View source for English usage controversies

{{Short description|Disputes over "correct" grammar and style}}
{{Grammar series}}{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2023}}In the English language, there are [[grammatical construction]]s that many native speakers use unquestioningly yet certain writers call incorrect. Differences of usage or opinion may stem from differences between formal and informal speech and other matters of [[Register (sociolinguistics)|register]], differences among [[dialect]]s (whether regional, class-based, generational, or other), difference between the social norms of spoken and written English, and so forth. Disputes may arise when [[style guide]]s disagree, when an older standard gradually loses traction, or when a guideline or judgment is confronted by large amounts of conflicting evidence or has its rationale challenged.

==Examples==
Some of the sources that consider some of the following examples incorrect consider the same examples to be acceptable in dialects other than [[Standard English]] or in an informal register; others consider certain constructions to be incorrect in any variety of English. On the other hand, many or all of the following examples are considered correct by some sources.
* [[Generic you|Generic ''you'']] – e.g., "Brushing '''your''' teeth is a good habit" as opposed to "Brushing '''one's''' teeth is a good habit"<ref name="7hj6S" /><ref name="HU7zz" />
* [[Singular they|Singular ''they'']] – e.g., "'''Somebody''' left '''their''' sweater"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bodine |first1=Ann |year=1975 |title=Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar |journal=Language in Society |volume=4 |issue=2 |doi=10.1017/S0047404500004607|s2cid=146362006 }}</ref> or "'''My friend''' left '''their''' sweater here"<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Bjorkman |first1= Bronwyn |year=2017 |title= Singular they and the syntactic representation of gender in English |journal=Glossa |volume=2|doi=10.5334/gjgl.374|doi-access=free }}</ref>
<!--this has never been just for gender-neutral language-->
* [[Flat adverb]]s – e.g., "Drive '''safe'''" as opposed to "Drive '''safely'''"<ref name="oos">{{Cite book |last1=O'Conner |first1=P.T. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2Ju-Vu0v6GQC&pg=PA30 |title=Origins of the Specious: Myths and Misconceptions of the English Language |last2=Kellerman |first2=S. |date=2009 |publisher=Random House Publishing Group |isbn=9781588368560 |page=30}}</ref> "It '''sure''' is" as opposed to "It '''surely''' is." 
* [[Split infinitive]]s – e.g., "[[Where no man has gone before|'''To''' boldly '''go''' where no man has gone before]]" as opposed to "'''To go boldly''' where no man has gone before"<ref name="Fowler547" />
* Beginning a sentence with a [[Conjunction (grammar)|conjunction]]  – e.g., "'''But''' Dad said not to jump on the bed!"<ref name="H3vSG" /><ref name="OjJSl" />
* [[English possessive#Double genitive|Double genitive]]  – e.g. "a friend of theirs" as opposed to "a friend of them" or "their friend"<ref name="K7EwH" />
* Using "me" vs. "I" in the [[subject complement]] ("It's '''me'''" as opposed to "It's '''I'''" or "It is '''I'''") or [[I (pronoun)#Me as a subject pronoun|other cases]] – e.g., "Me and Bob" vs. "Bob and I"<ref name="hqbQm" />
* Using "I" vs. "me" in the [[oblique case]], e.g., "He gave the ball to Bob and I" instead of "He gave the ball to Bob and me". This is often called a [[hypercorrection]], since it is perceived as related to avoidance of the stigmatized incorrect use of the oblique form.<ref name="qUhIZ" />  {{xref|(See also: [[Between you and I]].)}}
* The validity of ''aren't'' as a negative first-person singular contraction for ''to be'' in interrogative uses – e.g., "'''Aren't''' I the one you were talking about?"<ref name="gTPiu" /> {{xref|(See also: [[Ain't]].)}}
* The grammatical means for marking [[Counterfactual conditional#The grammar of counterfactuality|counterfactuality]] – e.g., "[[If I Were a Rich Man (song)|If I '''were/was''' a rich man]]" and "If the pandemic '''didn't happen'''/'''hadn't happened'''". 
* Whether to use [[Who (pronoun)#Usage of "whom"|''who'' or ''whom'']] in various contexts<ref>{{cite web |url = https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/who-vs-whom-grammar-usage |title = How to Use 'Who' vs. 'Whom' |website = Merriam Webster |access-date = 7 Dec 2024}}</ref>
* The use of [[Fewer vs. less|''less'' or ''fewer'']] with [[count noun]]s<ref name="mwdeu-less-fewer" />
* [[Double negative]]s as negative concord – e.g., "[[Another Brick in the Wall|We '''don't''' need '''no''' education]]"<ref name="cp4ge" />
* Certain [[double modal]]s – e.g., "You '''might could''' do it" – not considered standard, but used for example in [[Southern American English]]<ref name="Wilson" />
* [[Double copula]]<ref name="nZABI" /> – e.g., "What has to happen '''is, is''' that the money has to come from somewhere"<ref name="lJiGc" />
* [[Preposition stranding]] – e.g., "You have nothing to be afraid of" (vs. "You have nothing of which to be afraid") – criticized by grammarians in the 1600s by analogy with Latin grammar and by some teachers since, though many have always accepted it as part of standard English<ref name="AyYVt" />
* Distinction or lack of it between the past and past participle forms of the verb – e.g. "I should have ''went''" and "I ''done'' that yesterday".
* [[Quotation marks in English#Primary quotations versus secondary quotations|Order of quoted punctuation marks]], i.e., American style ("Many dreams were characterized as 'raw,' 'powerful,' and 'evocative{{'"}}) vs. British style ('Many dreams were characterized as "raw", "powerful" and "evocative{{"'}}). Some American authorities (such as the [[American Psychological Association|APA]] and [[The Chicago Manual of Style|CMS]]) require the former, while others (such as the [[Linguistic Society of America|LSA]]) allow, prefer, or require the latter.
* Whether the verbs ''open/close'' to denote ''[[switch|turn on/turn off]]'' can be used as [[English collocations]] (i.e. "Open the lights, please" for "Turn on the lights, please"). The expression is a [[metaphrase]] and is common among [[English as a second or foreign language|nonnative English speakers]] of Hebrew, Croatian, Filipino, French, Thai, Chinese, Greek, Italian descent, and also among [[French Canadians]] (or some speakers of [[Quebec English]]), where "open" and "close" for "on" and "off" are used instead. This construction is grammatically correct but only out of context. The [[calquing]] and [[Language transfer|linguistic transfer]] make this construction foreign to other English speakers.<ref name="r1" />

Several proscriptions concern matters of writing style and clarity but not grammatical correctness:
* [[Dangling modifier]]s (including dangling participles) are often cited as potentially causing confusion.<ref name="GWP7S" />
* Various style guides warn writers to avoid<ref name="mLg12" /> the [[passive voice]].
* [[Gender neutrality in English]]:
** [[Gender-specific and gender-neutral pronouns]] – Replacing masculine pronouns where they are meant to refer to a person of either gender with both masculine and feminine pronouns, alternative phrasing, the [[singular they]]<ref name="GJHOC" /> or [[Neopronoun|newly invented words]] such as "hir" and "ze"{{citation needed|date=June 2022}}
** Terms for humans in general – Replacing nouns such as "mankind" with "humankind"
** [[Gender marking in job titles]] – Replacing nouns such as "chairman" and "manpower" with alternatives such as "chairperson" and "staffing levels"
** Use of [[Ms.]] for equality with [[Mr.]], as opposed to [[Miss]] and [[Mrs.]], which specify whether a woman is married; there are no similar titles for men that specify whether a man is married, though [[Master (form of address)|Mstr.]] (pronounced "master") is occasionally used for a male child.

For an alphabetical list of disputes concerning a single word or phrase, see [[List of English words with disputed usage]].

==Factors in disputes==
The following circumstances may feature in disputes:

===Myths and superstitions===
There are a number of alleged rules of unclear origin that have no rational basis or are based on things such as misremembered rules taught in school. They are sometimes described by authorities as superstitions or myths. These include rules such as not beginning sentences with "and"<ref name="MWDEU" /> or "because"<ref name="MWDEU" /> or not ending them with prepositions<ref name="Fowler 1996" /> {{xref|(see: [[Common English usage misconceptions]])}}.

===No central authority===
Unlike some languages, such as [[French language|French]] (which has the [[Académie Française]]), English has no single authoritative governing academy, so assessments of correctness are made by "self-appointed authorities who, reflecting varying judgments of acceptability and appropriateness, often disagree."<ref name="Quirk 1985" />

===Education===
While some variations in the use of language correlate with age, sex, ethnic group, or region, others may be taught in schools and be preferred in the context of interaction with strangers. These forms may also gain prestige as the standard language of professionals, politicians, etc., and be called [[Standard English]] (SE), whereas forms associated with less educated speakers may be called nonstandard (or less commonly substandard) English.<ref name="Quirk 1985" />

===Stigma===
The [[Linguistic prescription|prescriptivist tradition]] may affect attitudes toward certain usages and thus the preferences of some speakers.<ref name="Quirk 1985" />

===Hypercorrection===
{{Main|Hypercorrection}}
Because of the [[Stigma (sociological theory)|stigma]] attached to violating prescriptivist norms, speakers and writers sometimes incorrectly extend usage rules beyond their scope in attempting to avoid mistakes.<ref name="Quirk 1985" />

===Classical languages===
Prescriptivist arguments about various English constructions' correctness have sometimes been based on Latin grammar.<ref name="Huddleston 2002" />

===Analogy with other constructions===

It is sometimes argued that a certain usage is more logical than another, or that it is more consistent with other usages, by analogy with different grammatical constructions. For instance, it may be argued that the accusative form must be used for the components of a [[Coordination (linguistics)|coordinate construction]] where it would be used for a single pronoun.<ref name="Huddleston 2002" />

Speakers and writers frequently do not consider it necessary to justify their positions on a particular usage, taking its correctness or incorrectness for granted. In some cases, people believe an expression to be incorrect partly because they also falsely believe it to be newer than it really is.<ref name="U97Uh" />

==Prescription and description==
{{Further|Linguistic prescription|Linguistic description}}
It is often said that the difference between ''prescriptivist'' and ''descriptivist'' approaches is that the former prescribes how English ''should'' be spoken and written and the latter describes how English ''is'' spoken and written, but this is an oversimplification.<ref name="Huddleston 2002" /> Prescriptivist works may contain claims about the incorrectness of various common English constructions, but they also deal with topics other than grammar, such as style.<ref name="Huddleston 2002" /> Prescriptivists and descriptivists differ in that, when presented with evidence that purported rules disagree with most native speakers' actual usage, the prescriptivist may declare that those speakers are wrong, whereas the descriptivist will assume that the usage of the overwhelming majority of native speakers defines the language, and that the prescriptivist has an idiosyncratic view of correct usage.<ref name="Huddleston 2002" /> Particularly in older prescriptivist works, recommendations may be based on personal taste, confusion between informality and ungrammaticality,<ref name="Huddleston 2002" /> or arguments related to other languages, such as Latin.<ref name="Huddleston 2002" />

==Different forms of English==

===English internationally===
English is spoken worldwide, and the [[Standard Written English]] grammar generally taught in schools around the world will vary only slightly. Nonetheless, disputes can sometimes arise: for example, it is a matter of some debate in [[India]] whether [[British English|British]], [[American English|American]], or [[Indian English]] is the best form to use.<ref name="jrvNX" /><ref name="VIepo" />{{Failed verification|date=January 2015}}

===Regional dialects and ethnolects===
{{Unreferenced section|date=May 2016}}
In contrast to their generally high level of tolerance for the dialects of other English-speaking countries, speakers often express disdain for features of certain regional or ethnic dialects, such as [[Southern American English]]'s use of ''[[y'all]]'', [[Geordie]]s' use of "yous" as the second person plural personal pronoun, and nonstandard forms of "to be" such as "The old dock bes under water most of the year" ([[Newfoundland English]]) or "That dock be under water every other week" ([[African-American Vernacular English]]).

Such disdain may not be restricted to points of grammar; speakers often criticize regional accents and vocabulary as well. Arguments related to regional dialects must center on questions of what constitutes [[Standard English]]. For example, since fairly divergent dialects from many countries are widely accepted as Standard English, it is not always clear why certain regional dialects, which may be very similar to their standard counterparts, are not.

===Register===
Different constructions are acceptable in different [[Register (sociolinguistics)|registers]] of English. For example, a given construction will often be seen as too formal or too informal for a situation.

==See also==
{{Portal|Language}}
* [[Barbarism (linguistics)]]
* [[Common English usage misconceptions]]
* [[List of dialects of English]]

==References==

{{reflist|1=2|refs=
<ref name="Huddleston 2002">{{Cite book|last1=Huddleston |first1=Rodney |author-link1=Rodney Huddleston |last2= Pullum |first2= Geoffrey |author-link2=Geoffrey Pullum |title=The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language |year=2002 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge; New York |pages=5–9 |isbn=978-0-521-43146-0}}</ref>
<ref name="Quirk 1985">{{Cite book|last1=Quirk|first1=Randolph|author-link1=Randolph Quirk|last2=Greenbaum|first2=Sidney|author-link2=Sidney Greenbaum|last3=Leech|first3=Geoffrey|author-link3=Geoffrey Leech|last4=Svartvik|first4=Jan|year=1985|title=A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language|location=Harlow|publisher=Longman |pages=14, 18 |isbn=978-0582517349|url=https://archive.org/details/comprehensivegra00quir}}</ref>
<ref name="MWDEU">{{Cite book| title = Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage| year = 2002| publisher = Penguin |pages=69; 125&ndash;126 | isbn = 978-0877796336| url = https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780877796336}}</ref>
<ref name="Fowler 1996">{{Cite book|last1=Fowler |first1=H.W.|last2=Burchfield |first2=R.W.|title= The New Fowler's Modern English Usage |year=1996 |page=617 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0198610212}}</ref>
<ref name="Fowler547">{{cite encyclopedia | editor = Robert Allen | encyclopedia = [[Fowler's Modern English Usage|Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage]] (1926) | title = Split infinitive | year = 2002 | publisher = Oxford University Press | isbn = 978-0-19-860947-6 | pages = [https://archive.org/details/pocketfowlersmod00alle/page/547 547]}} "No other grammatical issue has so divided English speakers since the split infinitive was declared to be a [[solecism]] in the 19c [19th century]: raise the subject of English usage in any conversation today and it is sure to be mentioned."</ref>
<ref name="mwdeu-less-fewer">{{cite book|title=Merriam-Webster's dictionary of English usage |publisher=Merriam-Webster |year=1995 |edition=2nd |page=592 |chapter=less, fewer|isbn=978-0-87779-132-4 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2yJusP0vrdgC&pg=PA592}}</ref>
<ref name="Wilson">Kenneth G. Wilson, "Double Modal Auxiliaries", ''[http://www.bartleby.com/68/3/2003.html The Columbia Guide to Standard American English] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090307044137/http://www.bartleby.com/68/3/2003.html |date=7 March 2009}}'', 1993.</ref>
<ref name="r1">{{cite news|last=Scott|first=Marian|title=Our way with words|url=https://montrealgazette.com/news/our-way-with-words|access-date=15 March 2011|newspaper=The Gazette|date=12 February 2010}}</ref>
<ref name="7hj6S">[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/you?s=t] lists "one; anyone; people in general" as a definition without qualification that it is non-standard</ref>
<ref name="HU7zz">[http://www.cchs165.jacksn.k12.il.us/English/Guide/cchs%20usage%20handbook.htm#You%20in%20Formal%20Writing] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150530064405/http://www.cchs165.jacksn.k12.il.us/English/Guide/CCHS%20Usage%20Handbook.htm#You%20in%20Formal%20Writing |date=30 May 2015 }} requires replacing "you" with another word unless it means "you the reader".</ref>
<ref name="H3vSG">{{cite web|url=http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/01/can-i-start-a-sentence-with-a-conjunction/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120111090604/http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/01/can-i-start-a-sentence-with-a-conjunction/|url-status=dead|archive-date=11 January 2012|title=Can you start a sentence with a conjunction? – OxfordWords blog|date=5 January 2012|website=oxforddictionaries.com}}</ref>
<ref name="OjJSl">{{cite book |author=University of Chicago |title=The Chicago Manual of Style |edition=16th |year= 2010 |publisher=Univ. of Chicago Press |location= Chicago |isbn=978-0-226-10420-1|page=257}}</ref>
<ref name="K7EwH">{{cite web |last=Quinion |first=Michael |title=Double Possessive |work=World Wide Words |url=http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-dou3.htm |access-date=2009-05-19}}</ref>
<ref name="hqbQm">{{cite book |last1=Huddleston |first1=Rodney |author-link1=Rodney Huddleston |last2= Pullum |first2= Geoffrey K.|author-link2= Geoffrey Pullum | title=The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language |year=2002 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge; New York |isbn=978-0-521-43146-0 |page=459}}</ref>
<ref name="qUhIZ">{{cite book |last1=Huddleston |first1=Rodney |author-link1=Rodney Huddleston |last2= Pullum |first2= Geoffrey K.|author-link2= Geoffrey Pullum | title=The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language |year=2002 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge; New York |isbn=978-0-521-43146-0 |page=463}}</ref>
<ref name="gTPiu">{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aren't?s=t|title="''Aren't I?''" vs. "''Ain't I''" Usage Note|publisher=[[dictionary.com]]|access-date=9 June 2015}}</ref>
<ref name="cp4ge">{{cite book |last1=Fowler |first1=H.W. |last2=Gowers |first2=Ernest |author-link1=Henry Watson Fowler |author-link2=Ernest Gowers |title=Fowler's Modern English Usage |date=1965 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=019281389-7|pages=384–386 |edition=2nd |quote=Negative mishandling.|title-link=Fowler's Modern English Usage}}</ref>
<ref name="nZABI">{{cite web|url=http://currentnoblesville.com/the-double-is|title=Main Home|website=Current Publishing|date=24 September 2013}}</ref>
<ref name="lJiGc">{{cite journal|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/lexicon_valley/2013/09/17/double_is_why_linguists_think_we_sometimes_double_up_on_is_in_a_setup_payoff.html|title=Are You a Double-Is-er?|first=Alyssa|last=Pelish|date=17 September 2013|journal=Slate}}</ref>
<ref name="AyYVt">{{cite web|url=http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111130230324/http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/|url-status=dead|archive-date=30 November 2011|title=Can you end a sentence with a preposition? – OxfordWords blog|date=28 November 2011|website=oxforddictionaries.com}}</ref>
<ref name="GWP7S">McArthur, Tom, ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language, pp. 752–753. Oxford University Press, 1992, {{ISBN|0-19-214183-X}} The dangling modifier or participle</ref>
<ref name="mLg12">[[The Elements of Style]], 1918</ref>
<ref name="GJHOC">Chicago Manual of Style, 13th edition, (1983): p. 233.</ref>
<ref name="U97Uh">{{cite news |url=http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/10/09/losing_our_illusions/ |title=Losing our illusions |work=[[The Boston Globe]] |date=9 October 2005 |first=Jan |last=Freeman}}</ref>
<ref name="jrvNX">{{cite web|url=http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/post/india/hohenthal/9.2.html |title=The Model for English in India&nbsp;– the Informants' Views |first=Annika |last=Hohenthal |date=5 June 2001 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060707151608/http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/post/india/hohenthal/9.2.html |archive-date=7 July 2006}}</ref>
<ref name="VIepo">{{cite web |url=http://library.vu.edu.au/search?/Xenglish&r=m&b=int&m=-&m=Z&SORT=A/Xenglish&r=m&b=int&m=-&m=Z&SORT=A&SUBKEY=english/1%2C25%2C2425%2C/frameset&FF=Xenglish&r=m&b=int&m=-&m=Z&SORT=A&9%29%2C |title=English in a global context |publisher=Victoria University |first=James |last=Limerick |year=2002}}</ref>
}}

==Further reading==
* {{cite book|author=Robert Lane Greene|year=2011|isbn=978-0553807875|title=You Are What You Speak: Grammar Grouches, Language Laws, and the Politics of Identity|publisher=Delacorte Press }}
* {{cite book|title=Horrible Words: A Guide to the Misuse of English |author=Rebecca Gowers |publisher=Penguin UK |year=2018 |isbn=978-0141978970}}

[[Category:English usage controversies| ]]