you are limited in the number of characters per message/sms, and I suppose it's quicker ... or is it? Surely it only saves you a few seconds. Let's face it, if time were an issue and what you had to communicate was important then you'd just phone the bloody number instead of texting it! Indeed, you've hit upon the point of it being just pure laziness. Personally, I can't succumb to it and end up paying a small fortune in sms, so I pay for my stubborness, literally!

My beef with this issue does lie more centrally with conversational english though. Another example is that of the ubiquitous use of 'like' and 'so' in american conversational English:

"I was like, SO not there! Like, we went to the bar and like, it was SO smokey?"

Is this specific to one part of the US? Or is it widespread? Either way, it's excruciatingly painful to hear.

[veiledsentiments]

I would say that the overuse of 'like' and 'so' are more generational than geographical. It seems that 'like' has replaced the 'you know' of their parents generation.

All three drive me to distraction, but avoiding television can help.

My latest language pet peeve is the current proliferation of talking so fast that those of us developing age-related hearing loss can hardly understand the normal TV sitcom dialogue - not that most of it is worth hearing anyway. It seems that there are so many ads that they are having difficulty fitting any story line between them.

VS

[denise]

I'm more concerned with the decline of the written language than that of the spoken language--some of the abbreviations mentioned already (nite, c ya l8r, etc.) drive me batty.

I make more allowances for spoken language, and I myself take more liberties. Unless, of course, we're talking about "formal" spoken language like speeches. For conversational English, I have no problem whatsoever with rules being bent, slang being introduced, etc.--the particular ways in which the rules get bent can reveal a lot of the speaker's background and personality, things that we would not see if all rules were strictly adhered to. (And please excuse both a) my ending the previous sentence with a preposition and b) my starting this sentence with a conjunction.)


The, like, beauty of the language is that it's soooo, like, open to change. (I'd add "innit" here, but being an American, I'm not sure I would use it correctly.)

d

[khmerhit]

So youre saying you think the spoken language is going down the tubes, like?

Ring! Ring!

{picks up phone}

Uh huh, Uh uh.

{addresses thread}

I would like to take part in this discussion. However, my doctor has advised me to watch my blood pressure, therefore I will root from the sidelines.

El Khmer Heet

[foster]

In some ways, the slang from language is what gives us its colour. The differences with slang can be interesting. Even between English speaking countries, the way words are used can be very different and thus, rather educational or interesting.I agree with Denise that when talking with people, I make allowances for poor grammar. Yeah, it drives me crazy when my students say for the millionth time "I very like chocolate", but I know where it comes from. I know that at times, my grammar is not perfect, as I tend to get ahead of myself when talking and my mouth moves faster than my brain. (And that happens alot!!)

Apparently, during my trip to Australia at Chinese New Year, my Aussie friend was 'translating' for me when I said certain things but I never noticed. I did find out that the phrase "Light in the loafers" is not known in Australia.

Yes, I agree that the so, like, whatever usage drives me nuts. Then again, the ETO that people interjected into Japanese drive me batty as well. I wonder if that is not a personal thing, as those are often used as hestiation devices. I find it hard to follow people who, like, can't speak, erhm, so, smoothly.

Does anyone write letters anymore? NOT emails and NOT typewritten letters, but proper letters on nice stationery and then mail them? I am concerned about peoples lack of written communication. I understand that when SMS'ing someone, characters are of the essence and therefore shortcuts are required. In a proper email or even notes, I think you can take and make the time to write a word in it's entirty.

English is such an intricate language. Does anyone ever really master a language?

[FGT]

I agree with lots that's been said.

Intonation: making everything sound like a question (I think this started with Australian English though I may be wrong); differences between spoken and written forms (gonna/ wanna when speaking, ok. In an essay - ouch!).

What about wrong stress? Broadcasters (even BBC ones) frequently confuse noun and verb forms of the same word. There is a reason for the difference but it seems to be getting lost.
"Harass" is more often than not pronounced with the stress on the second syllable, is this now "correct"?

A particular foible of mine is "to beg the question" being used to mean "we should ask the question" rather than "to avoid answering the question".

I recognise that language is alive and has to grow and change but meaning seems to be getting lost in the process.

[khmerhit]

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:vb98ws_FIHEJ:alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxbegthe.html+beg+question+&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

it seems to mean, according to this link, "to avoid the issue". I must admit ive always had trouble with begging the question. The meaning it is mistaken for nowadays ("this calls up the question") is gaining currency.

this link is from an alt english group. New to me, b ut possible woth pursuing....

el khmer heet

[fat_chris]

[Mark-O]

Thanks Chris et al for confirming that I am not alone on this issue!

I have to emphasise that this is not a US-specific complaint at all - the English/British are just as bad or if not worse!

Slang I don't really have a problem with. Afterall, how much slang makes it into the dictionary these days, but more to the point is useful? I agree that slang often adds variety and colour to a language. But these nuances of 'like' and 'so' can not be considered slang and subsequently drive me up the wall. I just can't take anybody seriously when they use them in that manner. I think I'd agree with Foster that it probably serves as a delay in dialogues - the youth equivalent of the British MPs' television appearances in which they "ergh" and "argh" with alarming frequency whilst they concoct the next lie to leave their mouthes.

FGT, someone else has remarked to me that the question tone to every other sentence can be credited to the Australians!

Chris raised an interesting point with the baby talk that pervades the language these days. This is another area of my contempt. Programmes on British TV such as 'The Teletubbies' that actually advocate the use of this language by teaching toddlers to say "uh-oh" instead of "hello". What a great basis for a child's education - teaching the language as though it were spoken by a deaf person! Of course, the kitsch factor hit the teenage, student and even adult generations and when you sit at work, in an office environment, with 50-year old adults greeting each other with "uh-oh", then you really know that the language is descending into the realms of 'beyond salvage'!

[leeroy]

I use "like" sometimes in the way described above;

"My boss asked me to cover some classes, I was like 'man, I can't be bothered..'"

Here "to be like" is somewhere between "feel" and "say". Did I actually tell my boss "I can't be bothered", or did I just feel it and say something a bit more appropriate?

Although this new usage of "like" won't win any prizes for articulacy, I'm astonished by how fiercely people hate it (here, at least). Evidently the new generation decided that there was a need for a word not yet invented - and I'm sure there was a bit of "creating identity for the younger generation" too.

I also fail to see how "CUL8R" signals the degeneration of the English language. It is merely another medium, another genre if you will. In postcards we often omit subjects, articles and the verb "to be" ("Having great time!") - has this spilled over into other forms of discourse?

English is diversifying.

[dmb]

My boss asked me to cover some classes, I was like 'man, I can't be bothered..'"

Iread/heard somewhere that the use of like for reported speech(as above) and 'goes' as in "I met this bloke in a pub and he goes Oi are you looking at my bird" are two of the most common forms for reported speech. How often do you teach them in class.

[Mark-O]

Leeroy, you call it 'diversity', I call it 'demise'.

As ambassadors of the language should we then begin to teach the use of 'so' and 'like' to students in classes? Maybe some lessons on alphanumeric text talk too?

I feel that the presence of 'like', and largely 'so', is extraneous and don't add any value to what is being said. As in my example, how can someone be "so not there"? They're either there or not - they can't be 'very' not there or 'extra' not there, can they?

It seems to be a devolution of the language and does not bring any benefits to what is being said. The language already exists to convey these points, why devolve it for the sake of 'diversity'?

[leeroy]

I have, in fact, covered "text talk" in class - it was even in the coursebook. Text talk, emails and even discussion forums are simply new genres of written English. I'm fairly sure I have gone over "go/like/so" in lessons too, though I can't recall any occassions specifically.

My job is to help students to communicate; a large part of this is saying "This is how people speak". If people do use expressions like "He goes to me, like, do you know what I mean?" then it would be unprofessional of me to not mention it.

Whether or not the students choose to use this language is up to them (they very rarely do, in fact) - I would be going beyond the bounds of my duties to say "This is the style in which you must speak". It's much more similar to "These are the ways in which you can speak, so choose one that works for you".

As for the degeneration of the English language, I suspect that there are far more literate people in English-speaking countries now than there were a hundred years ago. I don't share the same apocalyptic visions as some others that "nite" signifies the end of humanity as we know it.

I disagree that "like" and "so" don't add meaning.

"I was like, what?"
"I was, what?"

As previously demonstrated, "like" has a meaning (thought not a crystal clear one). I tend not to use "so" in the ways you describe, but surely it is a way of signifying intensity on the part of the speaker. I doubt I would say "he was so not there" - but would understand if I heard it that the speaker meant to imply an added feeling of frustration or certainty.

"Bling-bling" also has a function, it gives the youth of today a new funky feeling of identity - and can be used as an expression, noun or adjective meaning something close to "openly rich".

In India people kept asking me "What is your good name?" What's good about it? Would you call this another symptom of the demise of the English language? Will everyone start saying that?[/i]