Lesson 2: Linguistic Knowledge and Performance; Descriptive and

Prescriptive Grammars

"What's one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one
and one and one)" "I don't know," said Alice. "I lost count." "She can't do
Addition," the Red Queen interrupted.
Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-
Glass

Tell us what you already know. (Activating prior knowledge)

1. Cite at least 2 rules you know in English grammar.

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
2. When you are having English conversations with a native American
English speaker or any proficient speaker of such language, do you sense
yourself committing errors in grammar? What do you when you know you
were making grammatical errors?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
3. As a future teacher of English, what are 3 items in your bucket list in
terms of becoming a proficient and capable teacher?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________

All done? Converse with a classmate about your answers. What did you
learn? Very well! Okay, now let us proceed to our next lesson.

Linguistic competence and linguistic performance

Speakers' linguistic knowledge permits them to form longer and longer

sentences by
joining sentences and phrases together or adding modifiers to a noun.
Whether you stop at three, five, or eighteen adjectives, it is impossible to
limit the number you could add if desired. Very long sentences are
theoretically possible, but they are highly improbable. Evidently, there is a
difference between having the knowledge necessary to produce sentences
of a language, and applying this knowledge. It is a difference between
what you know, which is your linguistic competence, and how you use
this knowledge in actual speech production and comprehension, which is
your linguistic performance.

Introduction to Linguistics/ Dr. Victoria V. Albacete 1

Speakers of all languages have the knowledge to understand or produce
sentences of any length. When they attempt to use that knowledge,
though - when they perform linguistically - there are physiological and
psychological reasons that limit the number of adjectives, adverbs,
clauses, and so on. They may run out of breath, their audience may leave,
they may lose track of what they have said, and of course, no one lives
forever.

When we speak, we usually wish to convey some message. At some stage

in the act
of producing speech, we must organize our thoughts into strings of words.
Sometimes the message is garbled. We may stammer, or pause, or
produce slips of the tongue. We may even sound like Tarzan in the
cartoon, who illustrates the difference between linguistic knowledge and
the way we use that knowledge in performance.

For the most part, linguistic knowledge is not conscious knowledge. The
linguistic
system - the sounds, structures, meanings, words, and rules for putting
them all to
gether-is learned subconsciously with no awareness that rules are being
learned. Just as we may not be conscious of the principles that allow us to
stand or walk, we are unaware of the rules of language. Our ability to
speak and understand, and to make judgments about the grammaticality
of sentences, reveals our knowledge of the rules of our language. This

Introduction to Linguistics/ Dr. Victoria V. Albacete 2

knowledge represents a complex cognitive system. The nature of this
system is what this book is all about.

Descriptive
grammar

The grammar of
a language
consists of the
sounds and
sound patterns,
the basic units of
meaning such as
words, and the
rules to combine
all of these to
form sentences
with the desired
meaning. The
grammar, then,
is what we know.
It represents our
linguistic
competence. To
understand the
nature of
language we
must understand
the nature of
grammar, and in
particular, the
internalized,
unconscious set of rules that is part of every grammar of every language.
Every human being who speaks a language knows its grammar. When
linguists
wish to describe a language, they attempt to describe the grammar of the
language that exists in the minds of its speakers. There will be some
differences among speakers' knowledge, but there must be shared
knowledge too. The shared knowledge --the common parts of the
grammar - makes it possible to communicate through language. To the
extent that the linguist's description is a true model of the speakers'
linguistic capacity, it is a successful description of the grammar and of the
language itself. Such a model is called a descriptive grammar. It does
not tell you how you should speak; it describes your basic linguistic
knowledge. It explains how it is possible for you to speak and understand,
and it tells what you know about the sounds, words, phrases, and
sentences of your language.

We have used the word grammar in two ways,: the first in reference to the
mental
grammar speakers have in their brains; the second as the model or
description of this internalized grammar. Almost two thousand years ago
the Greek grammarian Dionysius Thrax defined grammar as that which
Introduction to Linguistics/ Dr. Victoria V. Albacete 3
permits us either to speak a language or to speak about a language. From
now on we will not differentiate these two meanings, because the
linguist's descriptive grammar is an attempt at a formal statement (or
theory) of the speakers' grammar.

When we say in later chapters that there is a rule in the grammar such as
"Every sentence has a noun phrase subject and a verb phrase predicate,"
we posit the rule in both the mental grammar and the descriptive model of
it, the linguist's grammar. When we say that a sentence is grammatical,
we mean that it conforms to the rules of both grammars; conversely, an
ungrammatical sentence deviates in some way from these rules. If,
however, we posit a rule for English that does not agree with your
intuitions as a speaker, then the grammar we are describing differs in
some way from the mental grammar that represents your linguistic
competence; that is, your language is not the one described. No language
or variety of a language (called a dialect) is superior to any other in a
linguistic sense. Every grammar is equally complex, logical, and capable of
producing an infinite set of sentences to express any thought. If
something can be expressed in one language or one dialect, it can be
expressed in any other language or dialect. It might involve different
means and different words, but it can be expressed.

No grammar, therefore no language, is either superior or inferior to any

other. Languages of technologically undeveloped cultures are not
primitive or ill-formed in any way.

Prescriptive grammar

From ancient times until the present, "purists" have believed that
language change is corruption, and that there are certain "correct" forms
that all educated people should use in speaking and writing. The Greek
Alexandrians in the first century, the Arabic scholars at Basra in the eighth
century, and numerous English grammarians of the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries held this view. They wished to prescribe rather than
describe the rules of grammar, which gave rise to the writing of
prescriptive grammars.

In the Renaissance a new middle class emerged who wanted their children
to speak the dialect of the "upper" classes. This desire led to the
publication of many prescriptive grammars. In 1762 Bishop Robert Lowth
wrote A Short Introduction to English Grammar with Critical Notes. Lowth
prescribed a number of new rules for English, many of them influenced by
his personal taste. Before the publication of his grammar, practically
everyone-upper-class, middle-class, and lower-class-said I don't have
none, You was wrong about that, and Mathilda is fatter than me. Lowth,
however, decided that "two negatives make a positive" and therefore one
should say I don't have any; that even when you is singular it should be
followed by the plural were; and that I not me, he not him, they not them,
and so forth should follow than in comparative constructions. Many of
these prescriptive rules were based on Latin grammar, which had already
given way to different rules in the languages that developed from Latin.
Because Lowth was influential and because the rising new class wanted to
speak "properly," many of these new rules were legislated into English
grammar, at least for the prestige dialect.
Introduction to Linguistics/ Dr. Victoria V. Albacete 4
The view that dialects that regularly use double negatives are inferior
cannot be justified if one looks at the standard dialects of other languages
in the world. Romance languages, for example, use double negatives, as
the following examples from French and Italian show:
French: Je ne veux parler avec personne. (I not want speak with no-one.)
Italian: Non voglio parlare con nessuno. (not I-want speak with no-one.)
English translation: "I don't want to speak with anyone."
Grammars such as Lowth's are different from the descriptive grammars
we have been discussing. Their goal is not to describe the rules people
know, but to tell them what rules they should know.

In 1908 the grammarian Thomas R. Lounsbury wrote: "There seems to

have been in every period in the past, as there is now, a distinct
apprehension in the minds of very many worthy persons that the English
tongue is always in the condition approaching collapse and that arduous
efforts must be put forth persistently to save it from destruction."

Today our bookstores are filled with books by language "purists"

attempting to do just that. Edwin Newman, for example, in his books
Strictly Speaking and A Civil Tongue, rails against those who use the word
hopefully to mean "I hope," as in "Hopefully, it will not rain tomorrow,"
instead of using it "properly" to mean "with hope." What Newman fails to
recognize is that language changes in the course of time and words
change meaning, and the meaning of hopefully has been broadened for
most English speakers to include both usages. Other "saviors" of the
English language blame television, the schools, and even the National
Council of Teachers of English for failing to preserve the standard
language, and they mount attacks against those college and university
professors who suggest that African American English (AAE)4 and other
dialects are viable, living, complete languages.

Prescriptivists are bound to fail. Language is vigorous, dynamic, and

constantly changing. All languages and dialects are expressive, complete,
and logical, as much as they were 200 or 2000 years ago. If sentences are
muddled, it is not because of the language but because of the speakers.
Prescriptivists should be more concerned about the thinking of the
speakers than about the language they use.
We as linguists wish you to know that all languages and dialects are rule
governed and that what is grammatical in one language may be
ungrammatical in another (equally) prestigious) language. While we admit
that the grammars and usages of particular groups in society may be
dominant for social and political reasons, they are neither superior nor
inferior, from a linguistic point of view, to the grammars and usages of less
prestigious segments of society.

Having said all this, it is undeniable that the standard dialect may indeed
be a better dialect for someone wishing to obtain a particular job or
achieve a position of social prestige. In a society where "linguistic
profiling" is used to discriminate against speakers of a minority dialect, it
may behoove those speakers to learn the prestige dialect rather than wait
for social change. But linguistically, prestige and standard dialects do not
have superior grammars.

Introduction to Linguistics/ Dr. Victoria V. Albacete 5

Reference: Fromkin, V.; Rodman, R.; & Hyams, N. (2010) Introduction to linguistics,
Philippine Edition. Cengage Learning Asia Pte. Ltd.: Philippines.

Let’s process your understanding (Copy and answer then upload

this assessment to UNIT 1. LESSON 2. TASK 1)

Direction: Read the statements in the items that follow.

Determine whether they are correct or not. At the end of each
statement, put a check mark ( / ) if the idea conveyed is correct,
and an x mark ( x ) if otherwise.
1. Linguistic performance pertains to one’s knowledge of the rules of
usage applicable to that language.

2. A person’s ability to apply his knowledge of the language to use for

communication is known as linguistic competence .
3. English is superior than Filipino language in that it is older, has richer
vocabulary and more established rules of grammar.
4. Prescriptive grammar imposes which structure is correct based on
established rules and thus must be followed in oral and written
communication.
5. Descriptive grammar explains how it is possible for you to speak and
understand, and it tells what you know about the sounds, words, phrases,
and sentences of your language.

6-8. Identify the groups of “purists” under each period responsible for
keeping prescriptive grammar in place throughout time.

1st century 8th century 18th & 19th

centuries
Purists

Did you get them all correct? Great job! Proceed to the next level. If you
missed an item, retrace your steps back to the lesson. It pays to master
the subject before moving on.

Express your understanding

Directions: Read the questions carefully and answer by explaining

in 3-4 sentences with depth and substance. (5 pts each)

Rubric for grading:

Point Description
5 Answer is sufficient and well-organized and claims are clear and
well-supported with explanation and examples.
4 Answer is fairly sufficient and organized and claims are well-
detailed with some areas requiring further development.

Introduction to Linguistics/ Dr. Victoria V. Albacete 6

3 Answer is fairly adequate in most areas with some lapses in a
number of aspects.
2 Answer is wanting of substance and organization, with
significant errors.
1 Answer shows very meager understanding of the topic and
there are significant problems throughout.

Set to go? Here goes!

1. As a future teacher of English, should you emphasize prescriptive
grammar and discourage descriptive grammar? Or treat both grammars
with the same emphasis? Why? Why not?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
2. Cite the similarities and differences of prescriptive grammar and
descriptive grammar.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
3. As a future teacher of English, which of the two, linguistic knowledge or
linguistic performance, must you prioritize in your class? Explain your
answer.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________

How did you fare?

A score of 8-11 is just fair! While a score of 12-15 calls for a nice treat! But
a score of 7 and below might just call for some more reading and study
before proceeding to the next lesson.

Introduction to Linguistics/ Dr. Victoria V. Albacete 7