Far from boring all sorts of interesting points,
I have no thoughts on Chinese grammar as such, but the
supposed division between the presciptors and
descriptors does seem for me an interesting point of
conflict.
The idea that the 'natural' self evident growth of
language is only respected by the descriptors and
poets and inhibited by those that seek to prescribe
seems wrong.
There are plenty of cases that could argue that
prescription is likely to encourage language diversity
and growth(not sure what that words means in this
context, but go with it anyhow)
For example the bible as a linguistic norm/trope
(grammar and rhetoric looking similar here) has
encouraged many to adopt that voice to produce vastly
divergent literary and other texts. (numerous
examples)
Censorship has an effect on literature producing all
sorts of allegorical and other writing.(examples too
numerous to mention)
Interesting that those that would argue that
_political correctness_ is censorship hasn't produced
this sort of effect?
my own personal loadstone is the writing practice of
the OULIPO who consciously adopt practices that limit
easy writing in an effort to find new linguistic
pathways.
Poets often adopt verse metre or syllabul counts or
'poetical language' or the voices of others to escape
the freedom of talking in common places(not much
chance of that poets being pretty well ignored).
Far from respecting and being interested in the ever
changing qualities of language there plenty of poets
who for example consciously adopt archaic language and
would frown upon modern useage. Poets are perhaps not
as right on as you paint them.
Also, the division between descriptors and prescrips
could be resolved on a point of efficiency and
misreading, a good grammar could allow for misreading,
ambiguity and all that good stuff but still argue that
some expression are more efficient less open to
misreading (when they are not intend) double negatives
for example if we are talking about a modern grammar.
Also some expression are ugly, we can argue about to
boldly go but would anyone want to read phrases like
to without delay, or sparing the horses go.
seems to me from these principles the two could be
brought together? I am personally never that
attracted to the all powerful white wash of relativism
too often it relies on false dichotomies.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
|