Evening star., 1932-12-08

Growth of the English language Is
recognized In the debate that has fol-
lowed the proceedings Of the annual
convention, at Memphis, Of the Ma
tional Council of Teachers of English.
That gathering was advised that even
grammar is subject to the influence of
common practice. The convention re-
ceived the result Of a survey. in which
299 judges had been quizzed as to
their attitude regarding number OF
phrases which have persisted in col
loquial usage. A majority of the judges
approved as good English such express
sions as, "It is me-" who are you look
ing for?" go SLOW" "I wish I was
wonderful" They also advised that the
traditional distinction between "shan'
and "will" be disregarded and that
farther" and further" be accepted as
synonymous.
''The truth Is" according to the Bir-
rningham Age-Herald, that neither
teachers nor photographers nor gram
marians are the final tribunal with re-
spect to the matters under scrutiny.
Language grows, but independently OF
any artificial process, whether that OF
stern rhetoricians or complacent teach
ers Language grows because that al
teration is inherent In the scheme OF
things. A slang word of one generation
can give the effect Of being austerely
virtuous in the next. New verbalisnls
take on the odor of correctness either
because they have to do with a fresh
field of knowledge and experience or
because they are superior to the older
forms. But that does not mean that
standards must be lowered out Of o too
eager hospitality. 1t merely means that
time will have its way and that the In
exorable force of evolution will not be
arrested. A good rule in language and
In behavior, says metropolitan wit, Is
to do as you please-provided you know
better"
Declaring that the teachers "have rid
us all of occasions of distress" the
Scranton Times comments: Possibly
the purist will argue that the forms are
incorrect; surely there are rules which
show them to be so, but when the Eng
lish teachers In their wisdom see fit to
declare that the more common forms.
the heretofore incorrect ones, are &C
ceptable to their class rooms, then they
lift load from many students mind
and they lessen by just that much even
our danger Of error"
"The survey has shown that nothing
- 60S SA42ASC 0~NAoA - e&AN
Providence journal. finding it ''particu-
larly gratifying to note that among the
colloquial expressions found acceptable
by these experts is Who are you look
ing for?'" The Journal adds: THAT Is,
after all, much better than the stilted
For whom are you looking?' If it had
never been impressed upon millions Of
people in their youth that it is grave |
error to use who when whom is re-
quired by the grammatical rule, the |
world would have been relieved of a |
vast amount of mistaken straining for
accuracy. For whom Is WRONGLY placed |
quite as often as who. We hope |
teachers of English will take this Mem !
phis lesson to heart. An error based |
on academic pedantry Is always much |
more absurd than loose colloquialism." /"
"There are few grammarians on the |
usage side,' thinks the Spokane Spokes- I
man. Review, "but most Of them con-
tinue to rally valiantly around the dc
tionary, and their banner flies high. |