I am sure many of you have heard comments about language and that it’s getting…‘worse’ (to put it lightly). Many have made angry claims about how language is being ‘demolished’ by the young generation and their slang, the way they text and whatnot. Take for example, an article in the Daily mail presenting the views of an anxious father, who was claiming that the language his daughter and other youths in the UK are using is “clumsy rap-speak” and “a linguistic atrocity”. With the risk of having to be the bearer of bad news and the one saying “I’m sorry but I think you’re wrong” I must stop there and assure you that English is still doing okay and no “linguistic superbug” (as labelled by the father) is currently present.

Yes, one must acknowledge the emergence of novel language features such as fillers occurring in between sentences e.g. “For lunch I had, like, lasagne”, initialisms such as ‘LOL’ (laughing out loud) and acronyms such as ‘DW’ (don’t worry). However, one must stop and ask, are these really ruining English? To answer this, it’s best I present you with some empirical research. 

If you take the linguistic findings of Cheshire and Kerswill, it seems that such ‘atrocity’ has been present for quite some time and is classified as a language variety of its own right called “MLE”– Multicultural London English. However, recent evidence suggests that certain features are spreading outside of the capital, too. As a result, the term now used is “MUBE” or Multicultural Urban British English.

The main finding we should focus on, however, is that such language is only present within informal social situations, meaning most people understand that after a successful interview you wouldn’t for example say “I’m bare gassed (really excited) to start working”. We are all aware that we change our language depending on the situation we are in- something linguists call ‘code switching’. This therefore means we have progressed in a way that allows us to use language not just in its ordinary sense. Instead, we have acquired additional skills and a wider linguistic variety, so sadly, I do have to be the bearer of bad news when I say that the view presented by the Daily mail writer seems to really come into question.

As you can probably already tell, I do not fundamentally believe that MUBE is in any way illegitimate. To prove this, an interesting research study by Hewitt and Sebba in the 1980s focused on a language variety used by adolescent youths in the UK called ‘Black British English’, with common features including:

• Dental fronting- ‘this’ becoming ‘dis’
• Final consonant deletion e.g. ‘notin’, ‘goin’ etc. 
• Double negatives e.g. ‘he don’t know nofin’ 

Interestingly, linguist John Pitts later found that (similarly to nowadays), many people used to adopt prejudicial attitudes towards such language variations, which ultimately resulted in something called a ‘Resistance Identity’. This was a way in which Black English speakers challenged mainstream culture by deliberately emphasising their unique way of speaking as a way of opposing the authorities that were oppressing them. So, over the years a number of white English speakers started picking up on these language features and eventually began combining standard British English with Black British English resulting in a language similar to the one that the Daily Mail writer was complaining about. However, linguists have proven that such language is rooted in fascinating history and the interest shown by experts in this linguistic variety confirms why the demeaning attitude still present today is…well, ill-suited.

It also seems that language change followed by a tradition of complains is not in any way a new occurrence in spite of public opinion. In fact, in a highly educational (and entertaining!) TED talk, linguist John McWhorter presented evidence which showed that people have been complaining about the state of language for centuries. You can go all the way back to 63 A.D. and read documents that show Latin speakers complaining about what had become French at the time. Funnily enough, Latin speakers were arguing French has ‘broken grammar’ and is ‘too casual’ which, in my opinion, is kind of funny and borderline ironic considering French is now regarded as having a high level of prestige and around 77 to 110 million people choose to learn it to enhance their language abilities.

So, what is important to understand here is that language is constantly evolving and so are the attitudes towards it. Clearly, many have had trouble accepting language change for a very long time but you now know why that’s not the way to go. Having to be the bearer of bad news for the third time (sorry!) I have to be honest and say it’s likely that most people will continue to have negative attitudes towards language change in the future too. Don’t fret however. It’s only natural. Most people will see change as an attack on their comfort zone and what they are familiar with. What we should remember however is that language change is an interactive, intriguing and important process in the evolving nature of English language.

So, let’s not be so quick to demean new language forms simply because they are different or not what we are used to. Language change has clearly been happening for a very long time, so we can sit back, rest assured and bear in mind that although there will always be people worrying about the state of language, the planet somehow keeps on spinning while language keeps on evolving.