- Joined
- Nov 13, 2002
- Native Language
- British English
- Home Country
- UK
- Current Location
- Japan
I am not sure that the ideologically pure descriptivist exists, and probably not the absolute prescriptivist either. I don't think the level of consistency is under any threat from forms like the one we are discussing. Languages are flexible enough to withstand a few differences of view. You cannot have a speech community without making sense to each other. It may be a struggle sometimes with strong dialects, but those are receding somewhat in an age of greater movement and connectivity.
Grammarians have argued all sorts of cases, but I struggle to think of one they have won convincingly. Once native speakers in sufficient numbers have decided to do something, then the momentum is unstoppable. The thing that saves the traditionalists' bacon is the old fallback of saying that one form is preferred or recommended in formal usage. It creates a sort of protective bubble around what bothers them, though this too changes over time- it's been many years since I heard someone arguing that we should say lays-by as the correct plural. We probably benefit from having a brake and an accelerator- they help keep the speech community together.
Grammarians have argued all sorts of cases, but I struggle to think of one they have won convincingly. Once native speakers in sufficient numbers have decided to do something, then the momentum is unstoppable. The thing that saves the traditionalists' bacon is the old fallback of saying that one form is preferred or recommended in formal usage. It creates a sort of protective bubble around what bothers them, though this too changes over time- it's been many years since I heard someone arguing that we should say lays-by as the correct plural. We probably benefit from having a brake and an accelerator- they help keep the speech community together.