A lot of people, when they think about grammar, they think about a set of rules that they have to follow. Many people think they are “bad” at grammar. Others like to correct others’ grammar. Some people may have grammar pet peeves that get them especially annoyed. This is known as prescriptive grammar—creating and enforcing rules that tell people how they should use language.

Linguists think about grammar in a very different way. Because we approach grammar scientifically, we do not make value judgments about the ways people use language. Instead, we observe it and try to describe it. This is known as descriptive grammar.

Language variation and identity

Language is always changing, and language is not uniform. Everybody uses language in slightly different ways, and sometimes in very different ways. We use these differences in the ways we use language to perform our identity—to let other people know how we fit into our society. The ways we use language can indicate to others where we’re from, how old we are, whether we are cool or smart, our gender identity, and every other aspect of our identities that you can think of. The study of how our language varies is a major part of the field of sociolinguistics.

Unfortunately, not all identities are equally valued by society. The value society places on certain kinds of people often gets transferred to the language use associated with those people. Thus, the varieties of language used most often by the most powerful and prestigious people get viewed as “correct” or “standard” while the varieties of language used by the less powerful and prestigious people get viewed more negatively.

However, when studied objectively, all varieties of language follow systematic rules. All varieties allow for clear and creative communication. They are all equally valid, and none of them are better or worse than the others.

These different varieties do communicate different things, though. They communicate your identity, sometimes intentionally and sometimes unintentionally! They communicate whether you are rich or poor, whether you are well-educated or not, whether you fit in with a particular crowd or not. Likewise, the people you interact with perceive you in certain ways because of your language, sometimes intentionally and sometimes unintentionally. The most proficient language users aren’t the ones who always use the most prestigious variety of language; they’re the ones who are able to use many different varieties well and are able to choose which varieties are most effective for different contexts.

It is important to remember, though, that not everyone has equal access to the prestigious varieties of language. Children do not get to choose where they are born and grow up, the language variety used by their peers or parents, or the quality of their education. The varieties of language you use has less to do with your intelligence or attention to detail, and more to do with the communities you grew up in. It is possible to learn another variety of language, of course, just as it is possible to learn another language. But children who grow up being exposed to the prescriptively correct and prestigious forms will not have to put in as much effort to produce the prescriptively correct forms in formal situations. Not exposing children to culturally significant varieties of language can also cause harm, though, as children need the tools to be able to explore and express their identities.

Negative language attitudes are pervasive in our schools and in the media, and so it is natural to have internalized some of these attitudes yourself. However, it’s worth thinking about where those attitudes came from and the power structures they uphold.

Case study on ain’t

Let’s look more closely at one non-prestigious grammatical construction, ain’t. Ain’t is widely used in several dialects of the United States, including Appalachian English and African American Vernacular English. The following quote describes its use in Appalachia. According to this description, using ain’t is an important part of showing that you belong to the community.

Outside of Appalachia, however, ain’t is considered prescriptively incorrect. But if you look more closely, you’ll realize that it actually fills a gap in standardized English.

Ain’t is an example of a contraction, which is a shortened form of a common phrase into a single word. We use several contractions in standardized English, as shown in Table 1, but there is a gap! We don’t have a contracted form of am not.

It is not surprising that some dialects of English have developed a contraction that fills that gap. Some dialects use ain’t, while others, such as Irish English, use amn’t.

Where do prescriptive rules come from?

You may have been taught many prescriptivist rules about “correct” language in school. If you studied English formally, you may have been taught some of the following rules. In this section, we will discuss where these rules came from.

Imposing rules from other languages

Some prescriptivist rules are imported from other languages. For example, through the Enlightenment and Romantic periods, Greek and Latin-speaking scholars imposed Greek and Latin spelling and grammar rules on English. Scholars (sometimes correctly, and sometimes incorrectly) inserted silent letters into words to reflect their Greek or Latin origins. This is where the silent <b> in words like debt and doubt come from. But they didn’t stop at spelling reform!

In Greek and Latin, infinitives are one word, and so a word cannot intervene in the middle of an infinitive construction. But in English, an infinitive is two words (to + a verb). These scholars decided that, if a word cannot go in the middle of an infinitive construction in Greek and Latin, we shouldn’t be able to do so in English, either.

Another rule that has been imported is the prohibition against ending a sentence with a preposition. This is actually a pretty unique property of English grammar that is not possible in many other languages. Again, scholars began teaching that you shouldn’t end a sentence with a preposition to make English more like Latin and Greek.

Arguably, these scholars imposed Latin and Greek rules on English because they wanted to show off their higher education. At the very least, these rules imply that Latin and Greek are better than English. The prestige of Latin and Greek is not as strong as it used to be, but these rules get repeated by teachers and editors who may or may not be aware of their origins.

Language change

Language is always changing, and young people of every generation coin new words and even develop new grammatical patterns. However, sometimes the new grammatical forms aren’t accepted right away, and the new form is labelled as “incorrect.”

One example of this is the comparative form of the word fun, as shown in Table 3. Younger speakers produce words such as funner and funnest, especially in informal contexts, whereas older speakers only produce more fun and most fun.

Stylistics and rhetoric

Another source of prescriptivist rules is from stylistics and rhetoric, or the study of how texts are structured in order to be the most effective and persuasive. In stylistics and rhetoric, literary scholars may give you advice about what kinds of sentences and words to use because of the effect they have on the reader. For example, one piece of advice that is often given is to avoid the passive voice. One justification for avoiding the passive voice is because it removes responsibility and accountability from the person who performed the action. This critique is often directed at the news, for example, for statements like those in (1). In (1b), the actions of the police officer are downplayed.

However, sometimes the actor is not known, or if it is known, is not important. In these cases, the passive voice is definitely appropriate. Furthermore, it is possible to downplay the actor without using the passive voice. Consider this quote from NASA administrator Bill Nelson, shown in (2).

The sentence in (2) makes it sound like mistakes just happened, and does not lay the blame on anyone, but it doesn’t actually use the passive voice. Therefore, instead of a blanket rule to avoid the passive voice, a more appropriate recommendation is to be aware of whether you are downplaying the actor of a sentence and whether doing so is appropriate for the context.

Another justification given for avoiding the passive voice is the argument that the active voice gives a more vibrant and active feel to your writing. While this might sometimes be the case, it is possible to write dull sentences in active voice, as in (3a), and vibrant sentences in passive voice, as in (3b). Furthermore, a vibrant and active feel is not always the one you will be aiming for!

Although rules coming from stylistics or rhetoric might be reasonable advice in some cases, these are just guidelines given for a particular purpose rather than rules about how language is structured. In syntax, we are more concerned about the possible structures than about which structure is the most persuasive or clear. Although some styles of writing may be clearer or more appropriate in a given context, that doesn’t make the other ways of writing “wrong.” Unclear, ambiguous, or misleading sentences that are nonetheless grammatical still provide us with valuable information about how language is structured and processed.

Hypercorrection

Another source of prescriptivist rules is from something called hypercorrection, which is when a rule is over-applied and extended to new contexts. The rule about and I originated as a hypercorrection.

The difference between I and me, just like the difference between we and us, is about whether the pronoun appears in subject or object position. I generally appears in subject position, while me appears in object position.

Originally, the pattern was the same whether or not the pronoun came after and. But, in English, me is the default form that shows up when it is neither subject nor object, and for some speakers it started showing up after and in subject position, like in (5b). Other people started correcting that usage, and then people started saying and I in every context, even in object position, like (5d). In these questions, the % indicates that the sentence is accepted by some speakers but not all.

This is an example of a hypercorrection. This hypercorrection has been so pervasive that it has arguably changed some people’s grammars.

Linguistic imperialism and discrimination

Finally, some prescriptivist rules arise due to contact between two different language communities with a power imbalance. In these situations, the grammar of the language community with less power is often labelled as incorrect or even illogical. Often, this happens alongside other forms of racism and/or colonialism. For example, because the British Empire colonized so many countries around the world, there are many different global dialects of English. Many of these dialects can be considered mixed languages, which combine properties of two different languages. However, although these dialects are expressive and creative, follow systematic rules, and are valid language varieties, they are often described as “broken English.” For example, Nigerian Pidgin English is spoken by over half of the population of Nigeria (Faraclas 2008), including university graduates, professors, lawyers, and journalists, but it still has the reputation of being the language of the non-literate (Akande and Salami 2010).

These language attitudes can have significant impact on society. For example, in the infamous acquittal of George Zimmerman which launched the Black Lives Matter movement, the six hours of testimony by the star witness Rachel Jeantel were disregarded by the jury. Public remarks by a juror indicate that they disregarded her testimony because of her speech (Rickford and King 2016).

Check yourself!

References and further resources

Comedy and satirical linguistics

🎉 Phlogiston, Phineas Q. 2008. Cartoon theories of linguistics part XI – Prescriptivism vs. descriptivisim. Speculative Grammarian CLIV(3). https://specgram.com/CLIV.3/04.phlogiston.cartoon.xi.html

🎉 Starkey, Ryan. 2019. Linguistic prescriptivists make terrible zoologists. Starkey Comics. https://starkeycomics.com/2019/04/18/linguistic-prescriptivists-make-terrible-zoologists

For a general audience

🔍 Bee, Zoe. 2021. Grammarly is garbage, and here’s why. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5rB9jDbTPU

For linguistics students

🔍 Charity Hudley, Anne, Christine Mallinson, and Mary Bucholtz. 2022. Talking college: Making space for Black language practices in higher education. New York: Teachers College Press.

🔍 Curzan, Anne. 2014. Fixing English: Prescriptivism and language history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sources for examples

Watts, Marina. August 25, 2024. Nasa makes decision to bring home astronauts who have been stuck in space for 80 days. People. https://people.com/nasa-makes-decision-to-bring-home-astronauts-stuck-in-space-for-80-days-8701062

Academic sources

Akande, Akinmade T. and L. Oladipo Salami. 2010. Use and attitudes towards Nigerian Pidgin English among Nigerian university students. In Marginal dialects: Scotland, Ireland and beyond, ed. Robert McColl Millar, 70–89. Aberdeen: Forum for Research on the Languages of Scotland and Ireland.

Faraclas, Nicholas. 2008. Nigerian Pidgin English: Morphology and syntax. In Varieties of English 4: Africa, South and Southeast Asia, ed. Rajend Mesthrie, 340–367. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Montgomery, Michael. 2014. Hain’t we got a right to use ain’t and auxiliary contraction?: Toward a history of negation variants in Appalachian English. Southern Journal of Linguistics 38 (1): 31–68.

🔍 Rickford, John, and Sharese King. 2016. Language and linguistics on trial: Hearing Rachel Jeantel (and other vernacular speakers) in the courtroom and beyond. Language 92 (4): 948–988. https://www.linguisticsociety.org/sites/default/files/Rickford_92_4.pdf

Young, Vershawn Ashanti. 2010. Should writers use they own English? Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies 12 (1): 110-117.