/lit/ - Literature

That's correct though

whichever one means that the definition can't change is correct

Isnt it impossible for language to be anything but prescriptive since it forms from us making sounds that we apply a meaning to

>>19224199
>He prescriptively descripted

>his language isn't allusive with an edge of plausible deniability
Is this why Anglos can never handle the conditional mood and the difference between a subjunctive and indicative?

>>19224249
It can be, but you may have to be more active with your word choice.

>>>/qa/
Go back schizo

>>19224199
Any basic study of linguistics or philology will tell you this. Just read the Canterbury Tales in the original and see how much English has changed

>>19224199
It is a tension between both because it wouldn't work if it were purely either of them. The prescriptive base is necessary for basic intelligibility and the evolution of new forms is necessary to describe new concepts and to signal new group identities and so on.

What if
>You wanted to go to heaven
But god said
>Remember when you posted a soijak

>>19224199
Ackchyually it's both.

>>19224253
I thought "try and"' was an optimistic viewpoint for years before I realized that "try to" was simply not a grammatic formation they could handle.

>>19224422
You should try to get over your inferiority complex about anglos

>>19224457
That guarantees nothing.

>>19224249
>Anglos

>>19224422
>I realized that "try to" was simply not a grammatic formation they could handle.
?????

"Try to do X" is perfectly normal English grammar

>>19224199
"descriptive" and "prescriptive" refers to linguistics, not to language itself

>>19224199
That doesn't make any sense. "Precriptive" and "descriptive" refer to how people approach language.