language
I am reading another Bill Bryson book, this one called "Made in America: An Informal History of the English Language in the United States." So far, it is very interesting (as his books usually are.)
One thing struck me though. He mentioned that the era out of which the Pilgrims came, the era of Shakespeare and Milton, was one of the most interesting for the English language. Actually, he states it much better than I, so let me quote: "Perhaps no period on history has been more accommodating to verbal innovation, more alive with neologisms, more kissed with genius, than that into which the Pilgrims were privileged to be born." New words were being created all the time, by combining older terms into new compound words, by turning nouns into verbs, or just by coining new, entirely original words. Spellings and pronunciation were very much in flux and the language hadn't really been locked into a fixed form by rules of grammar, spelling, usage, etc. that have been passed down to us today.
So I got to wondering whether our own era is similar, linguistically, to this. Of course, we're all taught the rules in school, (and some of us really like these rules,) but the internet, texting and more and more cross-cultural communication is making them less and less relevant, and, I think, really encouraging the coining of new words. We also like to turn nouns into verbs (like "to friend"). Furthermore, we like to turn adjectives into nouns, (i.e. "I love Paula's crazy.") And we love adding crazy suffixes to words to create new words, such as: anvilicious, craptastic, and smarticle. (I got that last one from my kids. I'm not sure what it means.)
The only problem with our era is: are we creating the kind of literature that will immortalize these terms and ensure their influence for centuries to come, like Shakespeare did? Or are our coinages so attached to ephemeral media, like txt msgs and email, that they will disppear as quickly as they came? What do you all think?
One thing struck me though. He mentioned that the era out of which the Pilgrims came, the era of Shakespeare and Milton, was one of the most interesting for the English language. Actually, he states it much better than I, so let me quote: "Perhaps no period on history has been more accommodating to verbal innovation, more alive with neologisms, more kissed with genius, than that into which the Pilgrims were privileged to be born." New words were being created all the time, by combining older terms into new compound words, by turning nouns into verbs, or just by coining new, entirely original words. Spellings and pronunciation were very much in flux and the language hadn't really been locked into a fixed form by rules of grammar, spelling, usage, etc. that have been passed down to us today.
So I got to wondering whether our own era is similar, linguistically, to this. Of course, we're all taught the rules in school, (and some of us really like these rules,) but the internet, texting and more and more cross-cultural communication is making them less and less relevant, and, I think, really encouraging the coining of new words. We also like to turn nouns into verbs (like "to friend"). Furthermore, we like to turn adjectives into nouns, (i.e. "I love Paula's crazy.") And we love adding crazy suffixes to words to create new words, such as: anvilicious, craptastic, and smarticle. (I got that last one from my kids. I'm not sure what it means.)
The only problem with our era is: are we creating the kind of literature that will immortalize these terms and ensure their influence for centuries to come, like Shakespeare did? Or are our coinages so attached to ephemeral media, like txt msgs and email, that they will disppear as quickly as they came? What do you all think?