REFORMING THE LANGUAGE

Hokitika Guardian, 28 October 1930, Page 2

REFORMING THE LANGUAGE

The need for reform of the. .English language was discussed recently by Sir Richard Paget. After dealing with some or the anomalies, absurdities and deficiencies of the Erglidi tongue, Sir Richard Paget states 11 I nl our language would repay sci'nlifi'cultivation. “It .is already the best language that man has yet evolved,‘

he writes, “lvat it is still hampered by many ‘relies of barbarism’ which make it unii-scrs-arily difficult t; learn, ‘unci irstnnd arid use. Professor G. A!. Trevelyan, in l.is ‘History of England,’ gives a vivid account o' how the development of English trot place during the three centuries after the Norman conquest. Amrlo-Saxor was .spoken only by ignorant ports, the* clergy talked Gatin, while the gentry spoke French; the language was seldom written, and was of r.o interest to scholars. Professor Trevelyan writes: “If the grammar rclumsy and nn,graceful it can be altered much more easily when there arc no grammarians to protest.” But the- process of improvement and s simplifications was checked too soon, and Wheti scholars and writers again began to take interest There uTre still many i'cltcS of barbarism remaining, an 1 tlicv have boon allowed and even cm Couil'a-ged, to remain till tits day. j suggest that the time has now como when our (scholars and grammarians filiould ibs invited to take up the subject of the improvement of English from the point where the ignorant serfs left it; when literature stepped in and stabilised its form, making further improvement impossible. H would be ridiculous to argue that' the imcons-eioi.'-s work of the peasant inventors of .Engl.sli cannot be improved or carried fn.rt.her, in the light of the mntLrn knowledge of the nature and function of language. It would be equally ridiculous to protend t-lmt our present language rpp-ivsenti-i A really efficient method of symbolising oi:r thought. “Here, then, is a good case .for scientific pruning, grafting ami cultivation, to make our speech easier, better and more euphonious. If the (language 'were improved in such ways these, so r-s to make it consistent, but without altering it so much as to make the ckfssmnl form difficult to understand, English would in all probability become in a relatively short time the universal language of this planet. 'lf we do nothing, one thing will be ikely to happen, • namely that English language- will break up—America going one way, Australia another, and so on, till in the end these different communities will no longer be able to understand one an-, other.

“The ideal policy 'Would lb© that all the English-speaking communities should join In a systematic and scientific study of English speech, with a view to its future improvement and standardisation, throughout the Eng--11 ish-spea king wo -Id. Broadcasting, long-distance telephony, the talking film, and the gramophone, will malm standardisation possible,, and even comparatively easy to rotabli-sh. Every English-speaking school in the world will bo able to have samples of the now standard English to tench to its pupils; the ‘talkies’ will give to tlm world at large the latest and best in rational English—Hie latest thing in new words to clarify the mind, 1 instead of the latest thing in slang to surprise or shock it. If English were made in this way a really systematic language it would give a corresponding advantage in power of thought to all English-speaking people.”