View source for Linguistic prescription

{{Short description|Prescriptive rules of grammar and usage}}
{{Linguistics|Topics}}
{{Law sidebar}}

'''Linguistic prescription'''{{efn|Also called '''prescriptivism''' or '''prescriptive grammar'''.}} is the establishment of rules defining preferred [[Usage (language)|usage]] of [[language]].<ref>{{cite book|title=A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics|url=https://archive.org/details/dictionarylingui00crys_715|url-access=limited|given=David|surname=Crystal|publisher=Blackwell|edition=6th|year=2008|isbn=978-1-4051-5296-9|page=[https://archive.org/details/dictionarylingui00crys_715/page/n409 384]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics|given=Peter Hugoe|surname=Matthews|year=2007|page=316|isbn=978-0-19-920272-0}}</ref> These rules may address such linguistic aspects as [[spelling]], [[pronunciation]], [[vocabulary]], [[morphology (linguistics)|morphology]], [[syntax]], and [[semantics]]. Sometimes informed by [[linguistic purism]],<ref name="Janicki2006p155"/> such normative practices often propagate the belief that some usages are incorrect, inconsistent, illogical, lack communicative effect, or are of low aesthetic value, even in cases where such usage is more common than the prescribed usage.<ref name="Edwards2009p259"/><ref>{{cite book|first=Olivia|last=Walsh|title=Linguistic Purism: Language Attitudes in France and Quebec|year=2016|publisher=John Benjamins Publishing Company|pages=8–9|isbn=978-90-272-6673-6|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=FQHXDAAAQBAJ}}</ref> They may also include judgments on [[Etiquette|socially proper]] and [[Political correctness|politically correct]] language use.<ref>{{cite book|author=Jeffrey Reaser|author2=Carolyn Temple Adger|author3=Walt Wolfram|author4=Donna Christian|title=Dialects at School: Educating Linguistically Diverse Students|date=2017|publisher=Taylor & Francis|pages=117|isbn=978-1-317-67898-4|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zUAlDwAAQBAJ}}</ref>

Linguistic prescriptivism may aim to establish a [[standard language]], teach what a particular society or sector of a society perceives as a correct or proper form, or advise on effective and stylistically apt communication. If usage preferences are conservative, prescription might appear resistant to [[language change]]; if radical, it may produce [[neologism]]s.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thoughtco.com/purism-language-1691704|title = What is Purism in Language?}}</ref>

Prescriptive approaches to language are often contrasted with the [[Linguistic description|descriptive approach]], employed in [[Linguistics|academic linguistics]], which observes and records how language is actually used without any judgment.<ref name="McArthur1992p286">{{harvp|McArthur|1992|p=286}} entry for "Descriptivism and prescriptivism" quotation: "Contrasting terms in linguistics."</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Moch. Syarif Hidayatullah|title=Cakrawala Linguistik Arab (Edisi Revisi)|year=2017|publisher=Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia|pages=5–6, 18|isbn=978-602-452-369-5|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dLs8DwAAQBAJ|language=id}}</ref> The basis of linguistic research is text ([[text corpus|corpus]]) analysis and field study, both of which are descriptive activities. Description may also include researchers' observations of their own language usage. In the Eastern European linguistic tradition, the discipline dealing with standard language cultivation and prescription is known as "language culture" or "speech culture".<ref name=m>{{Cite web|first =Andrzej |last=Markowski|title=Językoznawstwo normatywne dziś i jutro: stan, zadania, szanse, zagrożenia|url=http://www.rjp.pan.pl/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=778:dyskusja-nad-referatem-prof-andrzeja-markowskiego-jzykoznawstwo-normatywne-dzi-i-jutro-stan-zadania-szanse-zagroenia&catid=79&Itemid=50|work=Konferencje i dyskusje naukowe|publisher=[[Polish Language Council]]|access-date=2019-02-22|language=pl}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|chapter-url=https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Speech+Culture|chapter=Speech Culture|title=The Great Soviet Encyclopedia|edition=3rd|year=1970–1979}}</ref>

Despite being apparent opposites, prescriptive and descriptive approaches have a certain degree of conceptual overlap<ref>{{Cite book |last=Cameron |first=Deborah |title=Verbal Hygiene |publisher=Routledge Linguistics Classics |year=2012 |isbn=978-0415696005}}</ref> as comprehensive descriptive accounts must take into account and record existing speaker preferences, and a prior understanding of how language is actually used is necessary for prescription to be effective. Since the mid-20th century some [[Dictionary|dictionaries]] and [[style guides]], which are prescriptive works by nature, have increasingly integrated descriptive material and approaches. Examples of guides updated to add more descriptive material include ''[[Webster's Third New International Dictionary]]'' (1961) and the third edition ''[[Garner's Modern English Usage]]'' (2009) in English, or the [[Petit Robert|''Nouveau Petit Robert'']] (1993)<ref>{{harv|Heinz|2003}}</ref> in French. A partially descriptive approach can be especially useful when approaching topics of ongoing conflict between authorities, or in different [[dialect]]s, disciplines, [[style (sociolinguistics)|styles]], or [[Register (sociolinguistics)|registers]]. Other guides, such as ''[[The Chicago Manual of Style]]'', are designed to impose a single style and thus remain primarily prescriptive ({{as of|lc=y|2017}}<!-- |reason=New edition of CMoS is coming out in late 2017 or early 2018; see what changes and update if necessary. -->).

Some authors define "prescriptivism" as the concept where a certain language variety is promoted as linguistically superior to others, thus recognizing the [[standard language ideology]] as a constitutive element of prescriptivism or even identifying prescriptivism with this system of views.<ref>{{cite book|title=Language, Society and Power: An Introduction|author=Annabelle Mooney|author2=Betsy Evans|publisher=Routledge|date=2018|isbn=978-0-429-82339-8|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nnd0DwAAQBAJ&q=standard+language+ideology}}</ref><ref name=kapovic>{{cite book|editor-first =Tvrtko|editor-last=Vuković|editor-first2=Maša|editor-last2=Kolanović|first =Mate|last= Kapović|chapter=Jezik i konzervativizam|title=Komparativni postsocijalizam: slavenska iskustva|publisher=Zagrebačka slavistička škola|pages=391–400|date=2013|chapter-url=https://www.lupiga.com/vijesti/jezik-i-konzervatizam-nije-tesko-vidjeti-da-je-jezicni-purizam-desni-politicki-projekt|access-date=9 November 2018|language=sh}}</ref> Others, however, use this term in relation to any attempts to recommend or mandate a particular way of language usage (in a specific [[context (language use)|context]] or [[register (sociolinguistics)|register]]), without, however, implying that these practices must involve propagating the standard language ideology.<ref>{{Cite book|title="Quality of language": The changing face of Quebec prescriptivism|first=Michael D.|last=Kliffer|publisher=McMaster University|pages=1|url=https://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~kliffer/716/kliffer2008.pdf|access-date=2018-11-09|archive-date=2020-01-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200108002827/https://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~kliffer/716/kliffer2008.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|first=John|last=McIntyre|title=Prescription for prescriptivists|url=http://www.baltimoresun.com/bs-mtblog-2011-09-prescription_for_prescriptivists-story.html|publisher=Baltimore Sun|date=1 September 2011|access-date=6 November 2018|archive-date=6 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200106041821/https://www.baltimoresun.com/bs-mtblog-2011-09-prescription_for_prescriptivists-story.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> According to another understanding, the prescriptive attitude is an approach to norm-formulating and [[codification (linguistics)|codification]] that involves imposing arbitrary rulings upon a [[speech community]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Kordić |first=Snježana |author-link=Snježana Kordić |editor1-last=Symanzik |editor1-first=Bernhard |title=Studia Philologica Slavica: Festschrift für Gerhard Birkfellner zum 65. Geburtstag gewidmet von Freunden, Kollegen und Schülern: Teilband I |series=Münstersche Texte zur Slavistik, vol. 4 |publisher=Lit |pages=339–347 |language=de |chapter=Sprache und Nationalismus in Kroatien |trans-chapter=Language and Nationalism in Croatia |chapter-url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426593.SPRACHE_UND_NATIONALISM.PDF |location=Berlin |year=2006 |isbn=3-8258-9891-1 |oclc=315818880 |ssrn=3438896 |id={{CROSBI|426593}} |archive-date=1 June 2012 |url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120601175342/http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426593.SPRACHE_UND_NATIONALISM.PDF |access-date=4 January 2013 }}</ref> as opposed to more liberal approaches that draw heavily from descriptive surveys;<ref>{{cite book|first =Beata|last= Jezierska|title=Frazeologizmy w polskich przekładach współczesnej prozy francuskiej (na wybranych przykładach)|location=Poznań|year=2016|publisher=Wydział Filologii Polskiej i Klasycznej: Instytut Filologii Polskiej|pages=97–99|language=pl|hdl= 10593/14690}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Kordić |first=Snježana |author-link=Snježana Kordić |year=2018|origyear=1st pub. 2010 |language=sh |title=Jezik i nacionalizam |trans-title=Language and Nationalism |url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/475567.Jezik_i_nacionalizam.pdf |url-status=live |series=Rotulus Universitas |location=Zagreb |publisher=Durieux |pages=57–68 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.3467646 |isbn=978-953-188-311-5 |lccn=2011520778 |oclc=729837512 |ol=15270636W |s2cid=220918333 |id={{CROSBI|475567}} |archive-date=3 March 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303183918/http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/475567.Jezik_i_nacionalizam.pdf |access-date=6 April 2022}}</ref> in a wider sense, however, the latter also constitute a form of prescriptivism.<ref name=m />

[[Mate Kapović]] makes a distinction between "prescription" and "prescriptivism", defining the former as "a process of codification of a certain variety of language for some sort of official use", and the latter as "an unscientific tendency to mystify linguistic prescription".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kapović |first1=Mate |title=Ideology in Grammar |journal=Paris-Lodron-Universität Salzburg |date=April 2014 |page=8 |url=https://www.plus.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Book_of_abstracts.pdf |access-date=14 December 2023 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231214135723/https://www.plus.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Book_of_abstracts.pdf | archive-date=14 December 2023}}</ref>

==Aims==
Linguistic prescription is a part of a language standardization process.<ref>{{Cite book |author=Carol Percy |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EShoDQAAQBAJ |title=Prescription and Tradition: Establishing Standards across Time and Space |author2=Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade |publisher=Multilingual Matters |year=2016 |isbn=978-1-78309-652-7 |series=Multilingual Matters |page=3}}</ref> The chief aim of linguistic prescription is to specify socially preferred language forms (either generally, as in [[Standard English]], or in [[Style (sociolinguistics)|style]] and [[Register (sociolinguistics)|register]]) in a way that is easily taught and learned.<ref>{{harvp|McArthur|1992|pp=979, 982–983}}</ref> Prescription may apply to most aspects of language, including spelling, pronunciation, vocabulary, morphology, syntax, and semantics.

Prescription is useful for facilitating inter-regional communication, allowing speakers of divergent [[dialects]] to understand a [[standard language|standardized idiom]] used in [[broadcasting]], for example, more readily than each other's dialects. {{Citation needed|date=April 2020}} While such a [[lingua franca]] may evolve by itself, the tendency to formally [[codification (linguistics)|codify]] and normalize it is widespread in most parts of the world.{{citation needed|date=April 2020}} Foreign language instruction is also considered a form of prescription, since it involves instructing learners how to speak, based on usage documentation laid down by others.<ref>{{Cite book|author=Jeanette Sakel|title=Study Skills for Linguistics|series=Understanding Language|isbn=978-1-317-53009-1|year=2015|publisher=Routledge|page=34|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8JasBwAAQBAJ|language=en}}</ref>

Linguistic prescription may also be used to advance a social or political ideology. Throughout history, prescription has been created around high-class language, and therefore it degeneralizes lower-class language. This has led to many justifications of [[Class discrimination|classism]], as the lower-class can easily be portrayed to be incoherent and improper if they do not speak the standard language. This also corresponds to the use of prescription for [[racism]], as dialects spoken by what is seen as the superior race are usually standardized in countries with prominent racism. A good example of this is the demeaning of [[African-American Vernacular English|AAVE]] in the [[United States]], as the idea that the "lower race" speaks improperly is propagated by people with an opposing ideology.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.swarthmore.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/linguistics/The%20Role%20of%20Linguists%20in%20Social%20Movements%20What%20Role%20Does%20Language%20Truly%20Play.pdf|format=PDF|title=The Role of Linguists in Social Movements: What Role Does Language Truly Play?|author=Dylan Clairmont|website=Swarthmore.edu|access-date=27 July 2022}}</ref> Later, during the second half of the 20th century, efforts driven by various [[advocacy groups]] had considerable influence on language use under the broad banner of "[[political correctness]]", to promote special rules for [[Gender-neutral language|anti-sexist]], [[anti-racist]], or generically anti-[[Discrimination|discriminatory]] language (e.g. "[[people-first language]]" as advocated by disability rights organizations).{{Citation needed|date=September 2017}}

==Authority==
[[File:Real Academia Española, Madrid - view 2.JPG|thumb|left|170px|The Royal Spanish Academy, Madrid]]
Prescription presupposes authorities whose judgments may come to be followed by many other speakers and writers. For English, these authorities tend to be books. [[Henry Watson Fowler|H. W. Fowler]]'s ''[[Fowler's Modern English Usage|Modern English Usage]]'' was widely taken as an authority for [[British English]] for much of the 20th century;<ref>{{harvp|McArthur|1992|p=414}}</ref> [[William Strunk Jr.|Strunk]] and [[E. B. White|White]]'s ''[[The Elements of Style]]'' has done similarly for [[American English]].{{Citation needed|date=November 2017}} The ''[[Duden]]'' grammar (first edition 1880) has a similar status for German.

Although [[lexicography|lexicographers]] often see their work as purely descriptive, dictionaries are widely regarded as prescriptive authorities.<ref>{{cite book|author1=Lyngfelt, Benjamin |author2=Bäckström, Linnéa |author3=Borin, Lars |author4=Ehrlemark, Anna |author5=Rydstedt, Rudolf |editor1= Lyngfelt, Benjamin |editor2=Borin, Lars |editor3=Ohara, Kyoko |editor4=Torrent, Tiago Timponi | series = Constructional Approaches to Language | chapter = Constructicography at work: Theory meets practice in the Swedish constructicon | title = Constructicography: Constructicon development across languages | year = 2018 | isbn = 9789027201003 | volume = 22 | location = Amsterdam | publisher = John Benjamins Publishing Company | page = 59 | doi = 10.1075/cal.22.03lyn |s2cid=65878707 | language = en}}</ref> Books such as [[Lynne Truss]]'s ''[[Eats, Shoots & Leaves]]'' (2003), which argues for stricter adherence to prescriptive [[punctuation]] rules, also seek to exert an influence.

=== Formal regulation ===
{{Main|List of language regulators}}
Linguistic prescription is imposed by regulation in some places. The ''[[Académie française|French Academy]]'' in Paris is the national body in [[France]] whose recommendations about the [[French language]] are often followed in the [[Francophonie|French-speaking world (francophonie)]], though not legally enforceable. In [[Germany]] and the [[Netherlands]], recent spelling and punctuation reforms, such as [[German orthography reform of 1996|the German orthographic reform of 1996]], were devised by teams of linguists commissioned by the respective governments and then implemented by statutes, some met with widespread dissent.

Examples of national prescriptive bodies and initiatives are:
* [[Afrikaans]]: The [[Die Taalkommissie|''Taalkommissie'']] (Language Commission) is responsible for the compilation of the ''[[Afrikaanse Woordelys en Spelreëls]]'' (Afrikaans Word-list and Spelling Rules), an [[orthography]] of formal, standardized Afrikaans. 
* [[Albanian language|Albanian]]: The Social Sciences and Albanological Section of the [[Academy of Sciences of Albania]] for the [[Tosk]] variety of the [[Albanian language|Albanian]] standard language.
* [[Canadian French]]: The {{lang|fr|[[Office québécois de la langue française]]}} in the Canadian province of [[Québec]], where French is perceived to be particularly threatened by the incursion of English.
* [[Dutch language|Dutch]]: In the Netherlands and the Flanders region of Belgium, standardized spelling norms are compulsory for government publications and in education (see [[Wordlist of the Dutch language]]). The Flemish press and other media also adhere to these rules. In the Netherlands, however, some media apply a slightly adapted spelling, as outlined in the [[White Booklet]].
* [[French language|French]]: The recommendations of the {{lang|fr|Académie française}}, a national body, are legally unenforceable, but they are often followed by [[standard French]] speakers.
* [[German language|German]]: The [[German orthography reform of 1996]] established statutory national normative spelling usages for each of the German-speaking countries (Germany, Austria, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, and Belgium). It has, however, been comprehensively disregarded by many people; in relevance, it became so controversial in the federal state of [[Schleswig-Holstein]] that in a [[plebiscite]] held there in 1998 56.4% of voters opposed its implementation. Notwithstanding, the Schleswig-Holstein parliament reversed the referendum outcome in 1999. Many major German newspapers chose to implement the reforms only partially (e.g. [[Axel Springer AG]], [[Der Spiegel]]) or to reject it entirely, ending a period when combined German spelling, although officially only necessary in government and educational use, was the widespread ''de facto'' standard.
* [[Italian language|Italian]]: The ''[[Accademia della Crusca|Academy of the Bran (Accademia della Crusca)]]'', the Italian language academic body.
* [[Polish language|Polish]]: The [[Polish Language Council]] for standard [[Polish language|Polish]], which aims to popularize Polish language knowledge, issue prescriptions for standard usage ({{langx|pl|poprawna polszczyzna}}, lit. "correct Polish") and formulate normative orthography.<ref>{{Cite web|publisher=Polish Language Council|title=Podstawowe informacje o Radzie|url=http://www.rjp.pan.pl/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=212&catid=36&Itemid=73|access-date=2019-01-27|language=pl}}</ref> The Polish prescriptive policy recognizes two normative subvarieties of standard Polish: the "model/official norm" ({{langx|pl|norma wzorcowa}}) and the "colloquial/vernacular norm" ({{langx|pl|norma użytkowa}}), with the former being a highly traditionalistic idiom for written language and public usage, and the latter being a more liberal idiom for private contexts that is more permissive for loanwords and deviations from "traditional" usage.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VUA59WvmQOQC|first=Władysław |last=Chłopicki|chapter=Polish Under Siege?|series=Translating Europe|title=In and Out of English: For Better, for Worse?|editor=Gunilla Anderman|editor2=Margaret Rogers|pages=110|year=2005|isbn=978-1-85359-787-9|publisher=Multilingual Matters}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://eduentuzjasci.pl/images/stories/analizy/dobkowska-hacia-ocena-poprawnosci-jezykowej-prac-dkg.pdf|title=Ocena poprawności językowej prac egzaminacyjnych uczniów III klasy gimnazjum: wewnętrznojęzykowe przyczyny trudności w ocenie, wyniki zastosowania skali egzaminacyjnej, zalecenia dla systemu egzaminacyjnego|first1=Joanna|last1=Dąbrowska|first2=Agata |last2=Hącia|journal=Edukacja|volume=2|issue=118|issn=0239-6858|year=2012|pages=96–97|language=pl}}</ref> According to the Polish language ideology, the latter is also considered to include regional usages.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.dialektologia.uw.edu.pl/index.php?l1=leksykon&lid=674|title=Regionalizm|first=Halina|last=Karaś|work=Dialektologia polska|access-date=2019-01-27|language=pl}}</ref>
* [[Portuguese Language|Portuguese]]: The [[Portuguese Language Orthographic Agreement of 1990]] sets a standard orthography for the language, it has been made into law in both Brazil (2009) and Portugal (2008).
* [[Romanian language|Romanian]]: The [[Romanian Academy]] for standard [[Romanian language|Romanian]], whose interpretations and instructions are approved by the Romanian state and other substances where Romanian is authoritatively recognized (e.g. the [[European Union]] and [[Vojvodina]]). In the [[Republic of Moldova|Moldovan Republic]], the only country besides Romania where Romanian is the state language, it is officially called "[[Moldovan language|Moldovan]]" and is monitored by the Institute of Linguistics of [[Academy of Sciences of Moldova]].
* [[Russian language|Russian]]: The [[Union of Soviet Writers]] policed the [[Russian language]] with linguistic prescription to establish a [[Standard Russian#Standard Russian|standardized Russian language]] during the [[History of the Soviet Union|era of the Soviet Union]].
* [[Spanish language|Spanish]]: The ''[[Real Academia Española]]'' in affiliation with the [[Association of Spanish Language Academies]] for standard [[Spanish language|Spanish]] in 21 countries.
*[[Turkish language|Turkish]]: The [[Turkish Language Association]], founded in 1932<ref>{{Cite web|title=Tarihçe – Türk Dil Kurumu|url=https://www.tdk.gov.tr/tdk/kurumsal/tarihce-2/|access-date=2021-12-10|website=www.tdk.gov.tr|archive-date=2019-02-18|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190218150617/https://www.tdk.gov.tr/tdk/kurumsal/tarihce-2/|url-status=dead}}</ref> by [[Mustafa Kemal Atatürk|Atatürk]], regulates the Turkish language.

=== Style manuals ===
{{Main|Style guide}}
Other kinds of authorities exist in specific settings, most commonly in the form of style guidebooks (also called style guides, manuals of style, style books, or style sheets).  Style guides vary in form, and may be alphabetical usage dictionaries, comprehensive manuals divided into numerous subsection by the facet of language, or very compact works insistent upon only a few matters of particular importance to the publisher.  Some aim to be comprehensive only for a specific field, deferring to more general-audience guides on matters that are not particular to the discipline in question.  There are different types of style guides, by purpose and audience. Because the genres of writing and the audiences of each manual are different, style manuals often conflict with each other, even within the same [[vernacular]] of English.

Many publishers have established an internal [[Style guide|house style]] specifying preferred spellings and grammatical forms, such as [[serial comma]]s, how to write [[acronym]]s, and various awkward expressions to avoid.  Most of these are internal documentation for the publisher's staff, though various newspapers, universities, and other organizations have made theirs available for public inspection, and sometimes even sell them as books, e.g. ''[[The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage]]'' and ''[[The Economist]] Style Guide''.

In a few cases, an entire publishing sector complies with a publication that originated as a house style manual, such as ''[[The Chicago Manual of Style]]'' and ''[[New Hart's Rules]]'' in non-fiction book publishing in the United States and the United Kingdom, respectively, and ''[[The Associated Press Stylebook]]'' in American [[news style]]. Others are by self-appointed advocates whose rules are propagated in the popular press, as in "[[proper Cantonese pronunciation]]".  The aforementioned Fowler, and Strunk & White, were among the self-appointed, as are some modern authors of style works, like [[Bryan A. Garner]] and his ''Modern English Usage'' (formerly ''Modern American Usage'').

Various style guides are used for academic papers and professional journals and have become ''de facto'' standards in particular fields, though the bulk of their material pertains to formatting of source citations (in mutually conflicting ways). Some examples are those issued by the [[American Medical Association]], the [[Modern Language Association]], and the [[Modern Humanities Research Association]]; there are many others. ''[[Scientific Style and Format]]'', by the Council of Science Editors, seeks to normalize style in scientific journal publishing, based where possible on standards issued by bodies like the [[International Standards Organization]].

None of these works have any sort of legal or regulatory authority (though some governments produce their own house style books for internal use). They still have authority in the sense that a student may be marked down for failure to follow a specified style manual; a professional publisher may enforce compliance; a publication may require its employees to use house style as a matter of on-the-job competence. A well-respected style guide, and usually one intended for a general audience, may also have the kind of authority that a dictionary does consult as a reference work to satisfy personal curiosity or settle an argument.

==Origins==
Historically, linguistic prescriptivism originates in a standard language when a society establishes [[social stratification]] and a socio-economic [[hierarchy]]. The spoken and written language usages of the [[Authority|authorities]] (state, military, church) is preserved as the standard language. Departures from this standard language may jeopardize social success (see [[social class]]). Sometimes, [[archaism]]s and [[honorific]] stylizations may be deliberately introduced or preserved to distinguish the prestige form of the language from contemporary [[colloquial language]]. Likewise, the [[Stylistics (literature)|style]] of language used in [[ritual]] also differs from everyday speech.<ref>See, generally, Marianne Mithun, ''The Languages of Native North America'' (Cambridge University Press, 1999; {{ISBN|0-521-23228-7}}) for North American examples of ritual speech.</ref> Special [[Sacred language|ceremonial languages]] known only to a select few spiritual leaders are found throughout the world; [[Liturgical Latin]] has served a similar function for centuries.

[[File:Hanzi.svg|thumb|150px|left|Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese characters]]
When a culture develops a writing system, [[Orthography|orthographic]] rules for the consistent transcription of culturally important transactions (laws, scriptures, contracts, poetry, etc.) allow a large number of discussants to understand written conversations easily, and across multiple generations.

Early historical trends in literacy and alphabetization were closely tied to the influence of various religious institutions. [[Western Christianity]] propagated the [[Latin alphabet]]. [[Eastern Orthodoxy]] spread the [[Greek alphabet|Greek]] and [[Cyrillic script|Cyrillic]] alphabets. [[Judaism]] used the [[Hebrew alphabet]], and [[Islam]] the [[Arabic alphabet|Arabic script]]. [[Hinduism]] used the [[Devanagari|Devanagari script]].<ref>[[David Diringer]], ''The Alphabet: A Key to the History of Mankind'' (1947; South Asia, reprinted 1996); {{ISBN|81-215-0748-0}}</ref> In certain traditions, strict adherence to prescribed spellings and pronunciations was and remains of great spiritual importance. Islamic naming conventions and greetings are notable examples of the linguistic prescription being a prerequisite to spiritual righteousness. Another commonly cited example of prescriptive language usage closely associated with social propriety is the system of [[honorific speech in Japanese|Japanese honorific speech]].

Most, if not all, widely spoken languages demonstrate some degree of social codification in how they conform to prescriptive rules. [[Prestige (sociolinguistics)|Linguistic prestige]] is a central research topic within [[sociolinguistics]]. Notions of linguistic prestige apply to different dialects of the same language and also to separate, distinct languages in multilingual regions. Prestige level disparity often leads to ''[[diglossia]]'': speakers in certain social contexts consciously choose a prestige language or dialect over a less prestigious one, even if it is their native tongue.

[[File:Egypt Hieroglyphe2.jpg|thumb|150px|right|Ptolemaic hieroglyphics from the [[Temple of Kom Ombo]]]]
Government [[bureaucracy]] tends toward prescriptivism as a means of enforcing functional continuity. Such prescriptivism dates from [[Egyptian language|ancient Egypt]], where bureaucrats preserved the spelling of the [[Middle Kingdom of Egypt]] into the [[Ptolemaic period]] through the standard usage of [[Egyptian hieroglyphics]].<ref>Allen, James P., ''Middle Egyptian – An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hieroglyphs'', (Cambridge University Press, 1999) {{ISBN|0-521-65312-6}}</ref>

==Sources==
From the earliest attempts at prescription in classical times grammarians have based their norms on observed prestige use of language. Modern prescriptivist textbooks{{Which|date=April 2018}} draw heavily on descriptive linguistic analysis.

The prescription may privilege some existing forms over others for the sake of maximizing clarity and precision in language use. Others are subjective judgments of what constitutes good taste. Some reflect the promotion of one class or region within a language community over another, which can become politically controversial.

Prescription can also reflect ethical considerations, as in prohibiting [[Profanity|swear words]]. Words referring to elements of sexuality or toilet hygiene may be regarded as obscene. Blasphemies against religion may be forbidden. In the 21st century, [[politically correct|political correctness]] objects to the use of words perceived as offensive.{{sfnp|McArthur|1992|p=794}}

Some elements of prescription in English are sometimes thought{{by whom|date=February 2015}} to have been based on the norms of [[Latin grammar]]. [[Robert Lowth]] is frequently cited {{by whom|date=May 2020}}{{citation needed|date=May 2020}} as having done so,{{clarify|date=September 2016}} but he specifically objected to "forcing the English under the rules of a foreign Language".<ref>''A Short Introduction to English Grammar'', p. 107, condemning [[Richard Bentley]]'s "corrections" of some of [[John Milton|Milton]]'s constructions.</ref>

==Criticisms==
Prescriptivism is often subject to criticism. Many linguists, such as [[Geoffrey Pullum]] and other posters to [[Language Log]], are highly skeptical of the quality of advice given in many usage guides, including highly regarded books like Strunk and White's ''[[The Elements of Style]]''.<ref>{{Citation|last = Pullum|first = Geoffrey|author-link = Geoffrey K. Pullum|title = 50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice|newspaper = The Chronicle of Higher Education|date = April 17, 2009|url = http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-Grammar/25497/|access-date = July 25, 2011}}</ref> In particular, linguists point out that popular books on English usage written by journalists or novelists (e.g. [[Simon Heffer]]'s ''Strictly English: The Correct Way to Write ... and Why It Matters'') often make basic errors in linguistic analysis.<ref>{{Citation|last = Pullum|first = Geoffrey|author-link = Geoffrey K. Pullum|title = English grammar: not for debate|date = September 11, 2010|url = http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2623|access-date = July 25, 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{Citation|last = Pullum|first = Geoffrey|author-link = Geoffrey Pullum|title = Strictly incompetent: pompous garbage from Simon Heffer|date = November 15, 2010|url = http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2780|access-date = July 25, 2011 }}</ref>

A frequent criticism is that prescription has a tendency to favor the language of one particular area or social class over others, and thus militates against linguistic diversity.<ref>{{harvp|McArthur|1992|pp=984–985}}</ref> Frequently, a standard dialect is associated with the [[upper class]], for example the [[United Kingdom]]'s [[Received Pronunciation]] (RP). RP has now lost much of its status as the Anglophone standard, and other standards are now alternative systems for [[English as a foreign language]]. Although these have a more democratic base, they still exclude the vast majority of the English-speaking world: speakers of [[Scottish English]], [[Hiberno-English]], [[Appalachian English]], [[Australian English]], [[Indian English]], [[Nigerian English]] or [[African-American English]] may feel the standard is arbitrarily selected or slanted against them.<ref>{{harvp|McArthur|1992|pp=850–853}}</ref><ref>''Fowler's Modern English Usage'', second edition, Ernest Gowers, ed., Oxford University Press: 1965, pp. 505–506</ref> Therefore, prescription has political consequences; indeed, it can be—and has been—used consciously as a political tool.{{citation needed|date=January 2024}}

A second issue with prescriptivism is that it tends to explicitly devalue [[non-standard dialect]]s. It has been argued that prescription, apart from formulating [[standard language]] norms, often attempts to influence speakers to apply the proposed linguistic devices invariably, without considering the existence of different [[variety (linguistics)|varieties]] and [[register (sociolinguistics)|registers]] of language. While some linguists approve the practical role of language standardization in modern nation states,<ref name=kapovic /><ref name="lyons">{{cite book|first=John|last=Lyons|author-link=John Lyons (linguist) |title=Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics|year=1968|publisher=Cambridge University Press|pages=42–44|isbn=978-0-521-29775-2|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VGkkjkLPZkoC}}</ref> certain models of [[codification (linguistics)|prescriptive codification]] have been criticized for going far beyond mere norm-setting, i.e. by promoting the sanctioned language variety as the only legitimate means of communication and presenting it as the only valid baseline of correctness, while stigmatizing non-standard usages as "[[error (linguistics)|mistakes]]".<ref>{{cite journal |author=Kordić, Snježana |author-link=Snježana Kordić |title=Purismo e censura linguistica in Croazia oggi |trans-title=Purism and censorship of language in Croatia nowadays |journal=Studi Slavistici |volume=5 |pages=281–297 |year=2008 |url=http://www.fupress.net/index.php/ss/article/view/2943/8774 |language=it |issn=1824-761X |oclc=835514860 |ssrn=3445779 |id={{CROSBI|427285}}. {{ZDB|2182164-1}} |archive-date=21 September 2013 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130921185139/http://www.fupress.net/index.php/ss/article/view/2943/8774 |access-date=9 May 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Kordić|first=Snježana|author-link=Snježana Kordić|language=es|title=Lengua y Nacionalismo|trans-title=Language and Nationalism|series=Bibliotheca Balcanica; 1|publisher=Doxa & Episteme|year=2021|origyear=1st pub. 2014|page=553|translator=Juan Cristóbal Díaz Beltrán|asin=B09NNTBYYP}} [1st pub {{OL|16814702W}}. {{ISBN|978-84-936668-8-0}}. {{CROSBI|694545}}.]</ref><ref name=kapovic /> Such practices have been said to contribute to perpetuating the belief that non-codified forms of language are innately inferior, creating social stigma and discrimination toward their speakers.<ref>{{Cite book|first=Asif|last=Agha|title=Language and Social Relations|pages=146–147|publisher=Cambridge University Press|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cm4JlkgSKPAC|year=2007|isbn=9780521576857}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Book Review Digest|volume=83|year=1987|publisher=H.W. Wilson Company|pages=1291|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=T2UOAQAAMAAJ}}</ref> In contrast, modern linguists would generally hold that all forms of language, including both vernacular dialects and different realizations of a standardized variety, are scientifically equal as instruments of communication, even if deemed socially inappropriate for certain situational contexts.<ref>{{Cite book|author=Vershawn Ashanti Young|author2=Rusty Barrett|author3=Y'Shanda Young-Rivera|author4=Kim Brian Lovejoy|title=Other People's English: Code-Meshing, Code-Switching, and African American Literacy|year=2013|publisher=Teachers College Press|isbn=978-0-8077-5502-0|page=20|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5kVeAgAAQBAJ}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|first1 =Susan|last1= Tamasi|first2=Lamont|last2=Antieau|title=Language and Linguistic Diversity in the US: An Introduction|year=2014|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-136-57904-2|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eCtWBQAAQBAJ&q=equal}}</ref> Resulting in [[standard language ideology]], normative practices might also give rise to the conviction that explicit formal instruction is an essential prerequisite for acquiring proper command of one's native language, thus creating a massive feeling of [[linguistic insecurity]].<ref name=lor>{{cite book|first=Loreta|last=Vaicekauskienė|title=Multiple Perspectives in Linguistic Research on Baltic Languages|chapter=‘Good Language’ and Insecure Speakers: A Study into Metalinguistic Awareness of TV and Radio Journalists in the Context of Language Monitoring in Lithuania|pages=78–80|year=2012|publisher=Cambridge Scholars Publishing|chapter-url=http://lki.lt/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/vaicekauskiene_Good_Language.pdf}}</ref> Propagating such [[language ideology|language attitudes]] is characteristic of the prescriptivists in [[Eastern Europe]], where normativist ideas of correctness can be found even among professional linguists.<ref name=lor /><ref>{{cite book |last=Kordić |first=Snježana |author-link=Snježana Kordić |editor1-last=Bierich |editor1-first=Alexander |title=Varietäten im Slavischen |series=Heidelberger Publikationen zur Slavistik, Linguistische Reihe, vol. 17 |publisher=Peter Lang |pages=313–330 |language=sh |chapter=Što je (ne)standardno za kroatiste? |trans-chapter=What is (non)standard for Croatists? |chapter-url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426280.STO_JE_NESTANDARDNO_ZA.PDF |location=Frankfurt am Main |year=2009 |isbn=978-3-631-57010-4 |lccn=2009502912 |oclc=319695935 |s2cid=149127460 |ssrn=3439290 |id={{CROSBI|426280}} |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120601180535/http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426280.STO_JE_NESTANDARDNO_ZA.PDF |url-status=live |archive-date=1 June 2012 |url=http://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/426280.STO_JE_NESTANDARDNO_ZA.PDF |access-date=8 August 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|journal=Multilingua|first=Miklós |last=Kontra|volume=19|title=Language contact in East-Central Europe|year=2000|pages=193|publisher=Mouton Publishers|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oQkLAQAAMAAJ}}</ref>

Another serious issue with prescription is that prescriptive rules quickly become entrenched and it is difficult to change them when the language changes. Thus, there is a tendency for prescription to lag behind the [[vernacular|vernacular language]]. In 1834, an anonymous writer advised against the [[split infinitive]], reasoning that the construction was not a frequent feature of English as he knew it. Today the construction is in [[usus|everyday use]] and generally considered standard usage, yet the old prohibition can still be heard.<ref>{{Cite book|first =Jack|last=Lynch|title=The Lexicographer's Dilemma: The Evolution of 'Proper' English, from Shakespeare to South Park|year=2009|publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing|isbn=978-0-8027-1963-8|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iwR89Oe_bVYC}}</ref>

A further problem is a challenge of specifying understandable criteria. Although prescribing authorizations may have clear ideas about why they make a particular choice, and their choices are seldom entirely arbitrary, there exists no linguistically sustainable metric for ascertaining which forms of language should be considered standard or otherwise preferable. Judgments that seek to resolve ambiguity or increase the ability of the language to make subtle distinctions are easier to defend. Judgments based on the subjective associations of a word are more problematic.{{Citation needed|date=May 2018}}

Finally, there is the problem of inappropriate dogmatism. Although competent authorities tend to make careful statements, popular pronouncements on language are apt to condemn. Thus, wise prescriptive advice identifying a form as colloquial or non-standard and suggesting that it be used with caution in some contexts may – when taken up in the classroom – become converted into a ruling that the dispreferred form is automatically unacceptable in all circumstances, a view academic linguists reject.<ref>{{cite journal|journal=Slavia Centralis|volume=IV/2|first =Mate |last=Kapović|title=Language, Ideology and Politics in Croatia|year=2011|pages=46–48|url=https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/566935.SCN_2_2011_Kapovic.pdf}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|first =Mate|last= Kapović|title=Čiji je jezik|publisher=Algoritam|location=Zagreb|edition=1st|year=2010|isbn=978-953-316-282-9|pages=37–54|url=https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/503036.Kapovic_Ciji_je_jezik.pdf|language=sh}}</ref> (Linguists may accept that a construction is ungrammatical or incorrect in relation to a certain lect if it does not conform to its inherent rules, but they would not consider it absolutely wrong simply because it diverges from the norms of a prestige variety.)<ref name=lyons /> A classic example from 18th-century England is Robert Lowth's tentative suggestion that [[preposition stranding]] in [[English relative clauses|relative clauses]] sounds colloquial. This blossomed into a grammatical rule that a sentence should never end with a preposition.{{citation needed|date=December 2018}} 

[[File:Dr-Johnson.jpg|thumb|upright|right|Samuel Johnson, c. 1772]]
For these reasons, some writers argue that linguistic prescription is foolish or futile. [[Samuel Johnson]] commented on the tendency of some prescription to resist language change:

{{blockquote|When we see men grow old and die at a certain time one after another, from century to century, we laugh at the elixir that promises to prolong life to a thousand years; and with equal justice may the [[Lexicography|lexicographer]] be derided, who is able to produce no example of a nation that has preserved their words and phrases from mutability, shall imagine that his dictionary can embalm his language, and secure it from corruption and decay, that it is in his power to change sublunary nature, and clear the world at once from folly, vanity, and affectation.

With this hope, however, [[List of language regulators|academies]] have been instituted, to guard the avenues of their languages, to retain fugitives, and repulse intruders; but their vigilance and activity have hitherto been vain; sounds remain too volatile and subtle for legal restraints; to enchain syllables, and to lash the wind, are equally the undertakings of pride, unwilling to measure its desires by its strength. The French language has visibly changed under the inspection of the [[Académie française|academy]]; the stile of [[Abraham Nicolas Amelot de la Houssaye|Amelot]]'s translation of [[Paolo Sarpi|Father Paul]] is witnessed, by [[Pierre François le Courayer]] to be ''un peu passé''; and no Italian will maintain that the diction of any modern writer is not perceptibly different from that of [[Giovanni Boccaccio|Boccace]], [[Niccolò Machiavelli|Machiavel]], or [[Annibale Caro|Caro]].|source={{Gutenberg book |no=5430 |title=Preface to a Dictionary of the English Language |bullet=none}} }}

==See also==
* {{annotated link|Constructionism (learning theory)}}
* {{annotated link|Skunked term}}
* {{annotated link|History of English grammars}}
* {{annotated link|History of linguistic prescription in English}}
* {{annotated link|Hypercorrection}}
* {{annotated link|Language policy}}
* {{annotated link|Linguistic insecurity}}
* {{annotated link|Linguistic purism}}
* {{annotated link|Politics and the English Language}}
* {{annotated link|Traditional grammar}}
* {{annotated link|Error (linguistics)}}
* {{annotated link|Schizoglossia}}
* {{annotated link|Barbarism (linguistics)}}
* {{annotated link|Solecism}}
* {{annotated link|Legalese}}
* {{annotated link|Psychobabble}}
* {{annotated link|Technobabble}}
* {{annotated link|Plain English}}

==Notes==
{{Notelist}}

==Examples of prescriptivist topics==
* {{annotated link|Common English usage misconceptions}}
* {{annotated link|A Dictionary of Modern English Usage|''Fowler's Modern English Usage''}}
* {{annotated link|List of Germanic and Latinate equivalents in English}}
* {{annotated link|List of English words with disputed usage}}
* {{annotated link|Wikipedia:List of commonly misused English words}}
* {{annotated link|Pleonasm}}

==Citations==
{{Reflist|2|refs=
<ref name="Edwards2009p259">John Edwards (2009) ''Language and Identity: An introduction'' [https://books.google.com/books?id=wwvOjiqyU-EC&pg=PA259 p.259]</ref>

<ref name="Janicki2006p155">Janicki, Karol (2006) [https://books.google.com/books?id=lWAz__vpe88C&pg=PA155 ''Language misconceived: arguing for applied cognitive sociolinguistics''] p.155</ref>

<!-- Unused citations
<ref name="Zuckermann2008p135">[[Ghil'ad Zuckermann]] (2008) [http://www.zuckermann.org/pdf/Realistic_Prescriptivism_Academy.pdf 'Realistic Prescriptivism': The Academy of the Hebrew Language, its Campaign of 'Good Grammar' and Lexpionage, and the Native Israeli Speakers] p. 135, in ''Israel Studies in Language and Society'' 1.1, pp. 135–154</ref>
<ref name="ArbasinoGL">{{cite web |language=it|author=Alberto Arbasino |url=http://www.arts.ed.ac.uk/italian/gadda/Pages/resources/archive/classics/arbasinogeniuslocii.html |title=Genius Loci |access-date=2011-03-30}}</ref>
-->
}}

==Sources==
* {{cite book|editor-last=McArthur|editor-first=Tom|year=1992|title=The Oxford Companion to the English Language|url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00mcar|url-access=registration|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-214183-5}}
* {{cite book|last=Heinz|first=Michaela|chapter=Les locutions figurées dans le Nouveau Petit Robert: évolution de quelques traitements entre 1993 et 2003|title=Les dictionnaires Le Robert: Genèse et évolution|year=2003|pages=227–245|chapter-url=http://books.openedition.org/pum/13867|doi=10.4000/books.pum.13867|isbn=9782760619425}}
* Strunk and White's ''[[The Elements of Style]]''

==Further reading==
* Simon Blackburn, 1996 [1994], "descriptive meaning", ''Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy'', pp.&nbsp;101–102 for possible difficulty of separating the descriptive and evaluative

==External links==
* [http://people.ucsc.edu/~pullum/MLA2004.pdf Ideology, Power and Linguistic Theory (pdf format)] a paper about descriptivism and prescriptivism by [[Geoffrey Pullum]].

{{Lexicography}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Linguistic Prescription}}
[[Category:Sociolinguistics]]
[[Category:Linguistic purism|Prescription]]
[[Category:Political terminology]]
[[Category:Linguistic controversies]]
[[Category:Language education]]