Through history there have always been those special protagonists who pop-up when it comes to certain topics. Think of classical music, and the symphonies of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Ludwig van Bethoven, Antonio Vivaldi, and Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky will come to mind. Think of literature, and the works of William Shakespeare, Charles Dickens, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and Mark Twain will rush forward. And finally, think of the English language, and the influences of John Locke, Jonathan Swift, Samuel Johnson, William Cobbett, William Wordsworth, Thomas Paine, and even Isaac Newton will suddenly hold a very important role (but in case you're not very familiar with these linguistic protagonists, don't worry, I'm about to explain).
John Locke wanted everybody to learn English, because "if the definition of words could be agreed, and misunderstanding avoided, peace would naturally follow" (2:25). But, if everybody did learn, speakers would be able to tell apart those who just learned the language from those who have known it all their lives, and conflict would inevitably rise again. However, let's pretend that everybody can speak the language equally as well. Would that actually bring peace? Not all conflicts revolve around linguistics. In fact, most of them don't. My sister and I, for example, know English and Spanish, and still we have plenty of fights that don't even relate to the subject of linguistics. And, as far as I know (unless you twist it at odd angles) World War II had nothing to do with linguistic matters either. Hitler would probably have continued, even if everybody in the world had spoken English back then. He might have even found it easier to convince others about the "dangers" that the Jews brought. Yeah, so maybe the common knowledge of the components of the dictionary isn't what we need in order to live in peace.
Jonathan Swift was somehow similar. He didn't want English to change, and hated the changes people deliberately decided to make on the language. There are still people like him today; but they never have been (and probably never will be) able to avoid the incessant changes English undergoes. Those who still stick to this ideal are fighting a lost battle. It has been evident for centuries that English will change. And now especially, with all the new technology that influences the majority of the population, language is bound to change.
As other men attempted to unify English speakers as one mass, William Cobbett examined them as several groups. Although he believed that proper grammar was indispensable in order to prevail in society, he knew that not everybody would have this "proper grammar." Thus, he studied the different grammar usage and vocabulary people had: slang. Aided by his theory about proper grammar, today's social classes were created.
Samuel Johnson also made a difference: he wrote the first dictionary written in seven years. It contained 43,000 words, each with a definition. Unfortunately, he omitted all the words he didn't know and the ones he couldn't figure out how to define. Because of this, it ended up not being such a reliable dictionary after all. For all you knew, that word you spent entire minutes looking for, might not even be there. After all, those words he didn't know were probably the ones most people didn't know either.
Newton probably wouldn't have been very pleased with Johnson's dictionary, as he was the creator of many scientific terms. There are so many of these that there's now more than an entire unit in Physics dedicated to learning about them. Nowadays these ideas and terms are vital in the scientific world; however, back then, these ideas and terms might not have seemed too important to a lot of people, or they might have been too difficult to grasp.
This was the reason why William Wordsworth preferred simple vocabulary over eloquent words. He thought that in order to have everyone understand, fancy words were unnecessary. Thomas Paine believed so too. This is why he wrote the Rights of Man in common English. This was a very smart thing to do, because the commoners were bound to support him. However, they would never have done so if they hadn't even been able to understand the document.
However, none of these linguistic protagonists are either completely wrong or completely right. Misunderstandings have caused plenty of disputes, as Locke predicted; and there are some words in English that most likely will remain relatively unchanged over time, as Swift desired. Despite Cobbett's studies and conclusions, there are nowadays lower-class people who speak impecable English and upper-class ones who you would expect to find anywhere but in a rich family. And although Samuel Johnson's dictionary lacked in helpfulness, it did establish a definition for many words. People might have had an idea of what they meant, but a clear definition had not been established until then. Finally, although Paine and Wordsworth preferred simple terms, in the end, it all depends on the audience. It is perfectly fine to refer to the public in such unadorned ways, but speaking in the same manner to a group of politicians would be unwise. There's not much to say about Newton though. He invented his own terms; so unless his theories are suddenly found to be wrong, he will be right for at least a while.
No comments:
Post a Comment