For linguists, the statement "language change is inevitable" is uncontroversial. Yet we're constantly told that teenagers (and, it seems, celebrity chefs) are destroying the English language. If we believe the warnings, then soon all younger generations will communicate as if they're composing an SMS or Facebook update and dictionaries will be full of inane abbreviations and words foreign to older generations.

Most languages have "standard" varieties, which are used for formal occasions, such as academia and the law. These words often have a history going back many years, and originate in Latin, French or German, for example. When communicating with friends and family, online or in other informal situations, "vernacular" or "colloquial" language is more appropriate.

Informal language is the most subject to change and to show variations in use. This is evident in changes to spelling, abbreviations such as "LOL", "CBF" and "FML", and for many users, an almost total disregard for rules of grammar. An understanding of the taboo nature of certain words can be seen in the substitution of "the c word" with the inoffensive "kent". The word "random" has taken on a new meaning of "weird" or "unexpected", as well as being used as a noun to describe someone who is not part of the person's social group — and unwanted.


In terms of the negatives, of concern to many people is the misspelling and misuse of homonyms such as "they're", "there" and "their", and "to", "too" and "two". It's also common to find a sentence peppered with "u", "dat", "dere" or "y" and to show a complete lack of punctuation, even between sentences. Whether this is done out of laziness, ignorance or economy is unclear, and would only be known if the person was forced to write formally. But if one never has to write an essay for uni, create a cover sheet for a job, or give a speech to hordes of business people, then an almost total use of informal language would not present many problems, except to (critical) others. The difficulties arise if one requires the use of formal language but is unable to wield it. Even for those of us who do write formally, subjunctives ("if I were"), split infinitives ("to boldly go") and prepositions at the ends of sentences, are not things we are generally concerned about (boom boom).

Is education to blame? I know academics who write "gonna", "wanna" and "CBF", and mechanics who use the subjunctive in speech. Go figure. We should not be overly concerned because most humans know the appropriate times for certain kinds of speech or writing, dictated by the context we are in and our audience. All "living" languages are constantly changing depending on the needs of the people using them. Nostalgically clinging to words is pointless. Conversely, formal varieties of language are slow to adopt changes and words or rules tend to fall into disuse, rather than be picked up (who nowadays uses "repugn", "peregrinate" or "jactation"?).

Not everyone will attain the vocabulary of Sir Humphrey Appleby or the linguistic style of Wordsworth, and while the use of highly vernacular language by others may be frustrating or grating, attempts to force people to speak or write in certain ways are usually met with resistance or resentment.

We cannot discount individual differences in language use — you use "LOL" but I use "haha" — and people will always have differing opinions on how others should speak or write, though some may think the sky is falling and we're all destined to utter monosyllabic grunts.

The only way to ensure that all children speak, write and understand formal language would be through a massive overhaul of the education system and a prohibition on other language styles. But as this would do little to prevent informal language from being used anyway, it seems some people need to, like, get over it, and stuff.

Brendan Black is a Melbourne writer who has a background in linguistics study.