Young Writers Society

Hi. I'm pretty new around here. Call me Kylie. Today, I bring with me a topic for debating... after a semi-rant.

Before we being, I'd just like to say that when something riles me, I tend to rant. I do try and be civilized when I rant so that it winds up more of a statement of my opinion than a rant, and I usually try to rant at the cause of my ranting. Well, I found something to rant at, which just so happens to be a great debate topic (if I'm posting this in the wrong forum, or if this is inappropriate, I am truly sorry). So...

*takes out soapbox*

The trigger lies under the spoiler.

[spoiler]Who taught you how to rhyme?
Who taught you about style?
Who taught you about grammar?
Who taught you about consistency?
Who, in fact, taught you all of these rules?
Who taught them?
Who then, taught that person?
Who was the first man (or woman) to establish this?
Who has kept to this age old wisdom?
Who hasn't deviated from this foundation?
Who hasn't implemented changes over time?
Who remembers that person in line eight (of this)?
Who said what they established was right?
Who had the courage to refute their rules?
Who doesn't think that what they said about writing sets the tone for the way we think about it today?
Who doesn't know that through centuries building on this we have writing as we see it today?
Who doesn't realize that we are now brainwashed and deprived of our literary freedom because of this?
Who doesn't realize that the rules constrain our ability to express?
Who doesn't see that (these) rules pack mud on our minds and calls it Focus?
Who is determined one way or another to be right, rather than being open minded?
Who is too set in a stone named Rules to climb outside the box?
Who feels that every time they want to convey something they must first consult this-Handbook?
Who doesn't know that if they were the first writer on earth their biased beliefs would affect all those who come after them?
Who doesn't know that its quite possible for a line of people to build off this unstable structure and produce Rules?
Who in today's time can even comprehend this without taking into consideration their beliefs?
Who can review without using words like "should" and phrases like "this is how its supposed to be"?
Who realizes that it's the imperfect Man (or group of) that decided this is "how it should be"?
Who doesn't realize that because of this establishment and it alone, no rules regarding writing can ever be accurate unless they are given to Man by some divine other worldly source?
Who is beginning to understand that by abandoning our rules (to writing) we might eventually be free?
Who can even begin to imagine the possibilities?
Who reading this now is already focusing on the negatives and preparing to respond nastily?
Who is afraid to have their world turned upside down and their (supposed) knowledge and the (relative) safety they feel in it-Challenged?
Who is prepared to accept this and write without fear of condemnation?
Who is just fine with the way things are?
Who wants freedom?
Who?[/spoiler]
I'm sorry, I just can't restrain myself from saying this, but all the above makes several mistaken assumptions about language, the first being that language is created by a single individual. All naturally occurring and created languages are collaborative efforts (consciously or no). English (since you're railing against it), for example, is a created language formed as a means of communication between (if I recall correctly) three or four major distinct cultures (I believe they were the French, Welsh, Celts, and Scots; there were many other lesser tribes and such involved as well, mostly of Germaic descent as I recall). Each had their own separate languages, and yet there was one centralized power, and so, for administrative purposes, a single official language was created.

Considering that most created languages never take off and die out shortly after their inception, I'd say that English has done quite well for itself, mainly, due to its origins, because the English language is so inherently flexible. English is one of very few languages with an extensive history of using loan words. While loan words exist in other languages, they are nowhere near as commonplace as in English.

Also, due to its origins, the "rules" of the English language are more guidelines than anything, and they are subject to rapid change. Take spelling conventions, for instance. Or sentence structure. Compare writing from 1920 to writing from 1950 or 1870 and you'll quickly see a marked difference in how ideas are conveyed. There's also the matter of rules only being as constraining as you allow them to be, but that's another discussion. The point of the matter is, without rules, how would we be able to understand each other?

Let's say I were to decide one day that the word "girl" would mean "child" rather than just "female child"? You wouldn't know that, and so you'd assume that when I was talking about "that girl over there" that I meant the girl with the shovel instead of the boy with the truck. Without some basic guidelines, communication is impossible.

Now, bending these guidelines, on the other hand is another story. Shaping language into forms it has never been fashioned into before is something that is done all the time. Metaphors, anyone? Shifts in word meaning ring a bell? How about the dozens of newly coined words entering dictionaries each year? English, as I mentioned earlier, is one of the most flexible languages in existence. As writers, it is our prerogative to take advantage of this fact.

Rail against the "constraints" all you want -- language is simply a tool, and like all tools, it has some limitations. However, within those limitations are nigh endless possibilities, not to mention that there's always the option to alter the tool or switch to another.

Besides, language isn't the true limiting factor here -- it's everyone's inability to instantly understand one another. That is why communication exists, after all; language is just one form of it.

Have you ever thought of how we would communicate without language?

*puts away soapbox*

So, what are your thoughts on language and its rules? Should they be broken/maintained/both? Why or why not? Also, any ideas on how we'd communicate without language?