Letter: The 'superiority' of Standard English
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Your education correspondent quotes John Marenbon's attack upon a 'new orthodoxy' about English teaching 'which regards it as a conceptual error to speak of 'correct' English' and which regards Standard English as 'simply one dialect among many' (12 December).
That Standard English is one dialect among many is an empirical fact which presupposes the view that the English language consists of the sum of all its varieties in past and present use. Present-day Standard English evolved from one of the Middle English dialects. It carries the greatest prestige as the standard written form of the language for very good reasons. But from the linguistic point of view, its undeniable superiority is not intrinsic, but historically and socially determined.
The differences between Standard English and the regional dialects are minimal in relation to the whole vocabulary and grammar of the language, and they are also arbitrary. For example, why does Standard English require 'himself', not 'hisself', to match 'myself' and 'yourself', like some of the dialects? Why has it not made the past tense of 'be' regular: I were, you were, he were, we were, etc, or alternatively, I was, you was, he was, we was, etc, like some of the dialects? Why do Standard English speakers say 'aren't I?' but never 'I aren't'?
The answer to these examples does not lie in any superior logic in Standard English. It simply happens that the dialects, including the one that has become Standard English, have changed in different ways. It is axiomatic that living languages are in a constant state of change.
A belief that Standard English is one dialect among many in no way implies that it should not be properly taught in schools. However, as a quid pro quo, the regional dialects should be understood as the 'non-standard' varieties of English and worthy of serious objective study, not pejoratively labelled as 'sub-standard', 'incorrect' or 'corrupt'.
Yours faithfully,
DENNIS FREEBORN
Easingwold, York
13 December
The writer is a former chief examiner of A-level English language for the London Board
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments