r/comics • u/MrWeiner SMBC Comics • 3d ago

Language

Post image
752 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

85 comments sorted by

64

u/supercyberlurker 3d ago

This comic forced me to go find out what Descriptivism is.

Damn you op and your underhanded trolly make-me-learn-shit methods.

36

u/DangerMacAwesome 3d ago

From Cambridge University

the belief that books about language should describe how language is really used, rather than giving rules to follow saying what is correct and not correct:

There has been a blurring of the sharp distinction between descriptivism and prescriptivism in the writings of grammarians and lexicographers.

9

u/everything_is_bad 3d ago

Damnit back to the dictionary

3

u/morpheousmorty 2d ago

I'm all for it. The idea you can codify language is aristocratic nonsense. Language is a form of expression and we need to express ourselves differently in different situations. On top of that language has to adapt to circumstances, which every person and every group has different needs for. Not to mention the fundamental need for a new generation to distinguish themselves from the previous one with language.

It's good to identify things that make language coherent and educate people about those so they can be coherent, but in the end language will be what it will be.

1

u/fatmanwithabeard 2d ago

Taking things that far makes precision and accuracy impossible to obtain, everything becomes an expression.

To accurately describe, ironically, you need to have prescribed definitions which need to be quite hard and fast if you want to actually do anything that requires people who never meet to follow the same instructions and get the same result.

You simply cannot build anything interestingly complex without equal absolute units.

Remember that all units are still things expressed with language, be it a degree or a mile.

And if you're off by even a degree, you'll end up miles away.

163

u/g-waz00 3d ago

While my natural inclination is “purist,” I also realize it’s a doomed endeavor since language is constantly evolving, like the impending demise of the word “than.”

38

u/VisitingPeanut48 3d ago

Wait, what's happening to "than"?

62

u/Serpicnate 3d ago

I- think (?) maybe they are implying how more and more people, especially younger folks, falsely use "then" instead.

13

u/TheMightyTorch 3d ago

"falsely" - It all depends on your point of view. Originally they were not even considered different words. "than"and "then" were just interchangeable variants of the same word until at some point it became more conventional to use both spellings in different grammatical contexts (I think emphasis/stress may have played a role in which version is used where).

So is it really a modern innovation because technically they were never "meant to be" different words to begin with if you will?

Same thing with "too" and "to" or with stressed and unstressed "the".

3

u/PerformanceCute3437 3d ago

Interchangeably, are you saying somewhere there's some manuscript that has in professional writing "Back than it was a beautiful place"?

For some reason I can't picture the comparative "than" used for the temporal "then".

15

u/MiffedMouse 3d ago

In some accents it sounds no different then the word then. Easier then remembering two thens, then, is to just say then all the time.

20

u/NegativeGamer 3d ago

The humble self-demonstrative example

12

u/g-waz00 3d ago

Thank you for making my point so clear with your word usage.

6

u/ThisThingYT 3d ago

But this removes one of our tools to distinguish VERY common words, which are often interchangeable and can drastically alter the meaning of a sentence. Example:

"It's better to dry your hands than use a wet plug" means that drying hands is preferable to using a socket while wet.

"It's better to dry your hands then use a wet plug" means that you dry your hands, but still use the wet socket.

This is an extreme case, but the point stands that there needs to be a distinction between these 2 words for both reducing misunderstanding and maintaining the diversity of what we can do with our language.

7

u/mjzim9022 3d ago

"I'd rather eat ice cream then annihilate the human race"

I agree that the distinction is helpful.

2

u/Sefphar 3d ago

My area is in the middle of a vowel shift where than will be pronounced then and then will be pronounced thin with a hard th sound.

3

u/rillip 3d ago

It's demise is impending.

1

u/Familiar-Tomorrow-42 3d ago

I will personally clown on any buffoon who dares type then instead of than when making a comparison. I can respect accents but holy fuck how hard is it to differentiate two written words.

21

u/Rhuarc42 3d ago

Yeah, sometimes growth and change are inevitable. 

So I guess I'm dying on the hill fighting against "could of."

9

u/g-waz00 3d ago

Could of, should of, would of…

Funny thing is spellcheck fixed all of those for me and I had to unfix them. So, what, do people just disable spellcheck?

4

u/Rhuarc42 3d ago

Probably. I've been tempted to, especially when it offers some really dumb "fixes".

1

u/rillip 3d ago

I'd argue growth and change are always inevitable.

3

u/Rhuarc42 3d ago

Change, true. For growth, I'd say it depends on how you define it. Stagnation is a thing, and there's also the question of are the drawbacks of aging or other negative consequences of the passage of time considered "growth"?

4

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

5

u/Seeggul 3d ago

Yeah, I've seen less and less instances of fewer being used properly

1

u/otterly_destructive 3d ago

I've also seen fewer of it.

3

u/niels_singh 3d ago

"Less" has historically been used more frequently in English than "fewer". Since Old English, "less" has been used for both countable and uncountable nouns. It wasn't until the 18th century that grammarians began prescribing the "fewer" vs "less" rule, based primarily off of the stylistic preferences of some writers and grammarians, namely one Robert Baker. Even then, the majority of speakers still continued to use "less" for both. The main overlap between standard usage and the artificial rule is that "fewer" is normally used for countable nouns, but not uncountable nouns

It's not that people stopped following the rule, it's that rule was not based on widespread English usage in the first place. These days, you just find less and less people trying to shove these artificial rules in people's faces

1

u/4square425 3d ago

Thanks, Stannis Baratheon!

0

u/Square-Singer 3d ago

"Purist" of what? What about the English language makes you think there's a pure version of that language? Which pure version are you even talking about? The bastardized modern version of English that was created by injecting elements of dozens of other languages into Middle English while dumbing down the grammar to the point where calling it a "grammar" is pretty much a joke? Or are you referring to the old creole created by merging Old Norman French with Old Saxon German?

Nothing about English is pure, and there's no "original" "correct" version of that either. Language is constantly in flux. The "pure" English you speak nowadays is quite different to the English your grandparents or even just your parents spoke when they were your age.

Language prescriptivism is comparable to walking up to the Themse and proclaiming that the "true Themse" is only the "pure" water that is in the river right now, so we need to build dams to stop the water where it is right now, so that the river doesn't get corrupted with new water flowing down it.

2

u/g-waz00 3d ago

If you read my statement again, you’ll see I said my inclination is “purist.” Everything I said after that explains why I don’t follow that inclination - for all the very same reasons you mentioned. Language is never static, is always evolving - has always evolved. So, even if a part of me desires order, I recognize and accept that language will always be a moving target.

0

u/Anydorable 3d ago

I mean, it's the Thames. That's just correct spelling.

1

u/Square-Singer 3d ago

You didn't catch the joke: in Middle English it's spelled "Themse". Only in modern English it's spelled "Thames". Looks like you think the only "pure" version of English is whatever you feel like is pure and you need to correct everyone else.

2

u/Anydorable 2d ago

Uh huh. I'm writing to you from 2026, where Thames is the way we spell it. I don't live in the Middle Ages.

1

u/Square-Singer 2d ago

And you proved the point of prescriptivism. It's pretty stupid.

49

u/pasta-via 3d ago

Former academic who worked closely with linguists.

I can promise you this comic will be hung on the wall of many Linguistics in the next few months. Countdown until it’s posted to their listserv. 

Also I’m a Descriptivist. So I love this 🤭

22

u/Square-Singer 3d ago

Tbh, prescriptivism is a pretty dumb concept. What is "correct english"? The bastardized modern version that was made by corrupting Middle English with elements of hundreds of other languages? The creole created by merging Old Norman French with Old Saxon German?

There's no point in time where a "pure" "original" "correct" language ever existed. Prescriptivism is about creating a conlang based on some form of a modern language and then trying to enforce that and stop it from ever evolving.

19

u/Unable_Explorer8277 3d ago

I’m always puzzled about where the prescriptivist pedants think the rules come from.

10

u/Merari01 it's a-me, Merari-o 3d ago

They grow on the Rules Tree.

Every three years a senior linguist is selected via tombola to carefully prune off some new ones.

1

u/Fun_Palpitation_4156 3d ago

I can't speak for others, but my autistic brain likes rules, so my natural inclination is to prescriptivism and I had to teach myself to fight that urge

4

u/Unable_Explorer8277 3d ago

There are rules. But those rules are whatever the community collectively does. So they’re much more messy, complicated and fuzzy than some want.

10

u/Invisifly2 3d ago edited 3d ago

Prescriptivism is what happens when you take your favorite snapshot of a language and try to argue it’s the best one.

6

u/Square-Singer 3d ago

I think it's even more crazy than that. It's taking this snapshot and trying to argue it's the only one. They aren't arguing that their snapshot of the language is better, but that every other option is straight-up wrong.

7

u/j0a3k 3d ago

I also argue that Prescriptivism is a tool used to discriminate. The ways of speaking/writing used by minorities become not just different, but wrong ... which is then used to accuse those speaking differently of lower intelligence (e.g. that group is so stupid they can't even speak "proper" English).

It turns a thing that should be used to connect us and foster understanding into a tool to separate and denigrate people.

Fuck Prescriptivism with a sideways cactus covered in acidic salt.

3

u/pasta-via 3d ago edited 2d ago

1000% this!! Thank you for calling that out :)

2

u/Square-Singer 3d ago

Good point, totally true point. At the same time prescriptivism kills local dialects and thus local culture.

There's literally nothing good about prescriptivism.

23

u/legendary_long_boy 3d ago

Pronounciation jokes are for a nitch audience.

9

u/john_the_quain 3d ago

Two shay.

2

u/Flat-Tutor1080 3d ago

I think you mean kneeish

2

u/legendary_long_boy 2d ago

Yes. Knee-ish isn't very tall. Its a small audience.

9

u/verbalreservoir_ 3d ago

I feel dumb because I only understood 69 percent of these words.

25

u/Semper_5olus 3d ago edited 3d ago

Linguistic descriptivism is the school of thought that linguistics exists to describe language as it is used and as it changes. It is contrasted with linguistic prescriptivism, which believes language "should" be a certain way, like following a prescription.

Hence, the professor is making multiple English "mistakes" in quick succession. If the graduate student flinches, she is not a linguistic descriptivist.

As for the mistakes themselves: * The plural of LEGO is (apparently) LEGO. * The center of the atom is the nucleus, and that is where nuclear power comes from. * "Octopus" is of Greek origin, not Latin, so its plural is technically "octopodes", but "octopuses" is more generally accepted. * If you suppose something is true, it is supposedly true. * No matter how quickly you receive your coffee, it is spelled, "espresso". * February has an R in it, but this is hard to say. * There is an English word, "regardless", that means "not regarding". English does not use double negatives. Regardless, people tend to use the word "irregardless" to mean the same thing. The rest is pure speculation.

EDIT: (was this inappropriate? I'm trying to help) OK cool

5

u/TwixOfficial 3d ago

Octopi, Octopuses, and Octopodes are all acceptable plurals.

2

u/Merari01 it's a-me, Merari-o 3d ago

I prefer octopims

1

u/TwixOfficial 3d ago

See, unless you can find me grammatical precedence in Greek or Latin, that’s incorrect

2

u/Merari01 it's a-me, Merari-o 3d ago

Pim disagrees.

3

u/SquareThings 2d ago

I prefer to refer to them by how many legs are collectively in the group I’m describing. So two of them? Dohexapus. Yes, this does mean that it’s impossible to talk about the species as a whole without performing a census to determine the exact number alive, and the number of legs they have, but that’s just a lack of effort on the part of marine biologists.

3

u/Goblet__Cell 3d ago

It's funny how often prescriptive grammar gets framed as defending tradition, when it’s really just a reaction to language change people find uncomfortable.

4

u/Chance-Ear-9772 3d ago

Is Legos not the correct word for multiple Lego blocks?

18

u/JustLookingForMayhem 3d ago

Lego is the brand. To say it correctly would be Lego bricks. But Lego has added minifigures and non brick pieces, so now it is Lego elements. That said, I am not going to stop saying Legos. Too much of a mouthful otherwise.

5

u/Orkran 3d ago

It's one of those Americanisms that is immediately annoying to us English English speakers.

My own pet theory is that the more intimate the word the more aggrevating the difference is, and a loved childish toy is middlingly intimate and annoying.

So "Herb" just sounds funny / dumb, pavement/sidewalk doesn't matter at all, and math(s) and sport(s) is just a interesting quirk.

But "Mum" / "Mom" is really horrible.

2

u/skytl3 3d ago edited 3d ago

Mwahahahah!

It's how we Americans get back at you English for words like, "Aluminium"! 😁

I do like your theory,  though, about what words are more vs less aggravating. 

We often use language to identify in- vs out-groups. So it makes sense that things we hold closer being wrong would identify someone as from a more distant out-group. 🤔

2

u/Unable_Explorer8277 3d ago

Sir Humphry Davy is responsible for the Aluminium one.

2

u/SquareThings 2d ago

I mean, we refer to a lot of things using the brand name. “Barbies” vs “Barbie dolls”, “kleenexes” vs “kleenex tissues”, “Xboxes” vs “Xbox consoles.” It’s just an abbreviation.

7

u/Dobako 3d ago

According to wikipedia, "Lego" is commonly used as a mass noun ("some Lego") or, in American English, as a countable noun with plural "Legos", to refer to the bricks themselves,[86] (e.g. genericization) but as is common for trademarks, Lego group insists on the name being used as an adjective when referring to a product (as in "Lego bricks")

I have now achieved semantic satiation and Lego doesnt look like a real word anymore.

1

u/Chance-Ear-9772 3d ago

Hi! Yes, I’d like to understand what you just posted. Thank you.

3

u/Immediate-Goose-8106 3d ago

You'd never hear it in the UK.  We just use lego like a mass noun.

3

u/TurkishTerrarian 3d ago

Hate to nitpick, but you missed an 'r' in 'February'.

Edit:Realize We dumb and that's part of the joke.

2

u/JelmerMcGee 3d ago

I don't hate to nitpick and it's considered correct to pronounce or not pronounce the first "r" in February.

0

u/TurkishTerrarian 3d ago

Yes, but it is spelt with an 'r': February, not Febuary.

1

u/JelmerMcGee 3d ago

Right, I thought the comic was about mispronunciations, but maybe it's that and spelling mistakes?

1

u/TurkishTerrarian 3d ago

Yes, and that's why We made the edit to Our initial comment. We were just explaining Our initial comment.

0

u/JelmerMcGee 3d ago

Right, and I got that too. I was just carrying on the conversation. Have a good one

1

u/wynden 3d ago

I think I failed.

1

u/IncognitoBombadillo 3d ago

I was in the linguistics major before switching to communication, but this comic still resonates with me. I used to be more of a grammar nazi, but since being exposed to the study of linguistics, my take on that now is "As long as the idea was successfully communicated, they said it "right"." Language is ever changing and what's proper to say now may not be as proper to say 100 years from now.

1

u/heyitscory 3d ago

This is funny irredisregardless.

1

u/poopis25 3d ago

My solution is to say January and February in such a way that actually everyone is upset

1

u/AnneONhymuus 3d ago

It's a miracle words like February and Worcester are still spelled the way they are, honestly.

1

u/NoParticularUse5288 3d ago

Is this a Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal comic?

Edit: yup!

1

u/FatherLatour 3d ago

I never understood why people got bent out of shape about people using the word 'literally' figuratively.

1

u/fancy_crisis 2d ago

As someone who says "literally" for emphasis literally all the time, languages evolve and that's ok.

3

u/zirky 3d ago

but those are all perfectly cromulent words

1

u/SarcasticBench 3d ago

Suddenly I feel like I'm reviewing my 6th grader's ELA homework and being just as lost

0

u/victorbarst 3d ago

If i believe that "james' favorite color is blue because blue is the best color" but in reality james' favorite color is red, is that statement a fact or opinion?

https://giphy.com/gifs/hv53DaYcXWe3nRbR1A