AAR

[Eliza]

I'm adding this to my statements list:
"..that anyone can learn to communicate his ideas, clearly and for the most part correctly."

I also agree that (1) it first requires the desire to learn followed up by the effort to do so, and (2) that it's an on-going process, not one-stop shopping. At least for me, that is, obviously.

As for lay/lie in fiction (bring/take, etc.), I can tolerate mistakes in dialogue if it fits the character's general or occasional misuse of language, but it's a deal breaker for prose though. I expect far more from authors and editors. As for first person POV, I think it's hard to pull off well without it reflecting back on the author.

[Mark]

It occurred to me that the lay/lie errors I described in my logged errors thread provide evidence for the confusion argument over the argument that the incorrect intransitive use of lay is taught. More than one book with lay/lie errors has the errors in both directions: a form of lay where lie is correct and a form of lie where lay is correct. This is confusion, not a different usage taught as correct.
As I have said more than once in this thread, I don't expect fully correct grammar in dialogue and first-person narrative if the errors show aspects of characters.

[Karen Templeton]

Just a side note, from someone who writes what's called "deep" third-person POV: This is a technique in which the narrative, as well as dialogue, is always in the characters' voices -- not the author's. In other words, the characters are telling the story nearly as much as in first person -- grammatical quirks and all. Not to the same extent as in dialogue, perhaps, since that can get wearing, depending on the character, but enough that the reader should be able to identify whose POV she's reading at any point in the story.

So if, say, I'm writing a character from the deep South, or Brooklyn, or New England, or wherever, while I'm in that character's POV the narrative is going to reflect his/her syntax/speech patterns -- not mine. Basically I hear the characters, then transcribe their thoughts/observations...and if their grammar isn't always correct, so be it. Their voices need to be unique to them, and their syntax be consistent throughout the story.

BUT.

The writer who doesn't know the rules isn't going to effectively, or correctly, manipulate those rules. I am by no means an advocate of sloppy or ignorant usage. And the writer's goal is to be in control of her language toolbox, to know how to use those tools to achieve a desired effect. But "perfect" can be cold and boring, and would lead to all writers, and characters, sounding the same. And who wants that?

Karen Templeton
http://www.karentempleton.com

[Tee]

[Charlotte McClain]

Eliza, I chose the map based on visual similarity to the map I remember from my linguistics textbook which I kept, but which is currently a few thousand miles away from me in storage. I don't believe that local dialects are disappearing as fast as you might think. When I took the linguistics class, I read articles dating back as far as the invention of the telephone claiming that the new technology was going to kill local dialects. My professor and I were discussing the idea that the internet may intensify local dialects in phonology if not lexicologically because people are reading more than hearing. (I might have been professor's pet. )

Mark, of course I have studied intransitive verbs, however, language is learned through imitation before it is formally taught. The saw I heard most often was "dog lay, only people lie." Might have had something to do with Catholic education. However, 12 years of elementary through high school, a bachelor's degree in English/Secondary Education, a year toward a Master's degree in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages and multiple rounds of editing through 5 novels, 5 novellas and 1 short story cannot trump my parents, grandparents, sister, brother and other assorted relatives who got to me first and taught me the wrong thing. I'm not proud of it; it's actually kind of embarrassing, but I can't seem to fix it. (I also have math issues that I got from my mother. Can't fix that either.) The only thing I have been able to do is work around it. My students will not learn that particular verb from me. They will, however, come away with a peculiar pronunciation of "o" as /aw/ and possibly the constructions of "needs -ing" and "shut out the lights."
_________________
Angsty romance with scattered humor.
My Faux Website

[Tee]

[Mark]

More than one post in this thread has expressed the concern that perfect text would be boring. I don't see that at all. In fact, to me that sounds like the insistence by non-readers of romances that all romances must be the same. Text without errors is still as rich and varied as text with errors, it just doesn't have the stumbling blocks that jerk readers like me out of the flow.

[Karen Templeton]

[Eliza]

@Karen T: I couldn't agree more with you when you said, "The writer who doesn't know the rules isn't going to effectively, or correctly, manipulate those rules." Also, "And the writer's goal is to be in control of her language toolbox, to know how to use those tools to achieve a desired effect." Otherwise we wouldn't have books like Ulysses or The Sound and the Fury, right? As for "perfect," it may be unlikely for some but I would still like to think of authors with the talent to use grammar properly while controlling everything else involved without being cold or repetitive.

@Charlotte M: Thank you for getting back with further info on the map. If I had it to do over, I would have handled my post differently or not posted at all. Apologies if I offended you in any way. As for the Internet, cellphones, or other coming events, I guess only time will tell how sound and word usage may change. I'm all for celebrating differences; I just see the world as getting smaller rapidly.

ETA: Oh geez, Mark, I had a statement similar to yours again. At least this time I must have been writing while you were posting.

[Eggletina]

[Tee]

[Karen Templeton]

[dick]

I can see the guy's point. If we were to break up the compound, we'd mostly likely say "I take care of so and so" rather than "I give care to so and so." I.e., I assume responsibility for that person's care. And it's certainly true that doctors and nurses don't "give" care as a gift; in fact, the care is usually quite costly. It would be interesting to know where and with whom the compound originated.

[Mark]

The oldest example for caretaker in the OED is from 1858, but caretaking is at least a century older.
My OED doesn't have caregiver, even in the 1987 supplement, so it is definitely a neologism compared to caretaker.

[Eggletina]

Caregiver is indeed more recent. The Online Etymology Dictionary dates it as of 1974.