Essay Example on The fundamental reason behind language change

Subcategory:

Category:

Words:

332

Pages:

1

Views:

19
The fundamental reason behind language change is social and political pressures English language has changed in many ways over the years Linguists and English authors have studied language change and written several articles on the topic In the readings 150th Anniversary 1851 2001 So Here s what s happening to Language by Jack Rosenthal and After Donald Trump Said It How News Outlets Handled It by Michael Grynbaum similar viewpoints are expressed towards language change Therefore this paper provides an analysis of the relationship between these two documents and shows how the ideas made in one document are relevant to the other The paper also provides a description of the connection between the two texts and highlights on the limitations that may exist when applying the arguments of one author to the ideas of the other The two texts connect in their discussion on matters of vulgarities that spoken word raises Rosenthal and Grynbaum note that the change in language is even affecting the speech of our leaders

They describe Presidents who have used vulgar language in their speech both in public and in their private meetings In the reading 150th Anniversary 1851 2001 So Here s what s happening to Language Rosenthal notes that the present dominance of spoken word overwritten is a contributing factor for Presidents to shrink from orotund oratory He noted that President Nixon had used vulgar language that were recorded on the White House tapes This is similar to what Grynbaum notes in the speech of President Trump In his reading Michael describes that President Trump had used a word that even the television network ABC could not repeat The president had used the term shit hole to refer to Haiti and African nations Both the authors share the idea of respecting the importance of standards in a language when addressing people of different age groups and race Rosenthal describes considerations that should be made when printing a family newspaper Newspapers that are read by children should avoid all forms of vulgar language The author gives the example of President Nixon and notes that the vulgarities identified in the President s spoken word were printed in the transcript but not in the newspapers Similarly Grynbaum describes language standards at the New York Times in his article 



He notes that the Times magazine omitted vulgarities in the headlines of its paper despite being required to directly quote a language because paraphrasing made the meaning of the message unclear Media outlets should not be the sources of profanity but rather the source of new information and inspiration This is an argument that the authors of both the article seem to agree on The relationship between the two texts is depicted in their acknowledgment that it is difficult for the leading media outlets to publish or read out to the public content that is expletive or includes profanity In his text Rosenthal notes that The Times nearly never prints vulgar or obscene words Grynbaum seems to be on the same pages with Rosenthal He notes that such media outlets find a censored version of such words and thus never print such expletive words Arguments made in the text by Rosenthal are relevant to the ideas found in the text by Grynbaum Rosenthal argues that informalization has changed the meaning of some words He suggests that spoken word has contributed to the use of the unusual amount of profanity in today s society He further notes that words once considered dirty are now a regular part of people s vocabulary 



This is relevant to the idea of media outlets allowing the use of the vulgar word shithole on air and publications following the incident where President Trump had used the word to refer to African countries Allowing profanity on a media network watched by families may encourage the use of such words by children Applying some arguments of one author to the ideas of the other author may have some limitations A perfect example is the argument by Rosenthal of establishing rules to guide written language It is difficult to apply these rules standards of written language in the ideas by Grynbaum given that media outlets allow profanity based on what the President said This suggests that it will be difficult for media houses or other publishers to abide by rules if leaders keep using profanity in their speech This is the same concept of parenthood where the parents are required to set a good example for their children if there is any hope of raising them right Difficulty in applying these rules is strengthened even further with the advances in technologies and thus more use of profanity in movies and theatrical performances In conclusion it is clear that a problem exists when it comes to the spoken word In the readings 150th Anniversary 1851 2001 So Here s what s happening to Language and After Donald Trump Said It How News Outlets Handled It profanity by our leaders and non adherence to standards by media houses are the critical issues The authors discuss similar problems although they share different ideas in some aspects Both Rosenthal and Grynbaum agree that the ascendency of the spoken word has affected language and culture but this may not be all a bad thing


Write and Proofread Your Essay
With Noplag Writing Assistance App

Plagiarism Checker

Spell Checker

Virtual Writing Assistant

Grammar Checker

Citation Assistance

Smart Online Editor

Start Writing Now

Start Writing like a PRO

Start