What do you think?
Rate this book
Words on the Move: Why English Won't—and Can't—Sit Still
A best-selling linguist takes us on a lively tour of how the English language is evolving before our eyes - and why we should embrace this transformation and not fight it.
Language is always changing - but we tend not to like it. We understand that new words must be created for new things, but the way English is spoken today rubs many of us the wrong way. Whether it's the use of literally to mean "figuratively" rather than "by the letter" or the way young people use LOL and like, or business jargon like what's the ask? - it often seems as if the language is deteriorating before our eyes.
But the truth is different and a lot less scary, as John McWhorter shows in this delightful and eye-opening exploration of how English has always been in motion and continues to evolve today. Drawing examples from everyday life and employing a generous helping of humor, he shows that these shifts are a natural process common to all languages and that we should embrace and appreciate these changes, not condemn them.
Words on the Move opens our eyes to the surprising backstories to the words and expressions we use every day. Did you know that silly once meant "blessed"? Or that ought was the original past tense of owe? Or that the suffix -ly in adverbs is actually a remnant of the word like? And have you ever wondered why some people from New Orleans sound as if they come from Brooklyn?
McWhorter encourages us to marvel at the dynamism and resilience of the English language, and his book offers a lively journey through which we discover that words are ever on the move, and our lives are all the richer for it.
Language is always changing - but we tend not to like it. We understand that new words must be created for new things, but the way English is spoken today rubs many of us the wrong way. Whether it's the use of literally to mean "figuratively" rather than "by the letter" or the way young people use LOL and like, or business jargon like what's the ask? - it often seems as if the language is deteriorating before our eyes.
But the truth is different and a lot less scary, as John McWhorter shows in this delightful and eye-opening exploration of how English has always been in motion and continues to evolve today. Drawing examples from everyday life and employing a generous helping of humor, he shows that these shifts are a natural process common to all languages and that we should embrace and appreciate these changes, not condemn them.
Words on the Move opens our eyes to the surprising backstories to the words and expressions we use every day. Did you know that silly once meant "blessed"? Or that ought was the original past tense of owe? Or that the suffix -ly in adverbs is actually a remnant of the word like? And have you ever wondered why some people from New Orleans sound as if they come from Brooklyn?
McWhorter encourages us to marvel at the dynamism and resilience of the English language, and his book offers a lively journey through which we discover that words are ever on the move, and our lives are all the richer for it.
Audible Audio
First published September 6, 2016
262 people are currently reading
4875 people want to read
About the author
John McWhorter
47 books1,713 followersJohn Hamilton McWhorter (Professor McWhorter uses neither his title nor his middle initial as an author) is an American academic and linguist who is Associate Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University, where he teaches linguistics, American studies, philosophy, and music history. He is the author of a number of books on language and on race relations. His research specializes on how creole languages form, and how language grammars change as the result of sociohistorical phenomena.
A popular writer, McWhorter has written for Time, The Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, The Chronicle of Higher Education, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The New Republic, Politico, Forbes, The Chicago Tribune, The New York Daily News, City Journal, The New Yorker, among others; he is also contributing editor at The Atlantic and hosts Slate's Lexicon Valley podcas
A popular writer, McWhorter has written for Time, The Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, The Chronicle of Higher Education, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The New Republic, Politico, Forbes, The Chicago Tribune, The New York Daily News, City Journal, The New Yorker, among others; he is also contributing editor at The Atlantic and hosts Slate's Lexicon Valley podcas
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 337 reviews
February 7, 2017
One of the few books that has substantially changed my opinion on a subject. McWhorter mocks the grammar Nazis and portrays them as grammar Hitler Youth, young punks who do not really understand what they are talking about simply trying to impress others with their orthodoxy.
As you would expect from a linguist, the book is very well written. I recommend it - like - totally.
As you would expect from a linguist, the book is very well written. I recommend it - like - totally.
September 24, 2016
This was ... literally ... a fascinating, informative, and incredibly interesting book! I listened to it on Audible (which I would highly recommend for this book), in a reading done by the author, John McWhorter -- who was very entertaining and held my interest like a laser. He is a linguist, and this book will give you so many insights about why our language changes and evolves, not just over centuries, but even over decades.
For instance, if someone receives poor service in a restaurant, why, in their recounting of the episode, are they likely to say "I thought the server had forgotten about me -- I was literally dying of thirst"? When, in reality, they .. um, "literally" weren't? Why do folks 40 and under often sprinkle their conversations with the word "like"? ("So I was like, 'did you enjoy the book?', and she was like 'I totally loved it'").
You will learn so much about how regional accents came to be; about why, if I "susPECT" someone of a crime, they become a SUSpect", or if i "reBEL", I have become a "REBel". McWhorter's book is a fast, captivating read, filled with examples of words and speech that we hear, and often use, every day. One caveat: there's a small amount of colorful language here and there (you'll understand why) but not enough to worry over too much.
I can't remember the last time I enjoyed a nonfiction book any more than this one. Highly recommended!
For instance, if someone receives poor service in a restaurant, why, in their recounting of the episode, are they likely to say "I thought the server had forgotten about me -- I was literally dying of thirst"? When, in reality, they .. um, "literally" weren't? Why do folks 40 and under often sprinkle their conversations with the word "like"? ("So I was like, 'did you enjoy the book?', and she was like 'I totally loved it'").
You will learn so much about how regional accents came to be; about why, if I "susPECT" someone of a crime, they become a SUSpect", or if i "reBEL", I have become a "REBel". McWhorter's book is a fast, captivating read, filled with examples of words and speech that we hear, and often use, every day. One caveat: there's a small amount of colorful language here and there (you'll understand why) but not enough to worry over too much.
I can't remember the last time I enjoyed a nonfiction book any more than this one. Highly recommended!
June 16, 2017
I've gone through two of John McWhorter's Great Courses on language; I've read several of his books, and I'm a faithful listener to his podcast. When I picked up this book I suddenly realized, "I know just what he's going to say. I get John McWhorter." But a testimony to his consummate skill as a popularizer and communicator is that I couldn't help myself and I finished the book anyway. And then, particularly with regard to back-shifting, McWhorter managed to say something new to me that my own reading in linguistics hasn't brought me to. I collect so many quotable quotes and fun illustrations from him that I can use in my own popularizing work.
And his head is screwed on straight. He spends an entire book bemusedly observing the sometimes random changes in language (in both word meaning and pronunciation) and offering none of the moral judgments people expect about them But he knows readers want that judgment, and he gives it to them in a wise form. Listen to this:
For a linguist to hope that the public will give up the idea that some ways of speaking are more appropriate for formal settings than others would be futile—especially since all linguists agree with the public on this. Often we are asked, "If all these things considered bad grammar are really okay, then why don’t you use them in your writing and speeches?" However, none of us is pretending that a society of human beings could function in which all spoke or wrote however they wanted to and yet had equal chances at success in life. The linguist’s point is that there are no scientific grounds for considering any way of speaking erroneous in some structural or logical sense. To understand this is not to give up on learning to communicate appropriately to context. To understand this is, rather, to shed the contempt: the acrid disgust so many seem to harbor for people who use the forms we have been taught are "bad."
This is very practical wisdom. It would have saved me from asking a Singaporean friend what his first language was and (I'm so embarrassed by this) asking a Kenyan friend why he speaks English wrong. It would have saved me from mocking a teacher who had a Southern accent when I was eighteen. And even now, the implicit connection to class McWhorter makes ("equal chances at success in life") is a good reason to be humble about whatever facility I've attained in the use of standard American English. The truth is that I've been schooled in it from infancy. I never, never had to labor to acquire it. (Thanks, English Major Dad.)
McWhorter also raises the question: “If the way so many people talk is okay, then what counts as a mistake?”
And he provides an answer:
When people are doing things on their own. I once knew someone who, for some reason, despite otherwise perfectly ordinary American English, used "nerfry" for nursery and "grofery" for grocery. That was, quite simply, off because no one else says the words that way; nor is there anything about their sounds that makes it likely that anyone ever will.
Get it set in your mind that McWhorter isn't giving the inmates permission to rule the asylum, only noting that they in fact do whether think they do or not, and you can quell your moral alarm at his sometimes nonjudgmental descriptions of language change.
And then there's this, an idea I consider a significant advance in my own understanding:
The fury some harbor over language usage issues is incommensurate with the gravity of the issue. Does anyone genuinely fear that we are on our way to babbling incomprehensibly to one another when no such thing has ever happened among a single human group in the history of our species? One suspects more afoot than logic: rage over language usage may be the last permissible open classism, channeling a tribalist impulse roiling ever underneath.
I doubt this will persuade anyone of his or her guilt, but this is by far the best explanation I've seen for the furor people raise over language change—and the moral disapprobation I see on people's faces when they find out I'm fine with changes in language. I have literally been told that I am a moral relativist, even after I have tried to explain with great care what I do and don't mean. (It was during a Q&A in front of a large group of people; it was awkward.)
Especially helpful for me was the fact that one theme in McWhorter's book was identical to the major theme of my upcoming book, Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible (in fact, I'm hoping to get my hero McWhorter to blurb the book for me!). The argument I apply to the King James he applies to Shakespeare. And the argument is this simple:
English has changed a lot more since Shakespeare than we think.
The key there is "than we think." People who don't obsess over language change like McWhorter does just aren't likely to notice all the subtle differences that make Shakespeare and the KJV bumpy sidewalks for modern readers. There are many words in each that McWhorter calls "false friends," words that we still use today but that meant something different in Elizabethan times. McWhorter and I share the same value: we want people to understand what they read and hear. So he made precisely the call I've made: update the false friends. His words on this issue are exceptionally wise and deft—and I promptly added them to the manuscript of my own book.
Thank you again, John McWhorter. I owe you a great debt, I really do.
March 10, 2025
A truly FUN book: it's entertaining, educational, and gets you outside of your own language paradigm box. McWhorter structures the book around the different ways that words - both in speech and writing - shift and change over time, in meaning, in spelling, in grammar.
Rather than the staunch approach, McWhorter advocates for the adaptations: why text language and emojis are language and communication, how this process of language bastardization is nothing new and occurs in all languages (with lots of examples from dozens of languages noted).
I particularly liked the chapter on vowel shifts and accents - and found myself reading aloud so I could feel and hear the words shift - the SUS-pect was sus-PECT-ed of the crime - the RE-cord was re-CORD-ed... here's some of that fun I was mentioning above!
Another bonus is McWhorter's frequent literary analysis of words shifting in meaning and pronunciation from Beowulf to Shakespeare's writings (he cites a lot of Shakespeare, but for good reason, as this was a time that the English language was codified and published broadly, thus putting it on the page and "sealing" it in time!) and a later discussion on Melville's Moby Dick and the different word meanings since the mid-nineteenth century.
Loved his closing words in the acknowledgments, thanking his students at Columbia University:
"The heart of the matter (ever confusing, ever fascinating) is the difference between print and speech, vaster than it seems. Print is the statue, speech is the person; print is the drawing, speech is the thing; print is a snapshot, speech is the life - and yet, gracious, it's hard to truly feel that from day to day. My students have, with intelligence and wit, spurred me on in seeking to help the public see language plain."
5* // Fantastic linguistics fun
The question is not whether a word will undergo one or more of these processes, but which one it will go through. We do not watch a parade and wonder why those people just don't stand still. Language is a parade: the word whose sound and meaning stays the same over centuries is the exception rather than the rule.
Rather than the staunch approach, McWhorter advocates for the adaptations: why text language and emojis are language and communication, how this process of language bastardization is nothing new and occurs in all languages (with lots of examples from dozens of languages noted).
I particularly liked the chapter on vowel shifts and accents - and found myself reading aloud so I could feel and hear the words shift - the SUS-pect was sus-PECT-ed of the crime - the RE-cord was re-CORD-ed... here's some of that fun I was mentioning above!
Another bonus is McWhorter's frequent literary analysis of words shifting in meaning and pronunciation from Beowulf to Shakespeare's writings (he cites a lot of Shakespeare, but for good reason, as this was a time that the English language was codified and published broadly, thus putting it on the page and "sealing" it in time!) and a later discussion on Melville's Moby Dick and the different word meanings since the mid-nineteenth century.
Loved his closing words in the acknowledgments, thanking his students at Columbia University:
"The heart of the matter (ever confusing, ever fascinating) is the difference between print and speech, vaster than it seems. Print is the statue, speech is the person; print is the drawing, speech is the thing; print is a snapshot, speech is the life - and yet, gracious, it's hard to truly feel that from day to day. My students have, with intelligence and wit, spurred me on in seeking to help the public see language plain."
5* // Fantastic linguistics fun
April 10, 2019
As a former English major and someone who has worked as an English teacher and writer for most of my adult life, I've spent a good amount of time around grammar nazis. Far too much, really. But let's not just paint all grammar nazis with the same brush — there are varying degrees of crazy each can get over viewing a misplaced comma.
For just like actual Nazi nazis, in all frenzied gatherings of grammar nazis you'll find your real Goebbels-level psychopaths as well as your "I didn't know about the concentration camps, I just wanted to serve my country" type nazis like Hans von Luck.
Back in the days when I was forced to make a living while chained to a desk, I had a colleague named Kate who was definitely Goebbels on the grammar front. Her main gripe, and one of the top three reasons she'd fly into a frothy rage each day, were people who wrote "till" as an abbreviation for "until".
"Nein, nein, nein!" She'd shriek, spewing me with flecks of today's, and yesterday's, lunch. "A 'till' is a gardening appliance used to prepare land for crops! A genuine abbreviation for "until" would be spelled "til", NOT 'till'!"
A till is also another word for a cash register, but I didn't say that.
After the daily "till" rant had run its course, two other colleagues, Tommy and Oliver, (AKA Himmler and Göring) would start in on how stupid those people were who used "decimate" to mean utter destruction rather than just one death in every ten, as the Romans intended. "What total melts!" The three would loudly concur, sending me scrambling to google what a "melt" was, while they went back to writing content for that social game on Facebook your aunt keeps sending you invites to play.
All this is not to say that I am without blemish, by any means. My own personal pet peeve is people who write "yea" instead of "yeah", as in "yes".
Ahem, yeah — that bugs me.
But I think I keep pretty cool about it.
In any case, the author of this delightfully fun book specifically cites the "decimate" example as a case when grammar nazis just need to chill, which of course put me in mind of my dearly departed colleagues, the memory of whom recalled such deeply repressed frustration that I will be sure to write Mr. McWhorter to complain about it.
Did I already say how much fun this book is? It really is, and relateable! Because we've all had ridicule heaped upon us by the grammar nazis we've been forced to put up with in our lives, to whom I now say:
"This book is for you! Just accept it you fascists! Language changes! The meaning of certain words, like "decimate", changes! Have a little fun and misplace a comma for christs' sake! failing to capitalize god or "failing" when it comes at the start of a sentence isn't the end of the world or a reason to allow yourselves to get distracted from your shitty sex lives! And yes! I have used FAR TOO MANY exclamation points and you know what?! I dont care!!! I like so totally dont!
For just like actual Nazi nazis, in all frenzied gatherings of grammar nazis you'll find your real Goebbels-level psychopaths as well as your "I didn't know about the concentration camps, I just wanted to serve my country" type nazis like Hans von Luck.
Back in the days when I was forced to make a living while chained to a desk, I had a colleague named Kate who was definitely Goebbels on the grammar front. Her main gripe, and one of the top three reasons she'd fly into a frothy rage each day, were people who wrote "till" as an abbreviation for "until".
"Nein, nein, nein!" She'd shriek, spewing me with flecks of today's, and yesterday's, lunch. "A 'till' is a gardening appliance used to prepare land for crops! A genuine abbreviation for "until" would be spelled "til", NOT 'till'!"
A till is also another word for a cash register, but I didn't say that.
After the daily "till" rant had run its course, two other colleagues, Tommy and Oliver, (AKA Himmler and Göring) would start in on how stupid those people were who used "decimate" to mean utter destruction rather than just one death in every ten, as the Romans intended. "What total melts!" The three would loudly concur, sending me scrambling to google what a "melt" was, while they went back to writing content for that social game on Facebook your aunt keeps sending you invites to play.
All this is not to say that I am without blemish, by any means. My own personal pet peeve is people who write "yea" instead of "yeah", as in "yes".
Ahem, yeah — that bugs me.
But I think I keep pretty cool about it.
In any case, the author of this delightfully fun book specifically cites the "decimate" example as a case when grammar nazis just need to chill, which of course put me in mind of my dearly departed colleagues, the memory of whom recalled such deeply repressed frustration that I will be sure to write Mr. McWhorter to complain about it.
Did I already say how much fun this book is? It really is, and relateable! Because we've all had ridicule heaped upon us by the grammar nazis we've been forced to put up with in our lives, to whom I now say:
"This book is for you! Just accept it you fascists! Language changes! The meaning of certain words, like "decimate", changes! Have a little fun and misplace a comma for christs' sake! failing to capitalize god or "failing" when it comes at the start of a sentence isn't the end of the world or a reason to allow yourselves to get distracted from your shitty sex lives! And yes! I have used FAR TOO MANY exclamation points and you know what?! I dont care!!! I like so totally dont!
May 27, 2019
I started this book on 14th Dec. 2014. It has disappeared from my shelves. But I had other records :-) Back then some over-eager and ignorant librarians were marking all these audio lectures Not A Book despite the fact that they come with course books. This one has a book of 170 pages with it. Text books are books! But I don't know if that's how it disappeared.
Whenever I find a book missing from my shelves I have never any idea and when I used to write to the Support or ask a mod I always got the same anodyne answer, Provide all the details you can and we'll look into it and they would make out in what I would imagine as a breathy voice, Oh this is so strange, we've never had this happen before. I never heard back from them in a positive way. I rarely did hear back but when I did they would say I must have deleted it in error myself. Yeah right.
Whenever I find a book missing from my shelves I have never any idea and when I used to write to the Support or ask a mod I always got the same anodyne answer, Provide all the details you can and we'll look into it and they would make out in what I would imagine as a breathy voice, Oh this is so strange, we've never had this happen before. I never heard back from them in a positive way. I rarely did hear back but when I did they would say I must have deleted it in error myself. Yeah right.
February 18, 2019
If you're going to read this (and I highly recommend that you do) you must commit to it. It's short, accessible, and engaging, so stick with McWhorter as he builds his argument.
I'm going along, thinking I got what I needed from the introduction, but still reading because I like his wit, his use of a healthy blend of formal and idiomatic language, his verve. I'm doing a lot of nodding, and a lot of wincing, and a lot of debating. I'm all like "Yeah but you're making these points about speaking (and primitive texting); Ima not gonna be so loosey-goosey about written language because then how can we understand books more than a few decades old without translations?"
And then, after inserting a bunch of bookdarts and thinking hard at each section break, I get to the end, in which he wraps it all up. Ah! Ok, I get it now!
I still don't agree with him 100%, but I'm going to be considerably less pedantic, and try to chill whenever I can.
So, yes, I think you should read it if you're a prescriptive pedant interested in the other perspective, if you want support for your descriptive perspective (if you find Lynne Truss annoying, for example) or if you want to get along better w/ ppl irl, or if you are a curmudgeonly stuffed shirt. Or if you're just curious.
So, now I'll add some of the bookdarted passages to try to lure you....
The meaning of words does change dramatically. Though the story of Charles II praising Christopher Wren's St. Paul's cathedral as "awful, pompous, and artificial" is mostly apocryphal, the fact is that he could have said it, and indeed those words would have been complimentary.
McWhorter also advocates for translations of Shakespeare to get more ppl to the stage. Not adaptations like West Side Story, but updating the approximately 10% of the words that don't resemble what we say today. I'm still thinking about this. If it mattered to me, I'd read that chapter again. But in my case what holds me back is the cost of the tickets! I do understand a traditionally staged video of a play better than I understand the script. Anyway, it's an interesting discussion and well worth a read even if you don't care.
One language change that's happening right now is that 'all' is becoming a legitimate grammatical marker. Whether we approve or not, things like 'What all do I need to pack' and 'Who's all going there' are here to stay. And that's ok.
His story of the development of the word 'fishburger' is great. And now I have to YouTube "Frankfurter Sandwiches."
Btw, I didn't write this review right away. And I find myself still thinking about the book. (Good book!) One thing I'm pondering is that I'm all for language change when it's evolution for something that enriches communication. And no, I don't just mean the random new word for technology, nor just spelling reform, but also what some would consider bigger changes like not fretting about the word 'whom' and all the words that inevitably get created by squishing, like electronic mail to e-mail to email.
But I really have trouble with messing up useful, specific words' meanings and pronunciations, for example appropriating literally for figuratively. What can we say now when we actually mean literally? Actually and really and in truth just don't cut it. And nucular for nuclear is just plain wrong. And I wish there wasn't so much drift, but I won't fight it: McWhorter says that a clan in a cave, with no outside influences, would still have a language changed from that their ancestors spoke, after just a few hundred years becoming less intelligible to one another.
Yeah. Read this. Or at least read something by McWhorter if your library doesn't have this. Ima gonna.
I'm going along, thinking I got what I needed from the introduction, but still reading because I like his wit, his use of a healthy blend of formal and idiomatic language, his verve. I'm doing a lot of nodding, and a lot of wincing, and a lot of debating. I'm all like "Yeah but you're making these points about speaking (and primitive texting); Ima not gonna be so loosey-goosey about written language because then how can we understand books more than a few decades old without translations?"
And then, after inserting a bunch of bookdarts and thinking hard at each section break, I get to the end, in which he wraps it all up. Ah! Ok, I get it now!
I still don't agree with him 100%, but I'm going to be considerably less pedantic, and try to chill whenever I can.
So, yes, I think you should read it if you're a prescriptive pedant interested in the other perspective, if you want support for your descriptive perspective (if you find Lynne Truss annoying, for example) or if you want to get along better w/ ppl irl, or if you are a curmudgeonly stuffed shirt. Or if you're just curious.
So, now I'll add some of the bookdarted passages to try to lure you....
The meaning of words does change dramatically. Though the story of Charles II praising Christopher Wren's St. Paul's cathedral as "awful, pompous, and artificial" is mostly apocryphal, the fact is that he could have said it, and indeed those words would have been complimentary.
McWhorter also advocates for translations of Shakespeare to get more ppl to the stage. Not adaptations like West Side Story, but updating the approximately 10% of the words that don't resemble what we say today. I'm still thinking about this. If it mattered to me, I'd read that chapter again. But in my case what holds me back is the cost of the tickets! I do understand a traditionally staged video of a play better than I understand the script. Anyway, it's an interesting discussion and well worth a read even if you don't care.
One language change that's happening right now is that 'all' is becoming a legitimate grammatical marker. Whether we approve or not, things like 'What all do I need to pack' and 'Who's all going there' are here to stay. And that's ok.
His story of the development of the word 'fishburger' is great. And now I have to YouTube "Frankfurter Sandwiches."
Btw, I didn't write this review right away. And I find myself still thinking about the book. (Good book!) One thing I'm pondering is that I'm all for language change when it's evolution for something that enriches communication. And no, I don't just mean the random new word for technology, nor just spelling reform, but also what some would consider bigger changes like not fretting about the word 'whom' and all the words that inevitably get created by squishing, like electronic mail to e-mail to email.
But I really have trouble with messing up useful, specific words' meanings and pronunciations, for example appropriating literally for figuratively. What can we say now when we actually mean literally? Actually and really and in truth just don't cut it. And nucular for nuclear is just plain wrong. And I wish there wasn't so much drift, but I won't fight it: McWhorter says that a clan in a cave, with no outside influences, would still have a language changed from that their ancestors spoke, after just a few hundred years becoming less intelligible to one another.
Yeah. Read this. Or at least read something by McWhorter if your library doesn't have this. Ima gonna.
July 31, 2018
As a reader I pay a lot of attention to language and how it is used and how it sometimes feels natural and other times feels awkward and stilted. What I don't pay attention to is what people say. Sure, we all know spoken English is not the same as written, but I am, if you will, acutely unaware of how people are speaking to me. Thankfully McWhorter is around to educate and delight me. Some prior McWhorter book no doubt elicited a comment about how much I enjoy the linguistics and how little I enjoy the social theorizing by comparison: this one is jammed full of examples, so, yay!
The last paragraph had a metaphor that was seriously icky, which is fresh in my mind, being read only a few minutes ago, so it feels like a bigger deal than it is. But ew.
The rest of it was great though.
Library copy
The last paragraph had a metaphor that was seriously icky, which is fresh in my mind, being read only a few minutes ago, so it feels like a bigger deal than it is. But ew.
The rest of it was great though.
Library copy
September 29, 2019
This is truly one of the best linguistics books I've read. Most people have no idea that language can be so much fun and linguists like McWhorter make it so interesting. The idea is that words can't sit still, they're constantly evolving. They morph into different shapes, meanings and sounds. And honestly that is what keeps a language alive. Take the word "like" for instance. It comes from a Latin word "Lic" pronounced as "leek". Over time, it transformed into Like. And in terms of meaning, "like" has recently attained three additional and colloquial meanings. For example: “And she was like, ‘I didn’t even invite him.’” "like" here is what we call a "quotative like". It's an equivalent of "She said". Some words are even the result of people's misconceptions at one point. For instance, words like chocoholic, workaholic, textaholic, etc. ,which have their roots in "alcoholic", were created upon reflection that "alcoholic" consists of "alco+holic" rather than "alcohol+ic". Nowadays we hear words like "medicopter" or "seacopter". You can imagine these words, because you know what a copter is. But the idea of copter as short for helicopter chops the word in a place its coiners would have found unnatural. Helico means spiral and pter “wing.” Both roots are Greek and, by themselves, fairly recognizable; we all know what a helix is, and pter also made it into pterodactyl. However, in English we don’t spontaneously process pt as the beginning of a word or even a syllable, and so helico-pter most readily comes out as “heli-copter.” We all know that Homo sapiens of European heritage carried DNA sequences from Neanderthals, as a
result of matings long ago. In the same way, words can leave chunks of themselves inside other words, replacing the original material with a new one. The word lives on, and no one bats an eye.
A black board is some board that someone painted black. A blackboard is the particular thing made of slate that hangs on a schoolroom wall. Black board is pronounced “black BOARD,” while the thing on the wall is a “BLACK-board,” and that’s no accident. The way we mark blackboard as “a thing,” different from just any old board that happens to be black, is with the Backshift (The shift of the accent backward). A language in which the vowels stayed the same would be a language spoken either by robots or by a people so demoniacally obsessed with keeping their vowels in place that they would have to devote all life’s energy to that task—which would be, essentially, death anyway.
result of matings long ago. In the same way, words can leave chunks of themselves inside other words, replacing the original material with a new one. The word lives on, and no one bats an eye.
A black board is some board that someone painted black. A blackboard is the particular thing made of slate that hangs on a schoolroom wall. Black board is pronounced “black BOARD,” while the thing on the wall is a “BLACK-board,” and that’s no accident. The way we mark blackboard as “a thing,” different from just any old board that happens to be black, is with the Backshift (The shift of the accent backward). A language in which the vowels stayed the same would be a language spoken either by robots or by a people so demoniacally obsessed with keeping their vowels in place that they would have to devote all life’s energy to that task—which would be, essentially, death anyway.
November 7, 2017
I've been a fan of John McWhorter's ideas and personality for more than 10 years now, but this is even better than his previous work (including The Language Hoax which I just recently read). The same pieces are here, but McWhorter's upped his game. There's still insightful analysis making a field (linguistics) inherently interesting and engaging, but this is even more focused on what would matter to a layperson. It's possible I don't count as a layperson, but I'm certainly not a trained linguist. And doesn't everyone care about whether irregardless is a real word? And how "like" has become a piece of grammar, so it's not like a real word anymore? If not, surely his argument that a** has also become a piece of grammar instead of its own word will, er, grab you ;)
Another thing I love about this is clear reasoning that inspires you to think your own thoughts and opinions about his examples, including the above, or whether you want to think uptalk is still horrid (you know, ending every statement on a higher register so it sounds like each of them is a question?). So it apparently has a lingual purpose? And it's not just a younger generation being completely unsure of themselves? And how you are, of course, free to think literally anything you want of it?
McWhorter's key argument here is that the understanding of language as a static thing that shouldn't change is not only wrong and impossible, but historically recent (concurrent with the creation of dictionaries). He's got enough historical examples to make life tough on those who insist there's a "correct" grammar and vocabulary. For example, if you have a problem with the prefix "ir" being added to "regardless" to mean the same darn thing, you should switch back to "whelm", which meant the same thing as the version which has acquired the "over" prefix and is all we use today. Otherwise you run the risk of your grandchildren thinking you're weird for leaving off the first two letters of irregardless when you say it :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhUJe...
In other words, languages change over time, and there isn't really a concept of "correct" as long as the meaning is clear, which it literally still is. Sit back. Relax. You don't need to be the grammar police. There don't need to be _any_ grammar police.
If I haven't sold you on this book yet (if you only read one McWhorter, make it this one), there's some good background on the field of linguistics, including the FACE aspects of how language tends to change and pronunciation Backshifts when new compound words become single words. I give bonus points for a reference to Jack Finney's Time and Again, and will leave you with this wonderful quote from the book when McWhorter talks about pronunciation:
"The sense in all these things becomes clear when we know two things: one, that English spelling is a tragic accident that steers us away from what's happening in our own mouths, and two, that vowels, like the meanings of words, are ever on the move. Not only a word but a sound is something going on rather than something that is."
Another thing I love about this is clear reasoning that inspires you to think your own thoughts and opinions about his examples, including the above, or whether you want to think uptalk is still horrid (you know, ending every statement on a higher register so it sounds like each of them is a question?). So it apparently has a lingual purpose? And it's not just a younger generation being completely unsure of themselves? And how you are, of course, free to think literally anything you want of it?
McWhorter's key argument here is that the understanding of language as a static thing that shouldn't change is not only wrong and impossible, but historically recent (concurrent with the creation of dictionaries). He's got enough historical examples to make life tough on those who insist there's a "correct" grammar and vocabulary. For example, if you have a problem with the prefix "ir" being added to "regardless" to mean the same darn thing, you should switch back to "whelm", which meant the same thing as the version which has acquired the "over" prefix and is all we use today. Otherwise you run the risk of your grandchildren thinking you're weird for leaving off the first two letters of irregardless when you say it :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhUJe...
In other words, languages change over time, and there isn't really a concept of "correct" as long as the meaning is clear, which it literally still is. Sit back. Relax. You don't need to be the grammar police. There don't need to be _any_ grammar police.
If I haven't sold you on this book yet (if you only read one McWhorter, make it this one), there's some good background on the field of linguistics, including the FACE aspects of how language tends to change and pronunciation Backshifts when new compound words become single words. I give bonus points for a reference to Jack Finney's Time and Again, and will leave you with this wonderful quote from the book when McWhorter talks about pronunciation:
"The sense in all these things becomes clear when we know two things: one, that English spelling is a tragic accident that steers us away from what's happening in our own mouths, and two, that vowels, like the meanings of words, are ever on the move. Not only a word but a sound is something going on rather than something that is."
February 27, 2018
I literally, like, worship John McWhorter.
"No," you say, "You don't "literally" worship him. And quit using "like."" "Thank you," sez I, "that's exactly the response I was looking for. "
Language is a living thing, and like all living things, it grows and changes. As much as the use of "literally" to mean something that is figurative may make you tear out your hair, there are two things you should remember. First, that this is what language does, even to the point of some words coming to mean their exact opposite, frex, fast means something that is rapid. It also means something that is held immobile. Second, many of the words we use regularly, and think of as proper usage have already changed dramatically. Why don't we care? Because that happened long before we learned to speak. It's the newness that drives people crazy. They believe language must be frozen in dictionary form for eternity. But it doesn't work that way.
McWhorter is a brilliant scholar and lecturer, who can counter every argument you can come up with against some new usage in about half a dozen different ways without breaking a sweat. He explains how meanings change, how spelling and pronunciation change, and how grammar changes. He also explains why they do, how vowels shift from generation to generation, changing the pronunciation of a word over time. He discusses how word meanings change, citing examples such as our word "silly" which comes from the Old English "sǣliġ" which meant blessed, which later came to mean "innocent" and from there took on a negative connotation of weak-minded or silly.
Drawing examples from Chaucer, Shakespeare, Herman Melville, and even more contemporary sources such as Saul Bellow and F. Scott Fitzgerald, he cites examples of the huge changes English has gone through, continues to go through, will continue to go through, will we or nil we. As such, this book is an excellent primer on how not to be too pole-up-the-ass about casual usage. Yes, it's important for people to know how to communicate clearly in formal settings, but as he quite rightly points out, no language has ever devolved into meaningless babble in spite of the constant changes that it undergoes, and no language ever will.
Whether you're a language purist or someone who loves watching language evolve, I think you'll find yourself fascinated by this book.
"No," you say, "You don't "literally" worship him. And quit using "like."" "Thank you," sez I, "that's exactly the response I was looking for. "
Language is a living thing, and like all living things, it grows and changes. As much as the use of "literally" to mean something that is figurative may make you tear out your hair, there are two things you should remember. First, that this is what language does, even to the point of some words coming to mean their exact opposite, frex, fast means something that is rapid. It also means something that is held immobile. Second, many of the words we use regularly, and think of as proper usage have already changed dramatically. Why don't we care? Because that happened long before we learned to speak. It's the newness that drives people crazy. They believe language must be frozen in dictionary form for eternity. But it doesn't work that way.
McWhorter is a brilliant scholar and lecturer, who can counter every argument you can come up with against some new usage in about half a dozen different ways without breaking a sweat. He explains how meanings change, how spelling and pronunciation change, and how grammar changes. He also explains why they do, how vowels shift from generation to generation, changing the pronunciation of a word over time. He discusses how word meanings change, citing examples such as our word "silly" which comes from the Old English "sǣliġ" which meant blessed, which later came to mean "innocent" and from there took on a negative connotation of weak-minded or silly.
Drawing examples from Chaucer, Shakespeare, Herman Melville, and even more contemporary sources such as Saul Bellow and F. Scott Fitzgerald, he cites examples of the huge changes English has gone through, continues to go through, will continue to go through, will we or nil we. As such, this book is an excellent primer on how not to be too pole-up-the-ass about casual usage. Yes, it's important for people to know how to communicate clearly in formal settings, but as he quite rightly points out, no language has ever devolved into meaningless babble in spite of the constant changes that it undergoes, and no language ever will.
Whether you're a language purist or someone who loves watching language evolve, I think you'll find yourself fascinated by this book.
November 29, 2017
'The twentieth century witnessed many interesting things; one of them was the grammaticalization of ass.'
Words on the Move is one phenomenal book! A book with high edutainment value that I think works best as an audiobook since it's written conversationally and pronunciation is an essential part for the latter half of it. Words on the Move effortlessly opens up the mind to just how and how often (much more often that I thought) language changes i.e. something that's always on the move.
'It's hard not to think so: life is slow, dictionaries are big, and novelty is unsettling. But novelty can also be a lot of fun. Some consider it the staff of life. It’s certainly what keeps most linguists so interested in language—but we don’t share it enough. In this book I want to help change that.'
And so begins the journey of just how a language changes from century to century and even from one decade to another and how the meaning of a word is not what the dictionary says since it is a collection of words' meanings at the moment of its compilation, but is determined by how people are presently using it.
The concepts of modal markers, uptalk, grammaticalization, backshift and vowel shift, changes in sounds and where the sound emphasis is placed in a word and how written English is an utter mess left over by people long dead are all quite fascinating and peppered with interesting examples throughout. For instance, I, for one, had no idea about the origin of the word 'world' used to mean 'age of man.' There's also quite an interesting historical background about Black English and its usage.
I will admit that changes in the English language is not something that unsettles me all that much which could be because English is my second language and so I have to work on my English language skills more often than a native speaker would have to to remain up-to-date. It is nevertheless, written with the objective in mind to persuade people who are opposed, or at the least rigid, to language change to maybe see it in a new light.
I'm quite glad to have read Words on the Move and to have it answer many of the questions I had about English and language in general in an occasional funny, witty and an engaging package. 10/10 would recommend!
Words on the Move is one phenomenal book! A book with high edutainment value that I think works best as an audiobook since it's written conversationally and pronunciation is an essential part for the latter half of it. Words on the Move effortlessly opens up the mind to just how and how often (much more often that I thought) language changes i.e. something that's always on the move.
'It's hard not to think so: life is slow, dictionaries are big, and novelty is unsettling. But novelty can also be a lot of fun. Some consider it the staff of life. It’s certainly what keeps most linguists so interested in language—but we don’t share it enough. In this book I want to help change that.'
And so begins the journey of just how a language changes from century to century and even from one decade to another and how the meaning of a word is not what the dictionary says since it is a collection of words' meanings at the moment of its compilation, but is determined by how people are presently using it.
The concepts of modal markers, uptalk, grammaticalization, backshift and vowel shift, changes in sounds and where the sound emphasis is placed in a word and how written English is an utter mess left over by people long dead are all quite fascinating and peppered with interesting examples throughout. For instance, I, for one, had no idea about the origin of the word 'world' used to mean 'age of man.' There's also quite an interesting historical background about Black English and its usage.
I will admit that changes in the English language is not something that unsettles me all that much which could be because English is my second language and so I have to work on my English language skills more often than a native speaker would have to to remain up-to-date. It is nevertheless, written with the objective in mind to persuade people who are opposed, or at the least rigid, to language change to maybe see it in a new light.
I'm quite glad to have read Words on the Move and to have it answer many of the questions I had about English and language in general in an occasional funny, witty and an engaging package. 10/10 would recommend!
June 30, 2016
Thanks to the generosity of author John McWhorter and Henry Holt and Company, I was able to review this ARC of Words on the Move through winning a Goodreads giveaway.
I love words and the stories behind them, so I was drawn to McWhorter's book from the start. The book itself is one part word-histories, one part linguistics, and one part professorial rambling. The chapters acted more like hazy meditations on a theme rather than focused on one main idea--an aspect of the book that made it hard to read. I found myself wanting to speed past the word-for-word repetitions of main ideas (and some of the attempts at corny humor) to get back to the meat of the ideas. At times the book felt less like one unified whole and more like a collection of blog posts or collected academic lectures. I wonder if formatting the book in this way--for readers to dip in and out--would be preferable.
As for the humor, the attempts fell mostly flat on the page while I'm sure they work better when heard in person or delivered in a classroom lecture. Many had the effect of a digression that instead of clarifying or extending the point, just led me away from the main idea and tempted me to start skimming until I could pick up the thread again. That being said, sometimes the humor I initially discounted worked its way back into the explanation in meaningful and surprising ways.
The bones are good and I did enjoy the premise. Know that if you pick up this book, you're in for a bit of a slog, but there are definitely some great moments. When McWhorter helps the reader make connections between the way words change and our cultural aversion to it, his writing is at its best. I highly disagree with his argument that it's time to "translate" Shakespeare, but I suppose I'm just the kind of person he writes about. I like "translating" Shakespeare for myself and enriching my appreciation for words and their histories. Thanks to McWhorter, I have an appreciation for even more.
I love words and the stories behind them, so I was drawn to McWhorter's book from the start. The book itself is one part word-histories, one part linguistics, and one part professorial rambling. The chapters acted more like hazy meditations on a theme rather than focused on one main idea--an aspect of the book that made it hard to read. I found myself wanting to speed past the word-for-word repetitions of main ideas (and some of the attempts at corny humor) to get back to the meat of the ideas. At times the book felt less like one unified whole and more like a collection of blog posts or collected academic lectures. I wonder if formatting the book in this way--for readers to dip in and out--would be preferable.
As for the humor, the attempts fell mostly flat on the page while I'm sure they work better when heard in person or delivered in a classroom lecture. Many had the effect of a digression that instead of clarifying or extending the point, just led me away from the main idea and tempted me to start skimming until I could pick up the thread again. That being said, sometimes the humor I initially discounted worked its way back into the explanation in meaningful and surprising ways.
The bones are good and I did enjoy the premise. Know that if you pick up this book, you're in for a bit of a slog, but there are definitely some great moments. When McWhorter helps the reader make connections between the way words change and our cultural aversion to it, his writing is at its best. I highly disagree with his argument that it's time to "translate" Shakespeare, but I suppose I'm just the kind of person he writes about. I like "translating" Shakespeare for myself and enriching my appreciation for words and their histories. Thanks to McWhorter, I have an appreciation for even more.
June 1, 2017
I love John McWhorter. He makes linguistics, language, grammar, human communication, and history so much fun. Granted, I find all those subjects interesting anyway, but McWhorter makes so many clever observations and comments that it is simply entertaining.
He is also the rare author who delivers the perfect narration of his writing too. (I'm guessing that's because he's used to delivering speeches as a professor.)
He is also the rare author who delivers the perfect narration of his writing too. (I'm guessing that's because he's used to delivering speeches as a professor.)
September 22, 2016
What a fun and delightful book this is. Written in his trademark humorous style, John McWhorter tackles the serious and engrossing subject of language change in a way that doesn't require a linguistics degree to enjoy and follow. The reader is carried along on McWhorter's lively prose, learning about not only the English in which the book is written, but about human language as a whole.
Linguists are not stern high school English teachers who insist on "proper" grammar; rather, linguists are describers of language as it is, and as it was. McWhorter does just that; he discusses linguistic changes which are occurring right now (I am so tempted to say, "as we speak," but I shall refrain), and changes which have occurred in the past giving us the language we speak everyday. Each chapter covers a different aspect of language change, and very interesting it is, too.
It makes sense, if we stop to think about it, that languages must change, and that English has changed quite a bit, or Shakespeare would be as easy to understand as an Archie comic. But most of us are able to take speaking a language for granted; we learn to speak before we are old enough to remember, everyone around us speaks a language, and we all sound more or less the same. I remember once reading about a speaker in a hollow (valley) in the hills of Kentucky who opined that she herself did not have an accent, but that the people in the next hollow over did! We are conditioned to hear what we expect to hear, and don't notice the subtle changes which are constantly occurring.
I am not going to give chapter and verse because you should have the pleasure of reading this book for yourself. But if you have ever wondered why we say "willy-nilly," and a zillion other seemingly odd things, do yourself a favor, pick up "Words on the Move," and prepare to be amused, amazed, thoroughly entertained, and to learn a lot along the way.
I received an ARC from the publisher and NetGalley for my honest opinion.
Linguists are not stern high school English teachers who insist on "proper" grammar; rather, linguists are describers of language as it is, and as it was. McWhorter does just that; he discusses linguistic changes which are occurring right now (I am so tempted to say, "as we speak," but I shall refrain), and changes which have occurred in the past giving us the language we speak everyday. Each chapter covers a different aspect of language change, and very interesting it is, too.
It makes sense, if we stop to think about it, that languages must change, and that English has changed quite a bit, or Shakespeare would be as easy to understand as an Archie comic. But most of us are able to take speaking a language for granted; we learn to speak before we are old enough to remember, everyone around us speaks a language, and we all sound more or less the same. I remember once reading about a speaker in a hollow (valley) in the hills of Kentucky who opined that she herself did not have an accent, but that the people in the next hollow over did! We are conditioned to hear what we expect to hear, and don't notice the subtle changes which are constantly occurring.
I am not going to give chapter and verse because you should have the pleasure of reading this book for yourself. But if you have ever wondered why we say "willy-nilly," and a zillion other seemingly odd things, do yourself a favor, pick up "Words on the Move," and prepare to be amused, amazed, thoroughly entertained, and to learn a lot along the way.
I received an ARC from the publisher and NetGalley for my honest opinion.
January 29, 2018
This is a really interesting book that I think every cranky grammarian prescriptivist should read, particularly those who think people should speak the Queen's (or even King's) English. If their minds were open to it, they would have to, at the very admit, that evolution of language is a certain fact and that they are definitely not speaking the traditional, time tested language they think they are. The problem, of course, is that people like that generally don't let their minds open to such revelations, so the book may not have its intended effect, but instead merely reinforce the beliefs of both sides of the spectrum (no prizes for guessing where I sit). If you listen to the author's podcast, Lexicon Valley, this book really doesn't offer anything above and beyond what is already in that podcast, but it does have the advantage of providing all that information in a condensed form. It's written as he speaks, and is thus a very accessible and witty book, with a few lame jokes but also some genuine chuckles. If you are a language lover, I definitely recommend this book and the podcast, with one additional caveat: it's very American centric. The principles of the book apply to all English speakers; however, if you are one of those people who think Americans "butcher"the language, then you may be closed to its messages.
October 10, 2017
McWhorter's approach to language and linguistics is refreshing and enlightening. As a trade book, I am sure the ruffles and edges of more scholarly approaches are smoothed out, but McWhorter does a good job of making it simple without being simplistic.
In this work, McWhorter discusses how languages are constantly adapting and changing. He explains how the ceaseless shifts in sounds, usages, and meanings change the language and our understanding of it.
For the purists out there (and I have a lot of sympathy for this group) some of what McWhorter says might not fit comfortably. He makes, however, a persuasive case for his point of view and he is frank about the counterarguments.
Most of all, McWhorter is funny and engaging, a pleasure to read regardless (or irregardless) of your agreement with his view.
In this work, McWhorter discusses how languages are constantly adapting and changing. He explains how the ceaseless shifts in sounds, usages, and meanings change the language and our understanding of it.
For the purists out there (and I have a lot of sympathy for this group) some of what McWhorter says might not fit comfortably. He makes, however, a persuasive case for his point of view and he is frank about the counterarguments.
Most of all, McWhorter is funny and engaging, a pleasure to read regardless (or irregardless) of your agreement with his view.
May 10, 2017
This is an interesting book of words discussing words. The premise: language is a living breathing entity which is always changing. You have to be fascinated by words and language to love this book. John McWhorter is a English professor who specializes in linguistics. He does a fantastic job of making this information palatable to non-experts. One way he does this is to relate his observations to real life examples and expertly uses the analogy to help one understand this complex material. I listened to the audio book and I recommend that readers do so. Why?, one whole chapter is about pronunciation and it was very helpful to hear the narrator actually demonstrate different phonemes.
December 15, 2017
I love the very accepting and generous thesis here: relax about what the kids these days are saying, language always changes. But i think just a few examples would have done the trick. There’s just a lot of examples in here of the same concept and there isn’t as much history as I would have liked. How words change, why? Is there variations across languages? Do some change more than others? It may be asking too much, but I guess I wasn’t quite left satisfied with this book.
January 24, 2017
This book is directed at people who are overly judgmental about the way others use English to communicate. The language has always been constantly changing, so there is no one “standard” English that people ought to use. At the end of the book, the author does, however, make the point that people should use English in a way that is appropriate to the context. A person is not going to get a job by using profanity-laced slang during an interview. I didn’t need to be convinced that there is no one “right” way to use English. But if you do need convincing, this book gives lots of examples of words whose meaning has completely changed over time, as well as two words being merged into one word and other kinds of changes that show that our current way of using English is not the one “right” way.
Since I enjoy thinking about the way people use words, I enjoyed the book. Many words do not convey a specific dictionary-definition meaning; rather, they are used to color the meaning of other words. For example, the words really, very and truly are words that started out meaning actually, but now are words that are used to make what you are saying more emphatic. The word literally is currently in the process of changing in the same way, which leads the author to query why people object to this way of using the word literally, but not this way of using the words really, very or truly. Another example is to make what you are saying more personal, which is, y’know, a good thing to do sometimes. That boy is totally going to call you. Well, I think so, anyway. This is also done by making a declarative statement with a questioning intonation (uptalk). Another example is words that indicate that what you are saying is unexpected. That is one big-ass cat. Another example is to be less blunt and put the listener at ease, you know what I’m saying? It can even make a text more tactful lol.
Some words do not have any dictionary meaning, because they are just part of the language’s grammar, like a, the, used to, and let's. Back to the word ass, as in that was one longass movie, that’s some rottenass meat. Here, ass is used as a suffix. This brings me to my favorite line in this book: “The twentieth century witnessed many interesting things; one of them was the grammaticalization of ass.”
In English, when an adjective is followed by a noun, we usually accent the noun, such as fake NEWS. But if the adjective-noun combo becomes “a thing,” then the accent switches to the first word. So what we now call CHINESE food used to be called Chinese FOOD, the same way you would say this is delicious food. If fake news becomes a thing, people will start saying FAKE news.
The word like can serve different functions. It can signal something unexpected. My office was like 50 degrees today. The word like can also be used to make something sound less harsh. Can you like talk a little more quietly? It can also be used to mean that you’re quoting someone. She was like Are you kidding me? So the word like is a grammar word.
So I was like totally not gonna read this book, but then I was like, it’s a quick-read, so I literally just read it in two seconds, and it turned out to be like a cool-ass book, and anyway it was like better than watching TV, y’know? lol
Since I enjoy thinking about the way people use words, I enjoyed the book. Many words do not convey a specific dictionary-definition meaning; rather, they are used to color the meaning of other words. For example, the words really, very and truly are words that started out meaning actually, but now are words that are used to make what you are saying more emphatic. The word literally is currently in the process of changing in the same way, which leads the author to query why people object to this way of using the word literally, but not this way of using the words really, very or truly. Another example is to make what you are saying more personal, which is, y’know, a good thing to do sometimes. That boy is totally going to call you. Well, I think so, anyway. This is also done by making a declarative statement with a questioning intonation (uptalk). Another example is words that indicate that what you are saying is unexpected. That is one big-ass cat. Another example is to be less blunt and put the listener at ease, you know what I’m saying? It can even make a text more tactful lol.
Some words do not have any dictionary meaning, because they are just part of the language’s grammar, like a, the, used to, and let's. Back to the word ass, as in that was one longass movie, that’s some rottenass meat. Here, ass is used as a suffix. This brings me to my favorite line in this book: “The twentieth century witnessed many interesting things; one of them was the grammaticalization of ass.”
In English, when an adjective is followed by a noun, we usually accent the noun, such as fake NEWS. But if the adjective-noun combo becomes “a thing,” then the accent switches to the first word. So what we now call CHINESE food used to be called Chinese FOOD, the same way you would say this is delicious food. If fake news becomes a thing, people will start saying FAKE news.
The word like can serve different functions. It can signal something unexpected. My office was like 50 degrees today. The word like can also be used to make something sound less harsh. Can you like talk a little more quietly? It can also be used to mean that you’re quoting someone. She was like Are you kidding me? So the word like is a grammar word.
So I was like totally not gonna read this book, but then I was like, it’s a quick-read, so I literally just read it in two seconds, and it turned out to be like a cool-ass book, and anyway it was like better than watching TV, y’know? lol
October 9, 2017
In 2012 I was in Ukraine and saw a sign in English that said that some office is "totally closed". Dude, like, totally. Why wouldn't a native English speaker ever write this? And what does the "like" mean in "dude, like, totally"? Since we are at it, how is "really" different from "very"? A newspaper headline quotes a Spanish official who says that it is "very clear" that Catalan independence isn't going to happen. Why is "really clear" inappropriate here? If someone gives you an answer to this question that begins with "Well, ...", you can ask the next question: what does the "well" here mean? If you are curious about what all these words mean and how they came to acquire their meanings, this delightful little book is for you.
February 12, 2018
I can't recommend this book highly enough for anyone who appreciates grammar and etymology! McWhorter takes what could be a dry topic and really brings it to life. Reading this has gone a long way toward silencing my inner pedant, but I doubt it'll ever be completely suppressed. I especially enjoyed having the author read his own title on Audible, and have since queued up all of his TED Talks that I could find!
June 20, 2018
I started this book a year ago, stopped in the middle, and recently returned to finish.
Pros: Informative and enlightening.
Cons: Too much information, parts were overwhelming.
The humor was hit or miss.
The “take away” is words change in meaning, spelling and usage. I’m now 70 and have seen some of these changes. Now I am not bothered by them.
Pros: Informative and enlightening.
Cons: Too much information, parts were overwhelming.
The humor was hit or miss.
The “take away” is words change in meaning, spelling and usage. I’m now 70 and have seen some of these changes. Now I am not bothered by them.
September 23, 2018
Such a crush on John McWhorter. This is highly entertaining whether or not you've studied the subject.
December 29, 2021
Excellent and entertaining exploration of why and how English, as a language, is more like an ever-changing cloud than a fixed stone. Expands on themes in McWhorter's book Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue.
Replete with example of words that have changed (usually from objective to subjective meaning, among other ways) over the centuries to mean and connote something very different from their original definition. Ex: merry, pretzel, and brassiere all share the same ancestor from the Ukrainian steppes of thousands of years ago--and many other examples.
Also explores how words become grammatical punctuation marks, judiciously saving the chapter on "like" for last, wherein he argues that the California "like" does what every other previous chapter in the book has described words as capable of doing. Fuller review forthcoming.
Replete with example of words that have changed (usually from objective to subjective meaning, among other ways) over the centuries to mean and connote something very different from their original definition. Ex: merry, pretzel, and brassiere all share the same ancestor from the Ukrainian steppes of thousands of years ago--and many other examples.
Also explores how words become grammatical punctuation marks, judiciously saving the chapter on "like" for last, wherein he argues that the California "like" does what every other previous chapter in the book has described words as capable of doing. Fuller review forthcoming.
June 17, 2023
For anyone who loves to linger on language and delights in the history/evolution of words. Also a great read for grammar sticklers who want to codify language into a static list of rights/wrongs, dos or don'ts. Listening to McWhorter's narration on Audible is a MUST.
March 28, 2017
A joyous romp through the big hits of linguistics; I loved this. I also highly recommend listening to the audiobook, since John McWhorter - who hosts the equally fun and fizzy Lexicon Valley podcast - is a natural "radio entertainer". I found myself frequently smiling, laughing, or shaking my head in wonder and awe.
Anyway, philosophically, this book is one giant take-down of Internet pedants who despair at the 'decline of spoken English': i.e. those people at parties who correct someone exclaiming "I was literally burning up!" with "Actually, you mean figuratively." Ahhh, I do love taking down pedants. LANGUAGE IS A LIVING THING, YOU BETA. And that is McWhorter's central thesis: that language evolves, and that its evolution is to be celebrated, studied and even revered - rather than feared or moralized over.
I especially liked the following:
- The "euphemism treadmill": where we use language to soften and distance ourselves from prejudice, only to find each en vogue euphemism being abused by assholes, and Concerned People having to find a new one: e.g. "crippled" --> "handicapped" --> "disabled" --> "challenged". Each move was an attempt to distance the language from the assholey behavior of some people, but you can never escape it! IT'S INESCAPABLE.
- "Duchenne laughter" and AALLLL the amazing stuff about pragmatics vs. semantics and the grammaticalization of words: i.e. how we use laughter, or small words ("like", "well", "so", and - my favorite - "ANYWAY"), not as filler/chaff, but as social lubricants conveying subtle nuances of fellow feeling. I never thought about how, when saying "Well, blah blah", the "well" is conveying counter-expectation and softening the blow of surprise: "Well, it's actually red." ("actually" also!) This reminded me of my Goethe Institut basic German course where - despite what you would expect - it wasn't the infamously long German compound words that were hard to understand (Lebensabschnittpartner! Rechtsschutzversicherungsgesellschaften!), it was those tiny grammaticalized words like "doch" (conveying counter-intuitive surprise?) and "mal" (a softener similar to "just", as in "I just had a question."? honestly, I'm still not sure).
- McWhorter's authorial voice is Full of Personality, which I sometimes dislike in authors, but I LOLed frequently at McWhorter's indulgent twirls: e.g. he calls German compound words "highway pile-ups".
- The "back shift": when verbs transition to nouns in everyday English, the syllabic stress shifts from the last syllables to the front syllables: e.g. "I susPECTed him." (verb) vs. "Round up the usual SUSpects." (noun) This reminded me of my British friends once laughing at my "charming American way" of pronouncing "goodlooking" (I say "GOODlooking", they said "goodLOOKing").
- INDO-EUROPEAN. My favorite proto-language. I wish we knew more about it. I could listen to a whole book about it.
Now what I need is someone to explain to me my own accent, since so many English speakers have told me I have one, and I even hear it in recordings of myself, but it makes no sense and it sounds like I'm vaguely Scandinavian. (I'm not from Scandinavia.) Maybe McWhorter should do a call-in show.
Another indulgence: OH LANGUAGE, HOW I LOVE THEE! Much like the frisson I had the other week when I attended a Clojure workshop (Clojure is a functional programming language, miles away from Python - my everyday coding language) and learned a totally new way of conceptualizing code, so too is comparative linguistics amazing and exciting! Do they have books comparing natural language to computer languages? That's another thing.
Highly recommended! I want to read all of McWhorter's stuff now, listen to all his Great Courses series. (Coincidentally, I actually listened to his intro to linguistics Great Courses series way back in the early 2000s - not knowing it was the same dude - and his explanation of how tonal languages evolve BLEW MY MIND.)
Anyway, philosophically, this book is one giant take-down of Internet pedants who despair at the 'decline of spoken English': i.e. those people at parties who correct someone exclaiming "I was literally burning up!" with "Actually, you mean figuratively." Ahhh, I do love taking down pedants. LANGUAGE IS A LIVING THING, YOU BETA. And that is McWhorter's central thesis: that language evolves, and that its evolution is to be celebrated, studied and even revered - rather than feared or moralized over.
I especially liked the following:
- The "euphemism treadmill": where we use language to soften and distance ourselves from prejudice, only to find each en vogue euphemism being abused by assholes, and Concerned People having to find a new one: e.g. "crippled" --> "handicapped" --> "disabled" --> "challenged". Each move was an attempt to distance the language from the assholey behavior of some people, but you can never escape it! IT'S INESCAPABLE.
- "Duchenne laughter" and AALLLL the amazing stuff about pragmatics vs. semantics and the grammaticalization of words: i.e. how we use laughter, or small words ("like", "well", "so", and - my favorite - "ANYWAY"), not as filler/chaff, but as social lubricants conveying subtle nuances of fellow feeling. I never thought about how, when saying "Well, blah blah", the "well" is conveying counter-expectation and softening the blow of surprise: "Well, it's actually red." ("actually" also!) This reminded me of my Goethe Institut basic German course where - despite what you would expect - it wasn't the infamously long German compound words that were hard to understand (Lebensabschnittpartner! Rechtsschutzversicherungsgesellschaften!), it was those tiny grammaticalized words like "doch" (conveying counter-intuitive surprise?) and "mal" (a softener similar to "just", as in "I just had a question."? honestly, I'm still not sure).
- McWhorter's authorial voice is Full of Personality, which I sometimes dislike in authors, but I LOLed frequently at McWhorter's indulgent twirls: e.g. he calls German compound words "highway pile-ups".
- The "back shift": when verbs transition to nouns in everyday English, the syllabic stress shifts from the last syllables to the front syllables: e.g. "I susPECTed him." (verb) vs. "Round up the usual SUSpects." (noun) This reminded me of my British friends once laughing at my "charming American way" of pronouncing "goodlooking" (I say "GOODlooking", they said "goodLOOKing").
- INDO-EUROPEAN. My favorite proto-language. I wish we knew more about it. I could listen to a whole book about it.
Now what I need is someone to explain to me my own accent, since so many English speakers have told me I have one, and I even hear it in recordings of myself, but it makes no sense and it sounds like I'm vaguely Scandinavian. (I'm not from Scandinavia.) Maybe McWhorter should do a call-in show.
Another indulgence: OH LANGUAGE, HOW I LOVE THEE! Much like the frisson I had the other week when I attended a Clojure workshop (Clojure is a functional programming language, miles away from Python - my everyday coding language) and learned a totally new way of conceptualizing code, so too is comparative linguistics amazing and exciting! Do they have books comparing natural language to computer languages? That's another thing.
Highly recommended! I want to read all of McWhorter's stuff now, listen to all his Great Courses series. (Coincidentally, I actually listened to his intro to linguistics Great Courses series way back in the early 2000s - not knowing it was the same dude - and his explanation of how tonal languages evolve BLEW MY MIND.)
May 21, 2018
All my reviews can be seen at https://deedireads.com/.
Rating: 4.5/5
Oh. my goodness. If you love words and language, you have to read this book (literally). Actually, I recommend that you listen to it as an audiobook, as I did. John McWhorter is delightful and witty and very funny. Plus, a lot of his points depend on the pronunciation of words and inflection, so I think you'll get a lot more out of it that way.
I have always been passively fascinated by the way we use language, both written and oral. I think emojis are such a cool modicum of communication that goes so much farther than simple pictures. The way you can tell someone is angry if they end a text message with a period? So fascinating to me. And this book was about those things exactly, and more. All of it is interspersed with tangible examples from multiple languages and periods of history.
I learned so many interesting things. For example, did you know that the word overwhelm is as redundant as irregardless? It's true. (Although as I type this, Grammarly's spellcheck disagrees, as do you probably.) Apparently, whelm used to be a word on its own that actually means what we mean today by overwhelm. But people really wanted to emphasize it, so they added over, and it stuck. That's exactly what's happening with irregardless. And literally. Also, did you ever notice how somehow everyone knows nowadays that one exclamation point is simply the polite way to react ("See you there!"), but to express true enthusiasm, the norm is three exclamation points?
Okay, I don't want to give all these things away, but they are so cool. I'm clearly still very excited about it all. Do yourself a favor and listen to this audiobook!
Rating: 4.5/5
"Like is a word, and so we'd expect it to develop new meanings: the only question, as always, is which one? So is it that young people are strangely overusing the like from the dictionary, or might it be that like has birthed a child with a different function altogether? When one alternative involves saddling entire generations of people, of an awesome array of circumstances across a vast nation, with a mysteriously potent inferiority complex, the other possibility beckons as a worthy engagement."
Oh. my goodness. If you love words and language, you have to read this book (literally). Actually, I recommend that you listen to it as an audiobook, as I did. John McWhorter is delightful and witty and very funny. Plus, a lot of his points depend on the pronunciation of words and inflection, so I think you'll get a lot more out of it that way.
I have always been passively fascinated by the way we use language, both written and oral. I think emojis are such a cool modicum of communication that goes so much farther than simple pictures. The way you can tell someone is angry if they end a text message with a period? So fascinating to me. And this book was about those things exactly, and more. All of it is interspersed with tangible examples from multiple languages and periods of history.
"In terms of how words actually exist in time and space, to think of a word's 'genuine' meaning as the one you find upon looking it up is like designating a middle-aged person's high school graduation snapshot as 'what they really look like.' There's a charming whimsy in it, but still. A person receiving such a compliment often says, 'Oh, please!'—and words, if they could talk, surely would as well."
I learned so many interesting things. For example, did you know that the word overwhelm is as redundant as irregardless? It's true. (Although as I type this, Grammarly's spellcheck disagrees, as do you probably.) Apparently, whelm used to be a word on its own that actually means what we mean today by overwhelm. But people really wanted to emphasize it, so they added over, and it stuck. That's exactly what's happening with irregardless. And literally. Also, did you ever notice how somehow everyone knows nowadays that one exclamation point is simply the polite way to react ("See you there!"), but to express true enthusiasm, the norm is three exclamation points?
Okay, I don't want to give all these things away, but they are so cool. I'm clearly still very excited about it all. Do yourself a favor and listen to this audiobook!
September 25, 2019
I love books with fun facts on how the English language has changed, and this one was no exception. For better or for worse, it was clearly written by a professor, so he can dive into the theoretical if he feels like it, or make tons of hilarious and semi-inappropriate jokes and euphemisms if he feels like it. And both ways, there are a ton of interesting little nuggets. There used to be an English word "wer" meaning "man" (where the "werewolf" meaning "man-wolf" derives), and there also used to be a word "eld" (similar to "old") meaning age, or the age of. So there was a word "wer-eld" meaning "in the age of man" that kept getting generalized and smushed together, so "world" actually started as a compound word. Can you believe it?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 337 reviews