BobK:
'Grammar' has widely differing meanings - particularly
descriptivist (the way things
are in fact) and
prescriptivist (the way someone thinks things
should be.
A descriptive grammar specifies a syntax for any particular language - the way words are actually put together to convey meaning. A prescriptive grammar prescribes a syntax (the way sentences
should - according to a fairly random set of 'rules' - be put together).
Why is it a minefield, Bob? Because some pugnatious people hate the word rules? Descriptivists who take part in forums like this think they make learning languages easier, but it's just the opposite - non-native learners have to remember numerous exceptions in addition. One has to know where exactly the rules can be lax.
Regards
Good job, Bob!
The problem as I see it is that very few really understand what Descriptivism is. In actuality, it is Descriptivism that describes the minute details of language, the basic rules of language. Prescriptivism has never ever ever attempted this.
All Prescriptivism has done is make up rules according to some individual's personal tastes. That is, on its face, ludicrous in the extreme. You don't study something and inject personal taste and opinion in that study.
Everyone admits that this is what Prescriptivism is and yet so many still give it far far too much credence.
Humble, it is Prescriptivism that has never followed the rules of English, the rules Bobk describes as, let me run and get the exact quote, ... "(the way things
are in fact)".
Descriptivists love rules, the factual rules, not some made up nonsense.