Yet another inventory of postings (on Language Log and on this blog), this time on references to One Right Way in usage advice.
One Right Way is the “one form, one meaning” principle (which has been articulated by a number of writers in various contexts) turned into usage advice, with two parts:
(1) There is One Right Way to use an expression; a form should have only one meaning.
(2) There is One Right Way to express a meaning; a meaning should be expressed by only one form. No true synonyms.
Both clauses are used to object to lexical innovations (or what are perceived to be innovations), among other things: clause (1) to object to extensions of meanings (decimate ‘devastate’ is a famous example) and to category shifts (verbings, nounings, and adjings, as in the case of fun); and clause (2) to object to novel lexical items, including back-formations, and also to the cases covered by (1) (on the grounds that the language already has ways of expressing the meaning in question). There are other uses as well, described in the postings below.
The inventory covers only postings where the label One Right Way is used. As a result, they’re all by me, since I’m the writer who regularly uses this label (in these blogs and in ADS-L).
Language Log Classic
AZ, 5/3/05: Don’t do this at home, kiddies!:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002124.html
AZ, 2/11/06: Whatever is not prohibited is permitted – not!:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002824.html
AZ, 9/13/06: The tyranny of the majority, and other reasons for choosing a variant:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003576.html
AZ, 2/24/07: Tolerating variation, or not:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004233.html
AZ, 7/22/07: One will get you four more:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004737.html
AZ, 12/30/07: Blameless:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005272.html
New Language Log
AZ, 5/15/08: approve (of):
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=156
AZ, 5/16/08: protest of:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=163
AZ, 7/13/08: Test obscenity, taboo avoidance, and prescriptivism:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=351
AZ, 7/30/08: Not exactly a smackdown:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=412
AZ, 10/30/08: Periods:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=779
AZ, 3/24/09: Wordy, not classy, and lazy:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1265
AZ, 4/4/09: Agreement with disjunctive subjects:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1293
AZ, 5/15/09: Rigid complementarity:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1434
AZ, 5/8/09: Making distinctions 1:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1416
Arnold Zwicky’s blog
http://arnoldzwicky.wordpress.com/2008/12/28/forbecause/
http://arnoldzwicky.wordpress.com/2009/05/19/stick-to-those-good-old-irregular-plurals/
http://arnoldzwicky.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/mcintyre-simmering/
August 26, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
[...] between them, even if it’s just a distinction in degree of formality. Arnold Zwicky has blogged a lot on OFOM as it relates to prescriptive rules on grammar and usage. For example, when some English [...]
January 9, 2010 at 11:17 am |
[...] one variant as the “correct” one. That is, the writers generally subscribe to the One Right Way principle (probably without having formulated it), in roughly the following form: if no meaning [...]
January 19, 2010 at 1:34 pm |
[...] One Right Way theory leads some people to insist that it must be just one, usually by analogy to other usage. [...]