TedTest

From the Ted Talk by Andreea S. Calude: Does grammar matter?

Unscramble the Blue Letters

You're telling a friend an amazing story, and you just get to the best part when suddelny he interrupts, "The alien and I," not "Me and the ailen." Most of us would probably be annoyed, but aside from the rude interruption, does your freind have a point? Was your sentence actually grammatically incorrect? And if he still uenrdsootd it, why does it even matter? From the point of view of lscguniiits, grammar is a set of patterns for how words are put together to form phrases or clauses, whether spoken or in writing. Different languages have different patterns. In English, the subject normally comes first, followed by the verb, and then the object, while in Japanese and many other laeganugs, the order is subject, object, verb. Some scholars have tried to identify patterns common to all languages, but apart from some biasc features, like having nouns or verbs, few of these so-called linguistic universals have been found. And while any language needs consistent patterns to function, the study of these patterns opens up an oiongng debate between two positions known as prescriptivism and descriptivism. Grossly sfipimield, prescriptivists think a given language should follow consistent relus, while descriptivists see variation and adaptation as a natural and necessary part of language. For much of history, the vast majority of language was spoken. But as pelpoe became more interconnected and writing gained importance, written language was standardized to allow broader communication and ensure that people in different ptars of a realm could understand each other. In many languages, this standard form came to be considered the only proper one, despite being derived from just one of many spoken veeiritas, usually that of the people in power. Language purists worked to establish and propagate this standard by detailing a set of rules that reflected the eaitehslbsd grammar of their times. And rules for written grammar were applied to spoken lgnaugae, as well. Speech patterns that deviated from the werittn rules were considered corruptions, or signs of low social status, and many people who had gwron up speaking in these ways were forced to aodpt the standardized form. More recently, however, linguists have understood that speech is a separate phenomenon from writing with its own regularities and patterns. Most of us learn to speak at such an early age that we don't even remember it. We form our sopekn repertoire through unconscious habits, not memorized rules. And because speech also uses mood and intonation for mnnaeig, its structure is often more fiblelxe, adapting to the needs of sapkrees and listeners. This could mean aivoindg complex clauses that are hard to psrae in real time, making changes to avoid awkward pronounciation, or removing sdouns to make speech faster. The linguistic approach that tries to understand and map such differences without dictating corrcet ones is known as descriptivism. Rather than deciding how language should be used, it dbsrieecs how people actually use it, and tracks the innovations they come up with in the process. But while the debate between prescriptivism and descriptivism continues, the two are not mutually ecxivulse. At its best, prescriptivism is useful for informing people about the most common established pntaerts at a given point in time. This is important, not only for formal contexts, but it also makes communication eesiar between non-native speakers from different bnukadrogcs. dpiicessvrtim, on the other hand, gives us insight into how our minds work and the instinctive ways in which we structure our view of the world. Ultimately, grammar is best thought of as a set of linguistic habits that are constantly being ntgoeaetid and reinvented by the entire group of language uress. Like language itself, it's a wonderful and complex fabric woven through the contributions of speakers and lntiseers, wierrts and readers, prescriptivists and descriptivists, from both near and far.

Open Cloze

You're telling a friend an amazing story, and you just get to the best part when ________ he interrupts, "The alien and I," not "Me and the _____." Most of us would probably be annoyed, but aside from the rude interruption, does your ______ have a point? Was your sentence actually grammatically incorrect? And if he still __________ it, why does it even matter? From the point of view of ___________, grammar is a set of patterns for how words are put together to form phrases or clauses, whether spoken or in writing. Different languages have different patterns. In English, the subject normally comes first, followed by the verb, and then the object, while in Japanese and many other _________, the order is subject, object, verb. Some scholars have tried to identify patterns common to all languages, but apart from some _____ features, like having nouns or verbs, few of these so-called linguistic universals have been found. And while any language needs consistent patterns to function, the study of these patterns opens up an _______ debate between two positions known as prescriptivism and descriptivism. Grossly __________, prescriptivists think a given language should follow consistent _____, while descriptivists see variation and adaptation as a natural and necessary part of language. For much of history, the vast majority of language was spoken. But as ______ became more interconnected and writing gained importance, written language was standardized to allow broader communication and ensure that people in different _____ of a realm could understand each other. In many languages, this standard form came to be considered the only proper one, despite being derived from just one of many spoken _________, usually that of the people in power. Language purists worked to establish and propagate this standard by detailing a set of rules that reflected the ___________ grammar of their times. And rules for written grammar were applied to spoken ________, as well. Speech patterns that deviated from the _______ rules were considered corruptions, or signs of low social status, and many people who had _____ up speaking in these ways were forced to _____ the standardized form. More recently, however, linguists have understood that speech is a separate phenomenon from writing with its own regularities and patterns. Most of us learn to speak at such an early age that we don't even remember it. We form our ______ repertoire through unconscious habits, not memorized rules. And because speech also uses mood and intonation for _______, its structure is often more ________, adapting to the needs of ________ and listeners. This could mean ________ complex clauses that are hard to _____ in real time, making changes to avoid awkward pronounciation, or removing ______ to make speech faster. The linguistic approach that tries to understand and map such differences without dictating _______ ones is known as descriptivism. Rather than deciding how language should be used, it _________ how people actually use it, and tracks the innovations they come up with in the process. But while the debate between prescriptivism and descriptivism continues, the two are not mutually _________. At its best, prescriptivism is useful for informing people about the most common established ________ at a given point in time. This is important, not only for formal contexts, but it also makes communication ______ between non-native speakers from different ___________. _____________, on the other hand, gives us insight into how our minds work and the instinctive ways in which we structure our view of the world. Ultimately, grammar is best thought of as a set of linguistic habits that are constantly being __________ and reinvented by the entire group of language _____. Like language itself, it's a wonderful and complex fabric woven through the contributions of speakers and _________, _______ and readers, prescriptivists and descriptivists, from both near and far.

Solution

sounds
alien
people
writers
descriptivism
exclusive
established
parse
simplified
flexible
basic
correct
linguistics
backgrounds
avoiding
meaning
rules
understood
describes
written
languages
varieties
easier
friend
speakers
grown
patterns
spoken
suddenly
ongoing
language
negotiated
adopt
users
listeners
parts

Original Text

You're telling a friend an amazing story, and you just get to the best part when suddenly he interrupts, "The alien and I," not "Me and the alien." Most of us would probably be annoyed, but aside from the rude interruption, does your friend have a point? Was your sentence actually grammatically incorrect? And if he still understood it, why does it even matter? From the point of view of linguistics, grammar is a set of patterns for how words are put together to form phrases or clauses, whether spoken or in writing. Different languages have different patterns. In English, the subject normally comes first, followed by the verb, and then the object, while in Japanese and many other languages, the order is subject, object, verb. Some scholars have tried to identify patterns common to all languages, but apart from some basic features, like having nouns or verbs, few of these so-called linguistic universals have been found. And while any language needs consistent patterns to function, the study of these patterns opens up an ongoing debate between two positions known as prescriptivism and descriptivism. Grossly simplified, prescriptivists think a given language should follow consistent rules, while descriptivists see variation and adaptation as a natural and necessary part of language. For much of history, the vast majority of language was spoken. But as people became more interconnected and writing gained importance, written language was standardized to allow broader communication and ensure that people in different parts of a realm could understand each other. In many languages, this standard form came to be considered the only proper one, despite being derived from just one of many spoken varieties, usually that of the people in power. Language purists worked to establish and propagate this standard by detailing a set of rules that reflected the established grammar of their times. And rules for written grammar were applied to spoken language, as well. Speech patterns that deviated from the written rules were considered corruptions, or signs of low social status, and many people who had grown up speaking in these ways were forced to adopt the standardized form. More recently, however, linguists have understood that speech is a separate phenomenon from writing with its own regularities and patterns. Most of us learn to speak at such an early age that we don't even remember it. We form our spoken repertoire through unconscious habits, not memorized rules. And because speech also uses mood and intonation for meaning, its structure is often more flexible, adapting to the needs of speakers and listeners. This could mean avoiding complex clauses that are hard to parse in real time, making changes to avoid awkward pronounciation, or removing sounds to make speech faster. The linguistic approach that tries to understand and map such differences without dictating correct ones is known as descriptivism. Rather than deciding how language should be used, it describes how people actually use it, and tracks the innovations they come up with in the process. But while the debate between prescriptivism and descriptivism continues, the two are not mutually exclusive. At its best, prescriptivism is useful for informing people about the most common established patterns at a given point in time. This is important, not only for formal contexts, but it also makes communication easier between non-native speakers from different backgrounds. Descriptivism, on the other hand, gives us insight into how our minds work and the instinctive ways in which we structure our view of the world. Ultimately, grammar is best thought of as a set of linguistic habits that are constantly being negotiated and reinvented by the entire group of language users. Like language itself, it's a wonderful and complex fabric woven through the contributions of speakers and listeners, writers and readers, prescriptivists and descriptivists, from both near and far.

Frequently Occurring Word Combinations

Important Words

adaptation
adapting
adopt
age
alien
amazing
annoyed
applied
approach
avoid
avoiding
awkward
backgrounds
basic
broader
clauses
common
communication
complex
considered
consistent
constantly
contexts
continues
contributions
correct
corruptions
debate
deciding
derived
describes
descriptivism
descriptivists
detailing
deviated
dictating
differences
early
easier
english
ensure
entire
establish
established
exclusive
fabric
faster
features
flexible
follow
forced
form
formal
friend
function
gained
grammar
grammatically
grossly
group
grown
habits
hand
hard
history
identify
importance
important
incorrect
informing
innovations
insight
instinctive
interconnected
interruption
interrupts
intonation
japanese
language
languages
learn
linguistic
linguistics
linguists
listeners
majority
making
map
matter
meaning
memorized
minds
mood
mutually
natural
negotiated
nouns
object
ongoing
opens
order
parse
part
parts
patterns
people
phenomenon
phrases
point
positions
power
prescriptivism
prescriptivists
process
pronounciation
propagate
proper
purists
put
readers
real
realm
reflected
regularities
reinvented
remember
removing
repertoire
rude
rules
scholars
sentence
separate
set
signs
simplified
social
sounds
speak
speakers
speaking
speech
spoken
standard
standardized
status
story
structure
study
subject
suddenly
telling
thought
time
times
tracks
ultimately
unconscious
understand
understood
universals
users
variation
varieties
vast
verb
verbs
view
ways
wonderful
words
work
worked
world
woven
writers
writing
written