Last week I watched dozens of videos of educators making presentations to
their colleagues and superiors. While I cannot reveal anything about the
assignment itself, I would like to pontificate on a topic I care about a great
deal.
I know language must evolve. If it doesn’t, it will die just as Latin
died. However, I contend that language must not change so quickly that
significant portions of the population cannot adequately communicate. It has
taken many years for the old rule about not ending a sentence with a
preposition to fade away. While there are still language sticklers who will
never let that rule go, we need only observe how the vast majority of English
language speakers ignore the rule to conclude that it no longer applies in
common communication. The important point here is that the change occurred over
a significantly long period of time, resulting in no degradation of the quality
of communication, which after all, is the point of language rules. Here is an
example of what this rule refers to. Technically, I should have written, “Here
is an example to which this rule refers.”
Sentences are not supposed to end with to, with, at, onto, under, above
and many other words called prepositions. Winston Churchill is purported to
have said something similar to, “Ending a sentence with a preposition is
something up with which I will not put.”
If he had used the common language of our current generation, he might
have said, “Ending a sentence with a preposition is something I will not put up
with,” thus ending his sentence with a preposition. Which sounds more natural
to us today? Which aides in
communication, and which hinders communication?
Remember, clear communication is our goal.
This past week I was amazed at how quickly our language has devolved. While
I expect the rules of grammar to be severely altered by the common man speaking
to friends in an informal setting (I ignore many formal rules myself in such
situations), I expect educators and other professionals to hold the line on
most basic rules of communication, and to demonstrate the correct use of
language to communicate to colleagues who should share the same goal of
retarding the speed of language evolution in order to enhance understanding
among the largest possible audience. This is not what I found in the videos I
watched. Here are just a few of the most glaring examples.
“I
kind of want my students to be able to read at the appropriate level before
they leave my class.” “Kind of”? You don’t actually want your students to be
able to achieve this goal? I wish I had
counted how many times I heard these two words used. When I hear something like
that, I assume this person lacks the conviction to reach her goal of teaching
students to read. She is not sure if that is what she desires or not. I heard
this phrase used in technical contexts. “When you login, you have to kind of
use the password you set up.” This is
just laziness. If we don’t put out the effort to gain control of our speech
patterns, we shouldn’t be surprised when other people misunderstand us, or when
a potential employer decides he would rather hire a person who is more
understandable.
“I put the cursor here and, like, click on this button, and it, like,
brings up this window.” What are we
becoming, a nation of valley girls? If
you don’t understand that reference, it is because you are too young to
remember when this horrible habit of using “like” as a comma or in place of
“umm” was born. And, if you don’t understand the reference, I shouldn’t have
used it, because a good communicator needs to communicate with his entire
audience. When a person, especially a professional educator, exhibits an
irritating habit such as this one, I stop listening. Communication cannot occur
if a person is talking while nobody is listening.
“I think this is the most important aspect of teaching.” What would convince you? What would move you from the position of
“thinking” it is the most important one to believing it is the most important
one? This habit is akin to the “kind of”
one. When I think something is true, I retain some doubt. You may be able to
sway me before I take the final plunge. When I believe something is true, I
have already plunged into the pool and am lazily floating in the coolness of
the water, comfortable with my situation. You won’t convince me of your
devotion to an idea or ideal by telling me you think it is true.
“I feel like this new curriculum will really help our students.” Wonderful. Your gut tells you we should
enthusiastically stop doing what we have been doing for almost ten years and
embrace an entirely new way of doing things. That’s good enough for me! No, it is not good enough for me. I want to
know that you have thoroughly examined the new curriculum, considering the type
of students we have enrolled, the capacity of our staff, the cost of the
transition, and the means by which we will measure the success or failure of
the new curriculum. I want to know what you think and what you believe. I am
not at all interested in what you feel in this situation.
“I’m glad you guys could be here today.”
Arghhhh! I am a guy when I’m
hanging out in the garage drinking a beer with my buddies. I am not a guy when
I am attending a professional development meeting at an educational institution.
I don’t even like being called a guy when I’m sitting in a restaurant. I know
its use is intended to set a tone that is comfortable for everyone, but it has
an opposite effect in many situations. If I am about to try to convince my superiors
that it would be worth their time, effort, and expense to adopt a new program
for our school or district, I need to convey respect, not familiarity. If you
are a 22-year-old server in a restaurant, you should be concerned about showing
some respect for your elders, especially if you wish a generous tip at the end
of the evening. I am a mature, older stranger who may or may not wish to be
your buddy. You can be friendly without degrading me by calling me a guy. I
don’t care if you don’t call me “Sir,” though it wouldn’t bother me either. “Folks”
would be fine as well, when I am with someone.
Words matter. They are our primary means of communicating our thoughts,
beliefs and feelings to others. If we do not choose the words that carry the
appropriate meanings, there will always be the possibility the listener will
hear (or read and interpret) something we never intended to say. That is why I
often require my friends, acquaintances and strangers I interact with on
Facebook to define the main words they are using. I no longer trust anyone to
properly use the English language. I can avoid a long, useless discussion about
a disagreement that doesn’t actually exist if I can be sure the other person is
applying the same definition to a word as I am.
Looking back on this post, I can see that I have broken quite a few
English language rules. I have transitioned to the new one-space-after-a-period
rule. I have improperly placed
prepositions, split infinitives, used incomplete sentences, used contractions, included
an incredibly long sentence, and have chosen to use the Oxford comma. The
question you should ask is, “Do I understand what Tom is trying to
communicate?” If the answer is
affirmative, I have used language to achieve its intended purpose. That is all
I ask of anybody. Think about the implications of what you are saying or
writing. Who, if anyone, will or will not understand? Who will be so offended that they will not
listen? Who will not feel obligated to
exert the effort necessary to figure out what I am trying to say? What is the best way to use words to make
sure the intended message is conveyed?
And if you are in a professional setting, please, please, please
demonstrate a higher standard. By doing so, you will be a partner in slowing
the evolution of our language to a manageable pace.
