TedTest

From the Ted Talk by Andreea S. Calude: Does grammar matter?

Unscramble the Blue Letters

You're telling a friend an azmanig story, and you just get to the best part when suddenly he interrupts, "The alien and I," not "Me and the alien." Most of us would probably be annoyed, but aside from the rude inrtuioprten, does your friend have a point? Was your sentence actually grammatically incorrect? And if he still understood it, why does it even matter? From the point of view of linguistics, grammar is a set of patterns for how words are put together to form phrases or clauses, whether spkeon or in writing. Different languages have different patterns. In English, the subject normally comes first, followed by the verb, and then the object, while in Japanese and many other languages, the order is subject, object, verb. Some scalhros have tried to inefitdy patterns cmmoon to all languages, but apart from some basic features, like having nouns or verbs, few of these so-called linguistic universals have been found. And while any lgungaae needs csistnoent patterns to function, the study of these patterns opens up an ongoing debate between two positions known as prescriptivism and dcstirepvisim. Grossly simplified, prescriptivists think a given language should follow consistent rules, while descriptivists see votaiiran and adaptation as a natural and necessary part of language. For much of hoisrty, the vast majority of language was spoken. But as people became more interconnected and writing gained importance, written language was standardized to allow beaodrr comiomiaunctn and ensure that people in different parts of a realm could understand each other. In many languages, this standard form came to be considered the only peorpr one, despite being dreevid from just one of many spoken viearties, usually that of the people in power. Language purists worked to establish and poapgtare this sdrnatad by detailing a set of rules that reflected the established grammar of their times. And rules for wrttein grammar were applied to spoken language, as well. speceh patterns that deviated from the written rules were considered corruptions, or signs of low social status, and many people who had grown up skeapnig in these ways were forced to adopt the standardized form. More recently, however, linguists have understood that speech is a saptaere ponmonehen from writing with its own rtuarilegies and patterns. Most of us learn to speak at such an early age that we don't even remember it. We form our spoken repertoire through unconscious habits, not memorized rleus. And because speech also uses mood and intonation for meaning, its structure is often more flexible, adapting to the needs of speakers and listeners. This could mean adovniig complex clauses that are hard to psare in real time, making changes to avoid awkward pronounciation, or removing sounds to make speech faster. The lniigtusic approach that tries to understand and map such differences without dinicattg correct ones is known as descriptivism. Rather than deciding how language should be used, it describes how people actually use it, and tracks the ivaonnnitos they come up with in the process. But while the debate between pirtpesrivsicm and descriptivism ctonenuis, the two are not mutually exclusive. At its best, prescriptivism is useful for informing people about the most common established patterns at a given point in time. This is important, not only for formal contexts, but it also makes communication easier between non-native speakers from different bcgdraounks. Descriptivism, on the other hand, gives us insight into how our minds work and the instinctive ways in which we sttrcruue our view of the world. Ultimately, grammar is best thought of as a set of linguistic habits that are constantly being negotiated and reinvented by the einrte group of language uress. Like language itself, it's a wonderful and complex fabric woven through the contributions of speakers and listeners, writers and readers, prescriptivists and descriptivists, from both near and far.

Open Cloze

You're telling a friend an _______ story, and you just get to the best part when suddenly he interrupts, "The alien and I," not "Me and the alien." Most of us would probably be annoyed, but aside from the rude ____________, does your friend have a point? Was your sentence actually grammatically incorrect? And if he still understood it, why does it even matter? From the point of view of linguistics, grammar is a set of patterns for how words are put together to form phrases or clauses, whether ______ or in writing. Different languages have different patterns. In English, the subject normally comes first, followed by the verb, and then the object, while in Japanese and many other languages, the order is subject, object, verb. Some ________ have tried to ________ patterns ______ to all languages, but apart from some basic features, like having nouns or verbs, few of these so-called linguistic universals have been found. And while any ________ needs __________ patterns to function, the study of these patterns opens up an ongoing debate between two positions known as prescriptivism and _____________. Grossly simplified, prescriptivists think a given language should follow consistent rules, while descriptivists see _________ and adaptation as a natural and necessary part of language. For much of _______, the vast majority of language was spoken. But as people became more interconnected and writing gained importance, written language was standardized to allow _______ _____________ and ensure that people in different parts of a realm could understand each other. In many languages, this standard form came to be considered the only ______ one, despite being _______ from just one of many spoken _________, usually that of the people in power. Language purists worked to establish and _________ this ________ by detailing a set of rules that reflected the established grammar of their times. And rules for _______ grammar were applied to spoken language, as well. ______ patterns that deviated from the written rules were considered corruptions, or signs of low social status, and many people who had grown up ________ in these ways were forced to adopt the standardized form. More recently, however, linguists have understood that speech is a ________ __________ from writing with its own ____________ and patterns. Most of us learn to speak at such an early age that we don't even remember it. We form our spoken repertoire through unconscious habits, not memorized _____. And because speech also uses mood and intonation for meaning, its structure is often more flexible, adapting to the needs of speakers and listeners. This could mean ________ complex clauses that are hard to _____ in real time, making changes to avoid awkward pronounciation, or removing sounds to make speech faster. The __________ approach that tries to understand and map such differences without _________ correct ones is known as descriptivism. Rather than deciding how language should be used, it describes how people actually use it, and tracks the ___________ they come up with in the process. But while the debate between ______________ and descriptivism _________, the two are not mutually exclusive. At its best, prescriptivism is useful for informing people about the most common established patterns at a given point in time. This is important, not only for formal contexts, but it also makes communication easier between non-native speakers from different ___________. Descriptivism, on the other hand, gives us insight into how our minds work and the instinctive ways in which we _________ our view of the world. Ultimately, grammar is best thought of as a set of linguistic habits that are constantly being negotiated and reinvented by the ______ group of language _____. Like language itself, it's a wonderful and complex fabric woven through the contributions of speakers and listeners, writers and readers, prescriptivists and descriptivists, from both near and far.

Solution

prescriptivism
regularities
variation
phenomenon
language
spoken
linguistic
identify
avoiding
speech
varieties
dictating
backgrounds
structure
parse
descriptivism
proper
interruption
entire
rules
standard
broader
scholars
innovations
history
common
consistent
written
users
propagate
amazing
communication
separate
speaking
derived
continues

Original Text

You're telling a friend an amazing story, and you just get to the best part when suddenly he interrupts, "The alien and I," not "Me and the alien." Most of us would probably be annoyed, but aside from the rude interruption, does your friend have a point? Was your sentence actually grammatically incorrect? And if he still understood it, why does it even matter? From the point of view of linguistics, grammar is a set of patterns for how words are put together to form phrases or clauses, whether spoken or in writing. Different languages have different patterns. In English, the subject normally comes first, followed by the verb, and then the object, while in Japanese and many other languages, the order is subject, object, verb. Some scholars have tried to identify patterns common to all languages, but apart from some basic features, like having nouns or verbs, few of these so-called linguistic universals have been found. And while any language needs consistent patterns to function, the study of these patterns opens up an ongoing debate between two positions known as prescriptivism and descriptivism. Grossly simplified, prescriptivists think a given language should follow consistent rules, while descriptivists see variation and adaptation as a natural and necessary part of language. For much of history, the vast majority of language was spoken. But as people became more interconnected and writing gained importance, written language was standardized to allow broader communication and ensure that people in different parts of a realm could understand each other. In many languages, this standard form came to be considered the only proper one, despite being derived from just one of many spoken varieties, usually that of the people in power. Language purists worked to establish and propagate this standard by detailing a set of rules that reflected the established grammar of their times. And rules for written grammar were applied to spoken language, as well. Speech patterns that deviated from the written rules were considered corruptions, or signs of low social status, and many people who had grown up speaking in these ways were forced to adopt the standardized form. More recently, however, linguists have understood that speech is a separate phenomenon from writing with its own regularities and patterns. Most of us learn to speak at such an early age that we don't even remember it. We form our spoken repertoire through unconscious habits, not memorized rules. And because speech also uses mood and intonation for meaning, its structure is often more flexible, adapting to the needs of speakers and listeners. This could mean avoiding complex clauses that are hard to parse in real time, making changes to avoid awkward pronounciation, or removing sounds to make speech faster. The linguistic approach that tries to understand and map such differences without dictating correct ones is known as descriptivism. Rather than deciding how language should be used, it describes how people actually use it, and tracks the innovations they come up with in the process. But while the debate between prescriptivism and descriptivism continues, the two are not mutually exclusive. At its best, prescriptivism is useful for informing people about the most common established patterns at a given point in time. This is important, not only for formal contexts, but it also makes communication easier between non-native speakers from different backgrounds. Descriptivism, on the other hand, gives us insight into how our minds work and the instinctive ways in which we structure our view of the world. Ultimately, grammar is best thought of as a set of linguistic habits that are constantly being negotiated and reinvented by the entire group of language users. Like language itself, it's a wonderful and complex fabric woven through the contributions of speakers and listeners, writers and readers, prescriptivists and descriptivists, from both near and far.

Frequently Occurring Word Combinations

Important Words

adaptation
adapting
adopt
age
alien
amazing
annoyed
applied
approach
avoid
avoiding
awkward
backgrounds
basic
broader
clauses
common
communication
complex
considered
consistent
constantly
contexts
continues
contributions
correct
corruptions
debate
deciding
derived
describes
descriptivism
descriptivists
detailing
deviated
dictating
differences
early
easier
english
ensure
entire
establish
established
exclusive
fabric
faster
features
flexible
follow
forced
form
formal
friend
function
gained
grammar
grammatically
grossly
group
grown
habits
hand
hard
history
identify
importance
important
incorrect
informing
innovations
insight
instinctive
interconnected
interruption
interrupts
intonation
japanese
language
languages
learn
linguistic
linguistics
linguists
listeners
majority
making
map
matter
meaning
memorized
minds
mood
mutually
natural
negotiated
nouns
object
ongoing
opens
order
parse
part
parts
patterns
people
phenomenon
phrases
point
positions
power
prescriptivism
prescriptivists
process
pronounciation
propagate
proper
purists
put
readers
real
realm
reflected
regularities
reinvented
remember
removing
repertoire
rude
rules
scholars
sentence
separate
set
signs
simplified
social
sounds
speak
speakers
speaking
speech
spoken
standard
standardized
status
story
structure
study
subject
suddenly
telling
thought
time
times
tracks
ultimately
unconscious
understand
understood
universals
users
variation
varieties
vast
verb
verbs
view
ways
wonderful
words
work
worked
world
woven
writers
writing
written