Americanisms In School

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31986, 13 May 1969, Page 16

Americanisms In School

Sir,—My interest in the letter over the name of “Vive la Difference” waned as soon as I read the word “motiviated” in the fourth line, as it did, too, in the Rev. Mr Sweet’s recent article on Borstal when I found he used “motivitation” no less than 41 times in his short article and was even capable of writing “. . . the milieu of change of motivation.” Surely your anti-parent correspondents do not applaud this sort of gibberish; nor can they condone the mispronunciation of simple words such as “subsidence,” “confidant,” “controversy,” etc., which we hear almost daily on the national news sessions. Since they gave up teaching English in the primary schools a very large percentage of young teachers are unable to speak English themselves, but I cannot see why those of us who admire our language should have to put up with “as of now,” “go slow,” “not that bad.” “watch out,” “he speaks like me,” etc. My sympathies are all with “Parent.”—Yours, etc., TREVOR W. STRINGER. May 12, 1969.

Sir,—H avi n g recently marked hundreds of term examination papers I am most grateful to “Parent” for having drawn attention to this problem. In the minds of most teachers and pupils as far as spelling is concerned confusion must reign. Many teachers using text-books from both English and North American sources for the same subject State flatly: “Spell it any way so long as I can understand it!” And pupils do just that. 1 suggest that a few people in authority, say the directors of technical, secondary, and primary education, go through the primary school spelling lists and a list of common technical and scientific terms, set down permissible options, and have these published in the “Education Gazette. Unless this is done the confusion will increase and spelling will go from worse to indescribable.— Yours, etc., J F.W. May 12, 1969.

Sir, —It is perfectly true that a language changes with every generation, -but it cannot be improved by substituting long words for short ones and prolix alternatives for pithy phrases. I hope that “Vive la Difference” will be in due course approached by his son for the purchase of an “automobile”—and, no doubt, this handy little word will quite properly take the place of “car” in our future speech. By the same token not only radio programmes but holidays, letters, and eventually life will come to be “finalised” instead of just ended. The type of diction known as “standard English” varies very little on either side of the Atlantic. Respect for the phonetic purity of

vowels is observed in both cases, and varies from the distortions noticeable in regional speech, whether it be Brooklyn, Lancashire, or Auckland. But the real point at issue is whether we keep to a reasonable brevity of expression rather than revert to the circumlocutory phraseology of the 18th century—without the latter’s respect for grammatical purity.— Yours, etc., CARACTACUS. May 12, 1969.

[This correspondence is now closed.—Ed., “The Press.”]