14 CHAPTER 1 What Is Language? we say that it is ungrammatical,we mean it deviates from the rules in some way. If,however,we posit a rule for English that does not agree with your intuitions as a speaker,then the grammar we are describing differs in some way from the mental grammar that represents your linguistic competence;that is,your lan- guage is not the one described.No language or variety of a language(called a dialect)is superior to any other in a linguistic sense.Every grammar is equally complex,logical,and capable of producing an infinite set of sentences to express any thought.If something can be expressed in one language or one dialect,it can be expressed in any other language or dialect.It might involve different means and different words,but it can be expressed.We will have more to say about dialects in chapter 10.This is true as well for languages of technologically underdeveloped cultures.The grammars of these languages are not primitive or ill formed in any way.They have all the richness and complexity of the gram- mars of languages spoken in technologically advanced cultures. Prescriptive Grammars It is certainly the business of a grammarian to find out,and not to make,the laws of a language. JOHN FELL,Essay towards an English Grammar,1784 Just read the sentence aloud,Amanda,and listen to how it sounds.If the sentence sounds OK,go with it.If not,rearrange the pieces.Then throw out the rule books and go to bed. JAMES KILPATRICK,"Writer's Art"(syndicated newspaper column),1998 Any fool can make a rule And every fool will mind it HENRY DAVID THOREAU,journal entry,1860 Not all grammarians,past or present,share the view that all grammars are equal.Language "purists"of all ages believe that some versions of a language are better than others,that there are certain "correct"forms that all educated people should use in speaking and writing,and that language change is corrup- tion.The Greek Alexandrians in the first century,the Arabic scholars at Basra in the eighth century,and numerous English grammarians of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries held this view.They wished to prescribe rather than describe the rules of grammar,which gave rise to the writing of prescriptive grammars. In the Renaissance a new middle class emerged who wanted their children to speak the dialect of the "upper"classes.This desire led to the publication of many prescriptive grammars.In 1762 Bishop Robert Lowth wrote A Short Intro- duction to English Grammar with Critical Notes.Lowth prescribed a number of new rules for English,many of them influenced by his personal taste.Before the publication of his grammar,practically everyone-upper-class,middle-class, and lower-class-said I don't bave none and You was wrong about that.Lowth
14 CHAPTER 1 What Is Language? we say that it is ungrammatical, we mean it deviates from the rules in some way. If, however, we posit a rule for English that does not agree with your intuitions as a speaker, then the grammar we are describing differs in some way from the mental grammar that represents your linguistic competence; that is, your language is not the one described. No language or variety of a language (called a dialect) is superior to any other in a linguistic sense. Every grammar is equally complex, logical, and capable of producing an infinite set of sentences to express any thought. If something can be expressed in one language or one dialect, it can be expressed in any other language or dialect. It might involve different means and different words, but it can be expressed. We will have more to say about dialects in chapter 10. This is true as well for languages of technologically underdeveloped cultures. The grammars of these languages are not primitive or ill formed in any way. They have all the richness and complexity of the grammars of languages spoken in technologically advanced cultures. Prescriptive Grammars It is certainly the business of a grammarian to find out, and not to make, the laws of a language. JOHN FELL, Essay towards an English Grammar, 1784 Just read the sentence aloud, Amanda, and listen to how it sounds. If the sentence sounds OK, go with it. If not, rearrange the pieces. Then throw out the rule books and go to bed. JAMES KILPATRICK, “Writer’s Art” (syndicated newspaper column), 1998 Any fool can make a rule And every fool will mind it HENRY DAVID THOREAU, journal entry, 1860 Not all grammarians, past or present, share the view that all grammars are equal. Language “purists” of all ages believe that some versions of a language are better than others, that there are certain “correct” forms that all educated people should use in speaking and writing, and that language change is corruption. The Greek Alexandrians in the first century, the Arabic scholars at Basra in the eighth century, and numerous English grammarians of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries held this view. They wished to prescribe rather than describe the rules of grammar, which gave rise to the writing of prescriptive grammars. In the Renaissance a new middle class emerged who wanted their children to speak the dialect of the “upper” classes. This desire led to the publication of many prescriptive grammars. In 1762 Bishop Robert Lowth wrote A Short Introduction to English Grammar with Critical Notes. Lowth prescribed a number of new rules for English, many of them influenced by his personal taste. Before the publication of his grammar, practically everyone—upper-class, middle-class, and lower-class—said I don’t have none and You was wrong about that. Lowth
What Is Grammar?15 however,decided that "two negatives make a positive"and therefore one should say I don't bave any;and that even when you is singular it should be followed by the plural were.Many of these prescriptive rules were based on Latin grammar and made little sense for English.Because Lowth was influential and because the rising new class wanted to speak "properly,"many of these new rules were legislated into English grammar,at least for the prestige dialect-that variety of the language spoken by people in positions of power. The view that dialects that regularly use double negatives are inferior can- not be justified if one looks at the standard dialects of other languages in the world.Romance languages,for example,use double negatives,as the following examples from French and Italian show: French: Je ne veux parler avec personne. I not want speak with no-one. Italian: Non voglio parlare con nessuno. not I-want speak with no-one. English translation:"I don't want to speak with anyone." Prescriptive grammars such as Lowth's are different from the descriptive grammars we have been discussing.Their goal is not to describe the rules people know,but to tell them what rules they should follow.The great British Prime Minister Winston Churchill is credited with this response to the "rule"against ending a sentence with a preposition:"This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put..” Today our bookstores are populated with books by language purists attempt- ing to "save the English language."They criticize those who use enormity to mean“enormous'”instead of“monstrously evil.”But languages change in the course of time and words change meaning.Language change is a natural pro- cess,as we discuss in chapter 11.Over time enormity was used more and more in the media to mean "enormous,"and we predict that now that President Barack Obama has used it that way(in his victory speech of November 4,2008), that usage will gain acceptance.Still,the "saviors"of the English language will never disappear.They will continue to blame television,the schools,and even the National Council of Teachers of English for failing to preserve the standard language,and are likely to continue to dis (oops,we mean disparage)anyone who suggests that African American English(AAE)4 and other dialects are via- ble,complete languages. In truth,human languages are without exception fully expressive,complete, and logical,as much as they were two hundred or two thousand years ago. Hopefully (another frowned-upon usage),this book will convince you that all languages and dialects are rule-governed,whether spoken by rich or poor,pow- erful or weak,learned or illiterate.Grammars and usages of particular groups 4AAE is also called African American Vernacular English (AAVE),Ebonics,and Black English(BE).It is spoken by some(but by no means all)African Americans.It is discussed in chapter 10
What Is Grammar? 15 however, decided that “two negatives make a positive” and therefore one should say I don’t have any; and that even when you is singular it should be followed by the plural were. Many of these prescriptive rules were based on Latin grammar and made little sense for English. Because Lowth was influential and because the rising new class wanted to speak “properly,” many of these new rules were legislated into English grammar, at least for the prestige dialect—that variety of the language spoken by people in positions of power. The view that dialects that regularly use double negatives are inferior cannot be justified if one looks at the standard dialects of other languages in the world. Romance languages, for example, use double negatives, as the following examples from French and Italian show: French: Je ne veux parler avec personne. I not want speak with no-one. Italian: Non voglio parlare con nessuno. not I-want speak with no-one. English translation: “I don’t want to speak with anyone.” Prescriptive grammars such as Lowth’s are different from the descriptive grammars we have been discussing. Their goal is not to describe the rules people know, but to tell them what rules they should follow. The great British Prime Minister Winston Churchill is credited with this response to the “rule” against ending a sentence with a preposition: “This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put.” Today our bookstores are populated with books by language purists attempting to “save the English language.” They criticize those who use enormity to mean “enormous” instead of “monstrously evil.” But languages change in the course of time and words change meaning. Language change is a natural process, as we discuss in chapter 11. Over time enormity was used more and more in the media to mean “enormous,” and we predict that now that President Barack Obama has used it that way (in his victory speech of November 4, 2008), that usage will gain acceptance. Still, the “saviors” of the English language will never disappear. They will continue to blame television, the schools, and even the National Council of Teachers of English for failing to preserve the standard language, and are likely to continue to dis (oops, we mean disparage) anyone who suggests that African American English (AAE)4 and other dialects are viable, complete languages. In truth, human languages are without exception fully expressive, complete, and logical, as much as they were two hundred or two thousand years ago. Hopefully (another frowned-upon usage), this book will convince you that all languages and dialects are rule-governed, whether spoken by rich or poor, powerful or weak, learned or illiterate. Grammars and usages of particular groups 4AAE is also called African American Vernacular English (AAVE), Ebonics, and Black En glish (BE). It is spoken by some (but by no means all) African Americans. It is discussed in chapter 10
16 CHAPTER 1 What Is Language? in society may be dominant for social and political reasons,but from a linguistic (scientific)perspective they are neither superior nor inferior to the grammars and usages of less prestigious members of society. Having said all this,it is undeniable that the standard dialect (defined in chapter 10)may indeed be a better dialect for someone wishing to obtain a par- ticular job or achieve a position of social prestige.In a society where "linguistic profiling"is used to discriminate against speakers of a minority dialect,it may behoove those speakers to learn the prestige dialect rather than wait for social change.But linguistically,prestige and standard dialects do not have superior grammars. Finally,all of the preceding remarks apply to spoken language.Writing (see chapter 12)is not acquired naturally through simple exposure to others speak- ing the language (see chapter 8),but must be taught.Writing follows certain prescriptive rules of grammar,usage,and style that the spoken language does not,and is subject to little,if any,dialectal variation. Teaching Grammars I don't want to talk grammar.I want to talk like a lady. G.B.SHAW,Pygmalion,1912 The descriptive grammar of a language attempts to describe the rules internal- ized by a speaker of that language.It is different from a teaching grammar, which is used to learn another language or dialect.Teaching grammars can be helpful to people who do not speak the standard or prestige dialect,but find it would be advantageous socially and economically to do so.They are used in schools in foreign language classes.This kind of grammar gives the words and their pronunciations,and explicitly states the rules of the language,especially where they differ from the language of instruction. It is often difficult for adults to learn a second language without formal instruction,even when they have lived for an extended period in a country where the language is spoken.(Second language acquisition is discussed in more detail in chapter 8.)Teaching grammars assume that the student already knows one language and compares the grammar of the target language with the grammar of the native language.The meaning of a word is provided by a gloss-the paral- lel word in the student's native language,such as maison,"house"in French.It is assumed that the student knows the meaning of the gloss "house,"and so also the meaning of the word maison. Sounds of the target language that do not occur in the native language are often described by reference to known sounds.Thus the student might be aided in producing the French sound u in the word tu by instructions such as "Round your lips while producing the vowel sound in tea." The rules on how to put words together to form grammatical sentences also refer to the learner's knowledge of their native language.For example,the teach- ing grammar Learn Zulu by Sibusiso Nyembezi states that "The difference between singular and plural is not at the end of the word but at the beginning of it,"and warns that "Zulu does not have the indefinite and definite articles
16 CHAPTER 1 What Is Language? in society may be dominant for social and political reasons, but from a linguistic (scientific) perspective they are neither superior nor inferior to the grammars and usages of less prestigious members of society. Having said all this, it is undeniable that the standard dialect (defined in chapter 10) may indeed be a better dialect for someone wishing to obtain a particular job or achieve a position of social prestige. In a society where “linguistic profiling” is used to discriminate against speakers of a minority dialect, it may behoove those speakers to learn the prestige dialect rather than wait for social change. But linguistically, prestige and standard dialects do not have superior grammars. Finally, all of the preceding remarks apply to spoken language. Writing (see chapter 12) is not acquired naturally through simple exposure to others speaking the language (see chapter 8), but must be taught. Writing follows certain prescriptive rules of grammar, usage, and style that the spoken language does not, and is subject to little, if any, dialectal variation. Teaching Grammars I don’t want to talk grammar. I want to talk like a lady. G. B. SHAW, Pygmalion, 1912 The descriptive grammar of a language attempts to describe the rules internalized by a speaker of that language. It is different from a teaching grammar, which is used to learn another language or dialect. Teaching grammars can be helpful to people who do not speak the standard or prestige dialect, but find it would be advantageous socially and economically to do so. They are used in schools in foreign language classes. This kind of grammar gives the words and their pronunciations, and explicitly states the rules of the language, especially where they differ from the language of instruction. It is often difficult for adults to learn a second language without formal instruction, even when they have lived for an extended period in a country where the language is spoken. (Second language acquisition is discussed in more detail in chapter 8.) Teaching grammars assume that the student already knows one language and compares the grammar of the target language with the grammar of the native language. The meaning of a word is provided by a gloss—the parallel word in the student’s native language, such as maison, “house” in French. It is assumed that the student knows the meaning of the gloss “house,” and so also the meaning of the word maison. Sounds of the target language that do not occur in the native language are often described by reference to known sounds. Thus the student might be aided in producing the French sound u in the word tu by instructions such as “Round your lips while producing the vowel sound in tea.” The rules on how to put words together to form grammatical sentences also refer to the learner’s knowledge of their native language. For example, the teaching grammar Learn Zulu by Sibusiso Nyembezi states that “The difference between singular and plural is not at the end of the word but at the beginning of it,” and warns that “Zulu does not have the indefinite and definite articles
Language Universals 17 'a'and 'the.'"Such statements assume students know the rules of their own grammar,in this case English.Although such grammars might be considered prescriptive in the sense that they attempt to teach the student what is or is not a grammatical construction in the new language,their aim is different from grammars that attempt to change the rules or usage of a language that is already known by the speaker. This book is not primarily concerned with either prescriptive or teaching grammars.However,these kinds of grammars are considered in chapter 10 in the discussion of standard and nonstandard dialects. Language Universals In a grammar there are parts that pertain to all languages;these components form what is called the general grammar.In addition to these general (universal)parts,there are those that belong only to one particular language;and these constitute the particular grammars of each language. CESAR CHESNEAU DU MARSAIS,c.1750 There are rules of particular languages,such as English,Swahili,and Zulu,that form part of the individual grammars of these languages,and then there are rules that hold in all languages.Those rules representing the universal properties that all languages share constitute a universal grammar.The linguist attempts to uncover the "laws"of particular languages,and also the laws that pertain to all languages.The universal laws are of particular interest because they give us a window into the workings of the human mind in this cognitive domain. In about 1630,the German philosopher Johann Heinrich Alsted first used the term general grammar as distinct from special grammar.He believed that the function of a general grammar was to reveal those features "which relate to the method and etiology of grammatical concepts.They are common to all languages."Pointing out that "general grammar is the pattern norma'of every particular grammar whatsoever,"he implored "eminent linguists to employ their insight in this matter."Three and a half centuries before Alsted,the scholar Robert Kilwardby held that linguists should be concerned with discovering the nature of language in general.So concerned was Kilwardby with Universal Grammar that he excluded considerations of the characteristics of particular languages,which he believed to be as"irrelevant to a science of grammar as the material of the measuring rod or the physical characteristics of objects were to geometry."Kilwardby was perhaps too much of a universalist.The particular properties of individual languages are relevant to the discovery of language uni- versals,and they are of interest for their own sake. People attempting to study Latin,Greek,French,or Swahili as a second lan- guage are so focused on learning those aspects of the second language that are different from their native language that they may be skeptical of assertions that there are universal laws of language.Yet the more we investigate this ques- tion,the more evidence accumulates to support Chomsky's view that there is a Universal Grammar (UG)that is part of the biologically endowed human
Language Universals 17 ‘a’ and ‘the.’” Such statements assume students know the rules of their own grammar, in this case English. Although such grammars might be considered prescriptive in the sense that they attempt to teach the student what is or is not a grammatical construction in the new language, their aim is different from grammars that attempt to change the rules or usage of a language that is already known by the speaker. This book is not primarily concerned with either prescriptive or teaching grammars. However, these kinds of grammars are considered in chapter 10 in the discussion of standard and nonstandard dialects. Language Universals In a grammar there are parts that pertain to all languages; these components form what is called the general grammar. In addition to these general (universal) parts, there are those that belong only to one particular language; and these constitute the particular grammars of each language. CÉSAR CHESNEAU DU MARSAIS, c. 1750 There are rules of particular languages, such as English, Swahili, and Zulu, that form part of the individual grammars of these languages, and then there are rules that hold in all languages. Those rules representing the universal properties that all languages share constitute a universal grammar. The linguist attempts to uncover the “laws” of particular languages, and also the laws that pertain to all languages. The universal laws are of particular interest because they give us a window into the workings of the human mind in this cognitive domain. In about 1630, the German philosopher Johann Heinrich Alsted first used the term general grammar as distinct from special grammar. He believed that the function of a general grammar was to reveal those features “which relate to the method and etiology of grammatical concepts. They are common to all languages.” Pointing out that “general grammar is the pattern ‘norma’ of every particular grammar whatsoever,” he implored “eminent linguists to employ their insight in this matter.” Three and a half centuries before Alsted, the scholar Robert Kilwardby held that linguists should be concerned with discovering the nature of language in general. So concerned was Kilwardby with Universal Grammar that he excluded considerations of the characteristics of particular languages, which he believed to be as “irrelevant to a science of grammar as the material of the measuring rod or the physical characteristics of objects were to geometry.” Kilwardby was perhaps too much of a universalist. The particular properties of individual languages are relevant to the discovery of language universals, and they are of interest for their own sake. People attempting to study Latin, Greek, French, or Swahili as a second language are so focused on learning those aspects of the second language that are different from their native language that they may be skeptical of assertions that there are universal laws of language. Yet the more we investigate this question, the more evidence accumulates to support Chomsky’s view that there is a Universal Grammar (UG) that is part of the biologically endowed human
18 CHAPTER 1 What Is Language? language faculty.We can think of UG as the basic blueprint that all languages follow.It specifies the different components of the grammar and their relations, how the different rules of these components are constructed,how they interact, and so on.It is a major aim of linguistic theory to discover the nature of UG. The linguist's goal is to reveal the "laws of human language"as the physicist's goal is to reveal the "laws of the physical universe."The complexity of language, a product of the human brain,undoubtedly means this goal will never be fully achieved.All scientific theories are incomplete,and new hypotheses must be proposed to account for new data.Theories are continually changing as new discoveries are made.Just as physics was enlarged by Einstein's theories of rela- tivity,so grows the linguistic theory of UG as new discoveries shed new light on the nature of human language.The comparative study of many different lan- guages is of central importance to this enterprise. The Development of Grammar How comes it that human beings,whose contacts with the world are brief and personal and limited,are nevertheless able to know as much as they do know? BERTRAND RUSSELL,Human Knowledge:Its Scope and Limits,1948 Linguistic theory is concerned not only with describing the knowledge that an adult speaker has of his or her language,but also with explaining how that knowledge is acquired.All normal children acquire (at least one)language in a relatively short period with apparent ease.They do this despite the fact that parents and other caregivers do not provide them with any specific language instruction.Indeed,it is often remarked that children seem to "pick up"lan- guage just from hearing it spoken around them.Children are language learning virtuosos-whether a child is male or female,from a rich family or a disad- vantaged one,grows up on a farm or in the city,attends day care or has home care-none of these factors fundamentally affects the way language develops. Children can acquire any language they are exposed to with comparable ease- English,Dutch,French,Swahili,Japanese-and even though each of these lan- guages has its own peculiar characteristics,children learn them all in very much the same way.For example,all children go through a babbling stage;their bab- bles gradually give way to words,which then combine into simple sentences. When children first begin to produce sentences,certain elements may be miss- ing.For example,the English-speaking two-year-old might say Catby build house instead of Cathy is building the house.On the other side of the world,a Swahili-speaking child will say mbuzi kula majani,which translates as "goat eat grass,"and which also lacks many required elements.They pass through other linguistic stages on their way to adultlike competence,and by about age five children speak a language that is almost indistinguishable from the language of the adults around them. In just a few short years,without the benefit of explicit guidance and regard- less of personal circumstances,the young child-who may be unable to tie her shoes or do even the simplest arithmetic computation-masters the complex grammatical structures of her language and acquires a substantial lexicon.Just
18 CHAPTER 1 What Is Language? language faculty. We can think of UG as the basic blueprint that all languages follow. It specifies the different components of the grammar and their relations, how the different rules of these components are constructed, how they interact, and so on. It is a major aim of linguistic theory to discover the nature of UG. The linguist’s goal is to reveal the “laws of human language” as the physicist’s goal is to reveal the “laws of the physical universe.” The complexity of language, a product of the human brain, undoubtedly means this goal will never be fully achieved. All scientific theories are incomplete, and new hypotheses must be proposed to account for new data. Theories are continually changing as new discoveries are made. Just as physics was enlarged by Einstein’s theories of relativity, so grows the linguistic theory of UG as new discoveries shed new light on the nature of human language. The comparative study of many different languages is of central importance to this enterprise. The Development of Grammar How comes it that human beings, whose contacts with the world are brief and personal and limited, are nevertheless able to know as much as they do know? BERTRAND RUSSELL, Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits, 1948 Linguistic theory is concerned not only with describing the knowledge that an adult speaker has of his or her language, but also with explaining how that knowledge is acquired. All normal children acquire (at least one) language in a relatively short period with apparent ease. They do this despite the fact that parents and other caregivers do not provide them with any specific language instruction. Indeed, it is often remarked that children seem to “pick up” language just from hearing it spoken around them. Children are language learning virtuosos—whether a child is male or female, from a rich family or a disadvantaged one, grows up on a farm or in the city, attends day care or has home care—none of these factors fundamentally affects the way language develops. Children can acquire any language they are exposed to with comparable ease— English, Dutch, French, Swahili, Japanese—and even though each of these languages has its own peculiar characteristics, children learn them all in very much the same way. For example, all children go through a babbling stage; their babbles gradually give way to words, which then combine into simple sentences. When children first begin to produce sentences, certain elements may be missing. For example, the English-speaking two-year-old might say Cathy build house instead of Cathy is building the house. On the other side of the world, a Swahili-speaking child will say mbuzi kula majani, which translates as “goat eat grass,” and which also lacks many required elements. They pass through other linguistic stages on their way to adultlike competence, and by about age five children speak a language that is almost indistinguishable from the language of the adults around them. In just a few short years, without the benefit of explicit guidance and regardless of personal circumstances, the young child—who may be unable to tie her shoes or do even the simplest arithmetic computation—masters the complex grammatical structures of her language and acquires a substantial lexicon. Just