Talk:Common English usage misconceptions/Archive 3: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:03, 21 July 2022

Latest revision as of 06:11, 11 December 2023

(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)

Line 186:

'''comment'''. "List of English words with disputed usage" is already at 86,216 bytes. A merge with "Common English usage misconceptions" results in an article of approximately 124,000 bytes, generally considered suitable for a split. The former appears to pertain to specific words, while the latter to usage/practices. [[User:Mannanan51|Mannanan51]] ([[User talk:Mannanan51|talk]]) 20:07, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

{{Discussion bottom}}

== Unsourced "sources" section ==

Moving the below material from the article here since it apparently has been in the article without a source for nearly four years. If someone wants to find a source, the material could be returned. --[[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 02:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

===Sources===

{{Multiple issues|section=yes|

{{unreferenced section|date=December 2014}}

{{Original research|section|date=July 2018}}

{{cleanup rewrite|section=yes|date=July 2018}}

}}

Though there are a variety of reasons misconceptions about correct language usage can arise, there are a few especially common ones with English. Perhaps the most significant source of these misconceptions has to do with the pseudo-scholarship of the early modern period. During the late [[Renaissance]] and early modern periods the vernacular languages of Western Europe gradually replaced Latin as a literary language in many contexts. As part of this process scholars in Europe borrowed a great deal of Latin vocabulary into their languages. England's history was even more complex in that, because of the [[Norman conquest]], English borrowed heavily from both [[Anglo-Norman language|Norman French]] and [[Latin]]. The tendency among language scholars in England was to use Latin and French concepts of grammar and language as the basis for defining and prescribing English. Because French had for so long been seen as the language of the nobility, there was a tendency to see cases where English-language usage differed from French (and/or Latin) as ignorance on the part of English speakers. For example, in Germanic languages like English many words that can be used as prepositions (e.g., "Are you going ''with'' me?") can also be used as special verb modifiers (e.g., "Are you going ''with''?"). French (like Latin, for the most part) does not have these particle words, so using a preposition in any context except as a preposition was seen as wrong (including ending a sentence with one). Similarly, because in French and Latin infinitives are a single word (as opposed to two in English), placing an adverb in the middle of an infinitive was seen as incorrect.

Many other misconceptions arise from over-application of advice that is beneficial in some cases but not all. For example, overuse of [[passive voice]] in writing can cause a passage to sound weak and, in some cases, less clear. But it does not follow, and is not true, that the passive voice is wrong or inferior in all cases.

== Perceived usage and grammar violations ==

You [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Common_English_usage_misconceptions&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=890579404&oldid=890241156 reverted] my edit and wrote that:<br>

> "Perceived usage" means "perceived violations of correct English grammar and '''usage'''"

Usage of what? Usage of "''perceived violations of correct English grammar''"? But let's get rid of that "usage", and replace "''Perceived usage''" by "''Perceived violations of correct English grammar''".

Now our statement means that visceral reactions are elicit by:<br>

*<s>perceived</s> violations of correct English grammar

and

*grammar violations {{red|(not perceived?)}}

The word "perceived" is redundant because anything that elicits someone's reaction is somehow perceived. Do you need any further explanations?

<br>[[User:Vikom|'''Vikom''']]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:Vikom|talk]]} 23:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

:"Perceived" is not redundant, because perceived violations are not always actual violations. I will edit accordingly. [[User:AlsoWukai|AlsoWukai]] ([[User talk:AlsoWukai|talk]]) 22:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

::This makes sense. Good catch :-) However, the new version:

::"''Perceived violations of correct English usage and grammar elicit visceral reactions in many people.''"

::suggests that '''actual''' violations do '''not''' elicit visceral reactions. Besides, "''correct English usage''" is a general term, that includes "correct grammar", which is redundant here.

::So, how about something like this:<br>

::"''Both actual and perceived violations of correct English usage elicit visceral reactions in many people.''"? [[User:Vikom|'''Vikom''']]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:Vikom|talk]]} 00:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

:::I agree that "and grammar" is redundant, but we don't need to add "actual", because perceived violations include actual ones, and this article is specifically about those that are perceived but not actual. So how about just "Perceived violations of correct English usage elicit visceral reactions in many people"? [[User:AlsoWukai|AlsoWukai]] ([[User talk:AlsoWukai|talk]]) 02:46, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

::::First of all, {{green|neither perceived violations include '''all''' actual ones}}, {{brown|nor actual violations include '''all''' perceived ones}}. I emphasized "''all''", although I didn't have to, because the default meaning of the word "include" is "[[Subset|include all]]". <br>

::::Violations can be:

::::*both perceived and actual

::::*perceived but not actual

::::*actual but not perceived

::::You wrote:

::::* ''perceived violations include actual ones'' {{red|(I disagree)}}

::::and then

::::* ''this article is specifically about those that are '''perceived but not actual'''.'' {{green|(I agree)}}

::::Of course, violations of correct English usage must be '''perceived by definition''' to elicit '''any''' reactions, no matter whether violations are actual or not. In my previous post I wrote that the word "perceived" "''suggests that actual violations do not elicit visceral reactions''". I was wrong. This word says '''nothing''' about actual violations, especially that language changes constantly, and what is correct today, may be incorrect tomorrow, and vice versa. So, your proposed sentence "''Perceived violations of correct English usage elicit visceral reactions in many people''" is absolutely true, especially that it emphasizes that many violations are perceived but not actual. Perfect :-) [[User:Vikom|'''Vikom''']]&nbsp;^{[[User talk:Vikom|talk]]} 23:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)