Talk:Corruption (linguistics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Origin of the term bastardization

To preface my comments, I'm no linguist or etymologist make sure to keep what I say in that context. I had always thought that the reason the word bastardize means what it means is because the word bastard itself has been bastardized. By that I mean that as opposed to simply meaning an illegitimate child, it has become a curse word which people throw around in the heat of arguments or use to describe politicians. While some bastards may in fact be illegitimate, the meaning has changed. That's why it's called bastardization. Is that true? Is there some sort of etymologist that could answer that question authoritatively? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.112.76 (talk) 03:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What?

what is the defination and type of corruption?

[edit] This article is inarticulate

I fixed what I could, but I don't even know what this ungrammatical sentence from the history section is supposed to mean, so I took it out. Whoever knows what it should probably make it make sense and put it back in:

In cases it would be implied, and in others an accidental fault on one side.

NickelShoe 21:37, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

does not mean descriptivism. While I happen to hate prescriptivism, calling it a "notion" and refusing to actually use the word "corruption", which is the title of the article, is clearly a POV, even if it is the correct one. NickelShoe 22:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

NPOV actually does mean descriptivism. Describing something in the terms of what it is instead of the terms of what certain people think it should be is exactly what neutrality means. I stand by my use of the word "notion," but I don't have a problem with the way you phrased it, so that's okay. However, using the word corruption to describe these language changes is to give the notion of linguistic corruption validity and to tacitly approve those classist (etc.) prescriptivist ideals. Dave 01:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per unopposed request. -GTBacchus(talk) 22:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Corruption (grammar) → Corruption (linguistics). This article deals with all forms of linguistic corruption, not just grammatical corruption. –  AjaxSmack  01:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Add "# Support" or "# Oppose" on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

[edit] Survey - in support of the move

[edit] Survey - in opposition to the move

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.