PRESCRIPTIVISM vs. DESCRIPTIVISM

(pic taken from: hoydenabouttown.com of google images)

I know some of you may be so familiar already with these concepts, especially those who have had thorough studies in language and language learning theories and approaches. 

(pic taken from: emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu of google images)

Let us try to analyze this comic strip very quickly...

Did you find the exchange of lines interesting? Well, that makes the study of prescriptivism and descriptivism interesting!

For the benefit of those who are not very familiar with the concepts, let me share with you some important points related to these concepts. Along with the notes taken from various references, I will be giving some of my personal notes and insights. 

PRESCRIPTIVISM 

[A prescriptive approach is one that expresses certain dissatisfaction with the language use in general and even the language of such speakers. Those who take this approach believe that no one can be trusted to use the language “correctly”.] (Wardaugh, 2003) 

This approach “prescribes” how a language should be used. Therefore, it tries to implement some rules in using the language. According to the above-mentioned author, this approach is something we cannot just ignore. Why? Though this approach is “conservative” in nature, most of our existing references and formal prose conform to prescriptivism. However, if we dwell too much on prescriptivism, especially in speech, it will make us sound either pompous or pretentious, or both. 

Prescriptive Grammars 

[From ancient times until the present, “purists” have believed that language change is corruption, and that there are certain “correct” forms that all educated people should use in speaking and writing. They wish to “prescribe” rather than “describe” the rules of grammar, which gave rise to the writing of prescriptive grammars.] (Fromkin et. al, 2003) 

Based on the book authored by Fromkin and colleagues, there were certain historical events attributed to the rise of “prescriptive grammars”. In accordance with the stipulations in that book, during Renaissance, a new middle class emerged who wanted their children to speak the dialect of the “upper” classes. This in turn led to the publication of many prescriptive grammars. One author who first popularized descriptive grammar was Bishop Robert Lowth in 1762. His book prescribed a number of rules for English. And since he was influential at that time, many of these rules were legislated into the English grammar. 

As what we usually believe, language is dynamic, it changes with time. So, the rules which have been established before may no longer work this time, they may be outdated already and those which were not acceptable before may be widely-accepted now. 

DESCRIPTIVISM 

[A descriptive approach is one that attempts to describe actual language use.] (Wardaugh, 2003) 

It does not tell you “how” to speak or use the language; it simply “describes” how the speakers of the language use their language. 

Descriptive Grammar 

[To understand the nature of language we must understand the nature of grammar, and in particular, the internalized, unconscious set of rules that is part of every grammar of every language. Every human being who speaks a language knows its grammar. When linguists wish to describe a language, they attempt to describe the grammar of the language that exists in the minds of its speakers.] (Fromkin et. al, 2003) 

The descriptive grammar describes our basic linguistic knowledge. It tells us what we know about our language and how we are able to understand the language. It is not so concerned of the rules in using the language. 

INSIGHTS 

Knowing these two approaches in viewing language somehow widens our understanding of how language works. We will no longer be confined with using just the “prescribed” one. As English teachers, we are always particular with what is “proper” according to the book --- books which were published by the “purists”. As I have mentioned above, we cannot just ignore the prescriptive grammar because many of the formal writing we have nowadays are still conforming to prescriptivism. In those books, we don’t normally see words such as ain’t, gotta, wanna. Why? It is simply because these words are not accepted in the “prescriptive” point of view. These are considered “improper”. However, you might ask “Why is it improper?” How can it be wrong if the native speakers of the language use such expressions? Descriptivists believe that these expressions are not really wrong. These are simply reflections of what the current language status is. 

In grammar, there have been a lot of changes in the rules. Some which were acceptable before became unacceptable at some point in history and is now acceptable again. Earlier, I have mentioned about Bishop Lowth; before the publication of his book, it was widely accepted if one says “John is fatter than me.” However, some rules were established --- I not me, he not him, they not them, and so forth should follow “than” in comparative constructions. So, the sentence should be “John is fatter than I.” That was at certain time, when prescriptivism was popular. Nowadays, the use of “me” after “than” is starting to become more acceptable again, especially in spoken English. That’s how dynamic language is! 

Nonetheless, it should not be an excuse for us to just say “descriptive” to get rid of questions related to “correct grammar”. As teachers, we should always know both sides of the coin. We should be well-equipped with the necessary background knowledge to make our students understand and learn the language better. 

Furthermore, as teachers, we should always be open-minded about the changes. We should also be more understanding about some of the so called “mistakes” of others which are not in accordance with the “theory” or “approach” that we adhere to. 

To end my discussion, I want to quote one of my professors in the graduate school, Dr. Karaan. “Knowing much about grammar should not make us much of a critic, it should make us become more understanding of other’s mistakes”. As teachers, we should not just be laughing at our students’ grammatical mistakes. We should not embarrass or degrade anyone just because he/she committed a grammatical mistake. We should correct or critic but it should be done in the right manner. We should help him/her express ideas/concepts in a more comprehensible way. We should encourage others to “communicate” for them to have better facility of the language. We should not “intimidate” them. After all, grammar is not everything, it’s “communication”. It’s how we make ourselves understood.