[personal profile] lhexa
If the success of your theory's agenda leads to the elimination of some term, then your theory abuses language. If the adoption of a theory entails holding some term or terms in uniform contempt, disdain and dismissal; if it takes some other word and makes it inescapable and indispensable; or if it enforces a style of writing, so that only work in that style can be recognized as a work of the theory: then it abuses language. Theory should enrich language, not diminish it. Take into consideration the theory that seeks to persuade you against an opinion, but beware the theory that seeks to make it unthinkable.

Date: 2011-08-03 02:03 pm (UTC)
davv: The bluegreen quadruped. (Default)
From: [personal profile] davv
Would the adoption of the theory that well spelled material is understood more easily count? Such a theory, if adopted, would lead to the exclusion and elimination of terms that are misspelled.

Or, less obviously, do you think theories that encourage linguistic conservatism are also bad? Or are you considering theories that limit language indirectly, instead of dealing with language itself?

Profile

lhexa

January 2012

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
1516171819 2021
22232425262728
293031    

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 28th, 2017 08:54 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios