Kingston University London

Analysing English– EN1138

Bruno Nobre Silva
K0826081

Portfolio Task 2:
Approaches to
Grammatical Description

Portfolio Task 2 1
2008/2009
 Kingston University London
Analysing English– EN1138
Bruno Nobre Silva
K0826081

Letter to the Editor

Re: Mutilated Language (Published on Friday, 6th August 1999)

Sir,

This missive is in response to the observations made by Mr. Dennis M.

Jones from Thailand concerning what is, in his opinion, a mutilation of the

English Language by today’s writers, especially in regards to its grammar and

syntax. His claims about the incorrectness of the phrase constructions used

by newspapers and therefore by English speakers in general, ought to be

analysed through a different perspective in order to determine its grammatical

accuracy. Mr. Jones’ commentary about the phrase ‘different than’ is set upon

a rather conservative view, portraying journalists as incapable of following

what Bauer, Holmes and Warren (2006, p.254) describe as ‘formal written

language conventions’.

Moreover, it certainly underlies a prescriptive approach to grammar.

This view of grammar is based on a set of rules for the acceptable and proper

use of language (Yule, 1985, p.72). It also urges for the ‘best, polished usage

of language, rather than […] what is perfectly normal usage for everyday

matters’ (Bauer, Holmes and Warren 2006, p.253). Advocates of such

approach, like Mr. Jones, tend to view themselves as the judges of accuracy,

Portfolio Task 2 2
2008/2009
 Kingston University London
Analysing English– EN1138
Bruno Nobre Silva
K0826081

ready to point out exactly how others should use grammar (Hewings &

Hewings, 2005).

In view of this, the usage of the construction ‘different than’ is not a

matter of right or wrong in terms of grammaticality. It is, by contrast, a matter

of how appropriate it is for one to use it in different contexts (Bauer, Holmes

and Warren, 2006). In fact, according to Swan (1995), ‘different than’ is

commonly accepted, especially in American English, where ‘than’ replaces

the prepositions ‘from’ or ‘to’, most frequently used in British English. Even so,

if before a clause ‘different than’ is rather likely in the latter. Similarly, The

American Heritage Book of English Usage (1996), while more elaborate,

suggests that even though conventionally one should use ‘from’ when a

comparison is made between persons or things , ‘than’ is widely accepted

when ‘the object of comparison is expressed by a full clause’. And a clear

example is given: ‘The campus is different than it was twenty years ago’.

However, the best explanation is perhaps given by Wilson (1993), suggesting

that ‘than’ acts both as a preposition and a subordinate conjunction in

Standard English, contrary to the general belief that it is simply the latter. As

an example, ‘She looks different than me’ is recognisably accepted as

Standard English.

Thus it is evident that prescriptiveness as an approach to grammar has

one main setback. The notion of correctness that it implies is extremely

difficult to establish, and not even linguists agree fully on what is correct. The

fact is that ‘language changes over time [and] so does grammatical usage’

Portfolio Task 2 3
2008/2009
 Kingston University London
Analysing English– EN1138
Bruno Nobre Silva
K0826081

(Hewings & Hewings, 2005). Therefore, my humble suggestion to Mr. Jones

would be for him to acknowledge this mutability intrinsic to language and try to

recognize that instead of a right/wrong dichotomy, phrases like ‘different than’

should be analysed in regards to its appropriateness.

Kind Regards,

Bruno Nobre Silva

London, UK

Portfolio Task 2 4
2008/2009
 Kingston University London
Analysing English– EN1138
Bruno Nobre Silva
K0826081

References List:

Bauer, L. Holmes, J. and Warren, P. (2006) Language Matters. Basingstoke:

Palgrave Macmillan.

Hewings, A. & Hewings, M. (2005) Grammar and Context: an Advanced

Resource Book. London: Routledge.

Swan, M. (1995) Practical English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Yule, G (2006) The Study of Language: an introduction (3rd edn.) Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Jones, D.M. (1999) 'Mutilated Language: LETTERS TO THE EDITOR’

International Herald Tribune, 6 Aug [Online]. Available at:
http://www.iht.com/articles/1999/08/06/edlet.2.t_5.php (Accessed:
13/02/2009)

The American Heritage Book of English Usage: A Practical and Authoritative

Guide to Contemporary English (1996) [Online]. Available at:
http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/098.html (Accessed: 11 May 2009).

Wilson, K.G. (1993) The Columbia Guide to Standard American English

[Online]. Available at: http://www.bartleby.com/68/37/1837.html (Accessed: 13
May 2009)

Portfolio Task 2 5
2008/2009