misuse

I get tired of hearing the misuse of the word "nonstandard" - used on many language fora by native and nonnative speakers alike. Once and for all, the word "nonstandard" does not mean, is not synoymous with, "incorrect" or "ungrammatical".

Am I right?

You are right, it doesnt mean incorrect or ungrammatical...
It just means "not standard", and the word should speak for itself.

<< Once and for all, the word "nonstandard" does not mean, is not synoymous with, "incorrect" or "ungrammatical". >>

But not everybody believes in the concepts of "incorrect" and "ungrammatical", which is why terms like "nonstandard" are used in the first place. Nobody defines what's "correct" or "grammatical" in English; they are imaginary concepts. Useful, perhaps, but imaginary nonetheless.

- Kef

<But not everybody believes in the concepts of "incorrect" and "ungrammatical", which is why terms like "nonstandard" are used in the first place. >

Question is, why are they misused? What do the abusers of that word hope to gain by their act?

The reason we have speaking "ungrammatical" and "incorrect" is because in formal situations you are expected to speak, write, act, etc. a certain way...

It's just when those people take their terminology to the bar and such that it's really a problem... I dunno. It's really early for me... Does that make sense?

<The reason we have speaking "ungrammatical" and "incorrect" is because in formal situations you are expected to speak, write, act, etc. a certain way... >

Do you see many commentators saying "it's incorrect in formal English, but not in informal English"? I don't.

So, is it only formal English that is correct, Skippy?

<< Question is, why are they misused? What do the abusers of that word hope to gain by their act? >>

Define "misuse".

Gwest makes a good point because, one of the problems with prescriptivists, is they expect people to write and speak in this formal English all the time; but Divvy, you're incorrect. That's not what I said. Formal English is the only form that would be appropriate for formal contexts (though I'm sure some would argue otherwise).

<Define "misuse". >

You don't know the meaning? I've shown how the word "nonstandard" is misused. Look at the first post.

<Formal English is the only form that would be appropriate for formal contexts (though I'm sure some would argue otherwise). >

I'd be one of those.

<< You don't know the meaning? I've shown how the word "nonstandard" is misused. Look at the first post. >>

I asked you to define "misuse", not provide an example of it. But, looking at your first post, you did say this:

"Once and for all, the word 'nonstandard' does not mean, is not synoymous with, 'incorrect' or 'ungrammatical'."

So I suppose you're defining "misusing a word" as "giving a word a different meaning than the one it has". So then, who defines the meaning of "nonstandard"?

- Kef

I think that people use nonstandard because they believe "right" or "wrong" is very harsh or a "black-and-white" view of language. I'm not sure if it's misused because a language like English without an authority which defines what's correct and what's not, the standard should be considered the most correct (unless such uses may be ambiguous or lead to misunderstanding). Nontheless, probably some people use 'nonstandard' only to avoid more direct terms or just to be "politically correct"

<So then, who defines the meaning of "nonstandard"? >

The majority.

Kef, do you think the word "nonstandard" is misused or incorrectly associated with "incorrect" and "ungraamtical"? Does that happen? If so, is it OK to do so?