Alternate grief

By Fred Shivvin

Have you ever corrected someone's dreadful grammar, fixed their awful punctuation, or pointed out that they used the wrong word?

I get it - those errors can be very irritating. They distract your focus from the meaning. And certain errors are particularly 'triggering' for some of us. A whole online army seem fully occupied waging war against you're errors.

But have you ever considered that in your battle against 'errors', you might be fighting against the natural process of language change? 

I'm starting to think I might be doing just that when I react to one of my 'trigger' words errors - alternate, the adjective form. I consider it an error to use alternate when it should be alternative. I frequently hear alternate used wrongly in both formal and informal contexts, and I always correct it (at least to myself!) However, deep in my word nerd heart, I am starting to feel I might have to accept the word alternate is just changing its meaning, like so many have before.

But I'm not ready to accept it yet. Like me, grammar guides and dictionaries continue to insist the two words have distinct, precise and useful meanings.

English Grammar guide:

To avoid confusion, keep in mind that if you’re taking about taking turns, you should use alternate but if you are referring to available options, alternative is the better word choice.

Alternative(adjective):

1: offering or expressing a choice 2: different from the usual or conventional 3: occurring or succeeding by turns (if replacing something/someone)

  

Alternate(adjective)

1: occurring or succeeding by turns 2a: arranged first on one side and then on the other at different levels or points along an axial line  b: arranged one above or alongside the other 3: every other; every second 4: constituting an alternative to 5: alternative sense 2 (different from the usual or conventional)

But look at that! The dictionary is having it both ways and has signalled a shift in meaning of alternate with the addition of points 4 and 5. The everyday 'errors' are beginning to impact at the formal level.

The two words are often used interchangeably, sometimes from one sentence to the next (see the headline and first sentence of the Brexit example.)

Click to enlarge.

So, alternate is becoming an alternative to alternative. Many people, especially those younger than me, don't know that alternate even has the meaning of 'every other or every second one'. And they are definitely not bothered by it merging in meaning with alternative.

But it bothers me. We are losing a word. 'I work at home on alternate Mondays'; 'The man painted alternate planks of the fence in white' - gone or going. We just say it differently now (every second Monday, every other plank). A precise word with a useful meaning is disappearing. A loss for which I feel a little grief despite understanding that language does change. 

Language changes over time and constantly - we all change it through our use. Words change meaning, words drop out of use, new words and saying come into existence. Grammar rules shift and bend. Punctuation conventions alter over time. 

People do try to fight back and stop these changes. I bet people complained way back about the misuse of words like thee, guttling and canstow, words that have since disappeared from English. People have argued endlessly about the grammar rule not to split infinitive verb forms, a rule that is almost dead now. I've noticed that few people now use the colon: a hotly debated punctuation mark for ages. Forms of social media spelling (like LOL for 'laugh out loud' or ur for 'your') have been heavily criticised as 'the end of correct spelling'. 

Social media is full of people correcting each other's grammar, punctuation and spelling. On the other side, just as many complain about being corrected or make memes about the self-satisfied jerks who correct other people language when they can't win the argument. 

Which side are you on?

These two 'sides' represent the two broad approaches in the formal study of language (linguistics). One side is 'prescriptivist linguistics' which involves prescribing and explaining the rules and the correct way to use language. The alternative approach (see what I did there) is 'descriptivist linguistics' which describes how language is actually used, how and why it changes, with no judgement of correctness. I enjoy both, maybe leaning more to the descriptivist.

Those jerks on social media obsessively correcting other people's grammar and spelling - they might be prescriptivist linguists (or they might just be jerks).  

You may be interested to know there is no inherent reason for many of our language or grammar rules. What is formally 'correct' in English now has come to us from the language use of the English upper classes in the past. Those with education and power got to write the grammar and punctuation rules and to determine the official definition of words. They decided the way everyone else used language was wrong, and because they were already socially powerful, their decisions won the day. So, that social media prescriptivist jerk might just be declaring that your grammar or punctuation or word is wrong because, well, some upper class person in the eighteenth century said so.  

Don't get me wrong, I find many grammar and spelling errors annoying. They impact on the clarity of communication. They can create confusion about the intended meaning. Punctuation errors in particular can make text hard to understand.

The important thing is distinguishing between the need to correct errors to improve clarity and correcting errors as a way of making value judgements about those 'other' people who use 'incorrect' forms of language. These judgements have deep roots in our human need to align with the powerful. Being able to correct you aligns the online grammar warrior with those perceived as right and powerful. And that's how the behaviour of a self-righteous grammar jerk comes across - trying to show they are better than other people.

Value judgements aside, many of us find the study of language conventions and rules fascinating. Rules and structure are required in order to make sense with language. Grammar works as the foundation of meaningful sentences. Words used with their specific meaning allows shared understanding. Punctuation allows precision and subtlety. Together, all these language rules allow us to say what we mean and to avoid confusion. Great evocative writing depends on knowing these rules well and bending them with care and purpose.

Each of us gets hung up on different 'errors' we hear around us. Some people correct the Oxford comma, some pick up every incident of your/you're, some cannot tolerate the misspelling of definitely (with an 'a'), and I hate seeing alternate used when it just SHOULD be alternative. For each of us, some changes are harder to accept. When your language shifts without you, it feels like something important is no longer being respected. As the book Eats, Shoots and Leaves points out, the person who knows words, grammar and punctuation well feels these types of changes as deep wrongs, and feels this in their guts.

Likewise, the study of language change is equally fascinating - I am interested in what makes each change happen. Is the social power of the so-called 'incorrect users' starting to trump the use previously considered correct? Are young people changing language to keep the oldies from understanding - like every generation has done? Have people dropped letters to fit into 160 or 280 characters? Has the need for new ways of communicating online overcome old language rules?

While I do find language change very interesting, I have to admit sometimes my inner prescriptivist clashes with my inner descriptivist. 

The prescriptivist me can't let go of the word alternate meaning 'every second one.' Not yet. Lately, my inner prescriptivist has been comforting me with silly humour based on refusing to accept the change, and imagining a ludicrous scenario based on alternate still having its 'correct' meaning. 

When I hear or read: 

•  "Speaker announces rejection of every alternate Brexit option" - I imagine the UK parliament deciding to approve every second Brexit option.
• "The religious parents did not approve of their son's alternate lifestyle" - I imagine a son who is gay half of the time.
• "The opposition has an alternate tax plan for country" - I think about the difficulties of a tax system implemented on Sundays, Tuesdays and Thursdays with a completely different plan in place for Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.
• "Many references now consider 'hone in' a proper alternate version of 'home in'" - I see a pigeon who stops flying toward its destination to sharpen its beak, a little more homing, then another go at honing, and so on.
• "The alternate music scene is very much alive in the Valley" - I picture someone playing music for an hour then sitting on the stage for an hour of complete silence before playing again for the next hour.
• "The traffic was bad, so she took the alternate route home" - I picture the driver taking every second right hand turn all the way home.

The prescriptivist self-righteous jerk part of me (privately) mocks the person for saying, 'every second time' when they mean to say, 'instead of'. I judge them for their 'error'. 

Then the descriptivist part of me says, 'Let it go, Fred. Just let it go.' This part of me accepts that alternate is losing its distinctive meaning.

Words change. Grammar changes. Language changes continuously. But we still grieve our losses.

Images: knowyourmeme.com