| This paper examines the concept of corruption in the English language in an effort to assess the 21st-century condition of the language. For as long as language has been used, speakers have debated over its correct usage and bemoaned its seeming decay. Blame for declining standards is regularly placed on media, popular culture, education, bureaucracy, and technology. This study reviews the work of Samuel Johnson as a contextual snapshot of 18th-century historical opinion on the topic, the work of David Crystal as a 21st-century touchstone on the topic, and the work of Harvey Daniels as an indicator of the history of the language and the findings of linguistic research. In reviewing these authors' works, it is illustrated that the English language is not in danger of corruption but is merely a healthy and thriving language. This paper shows that the current literary panic (re-)surfacing in America is unfounded and advocates the idea that linguistic corruption is an impossibility. The very nature of a useful and functional language requires change and mutability, enabling it to meet the needs of its speakers. No language or variation is inherently better than any other; thus, linguistic modality must be taught and change must be embraced and understood in order to promote equality and shared understanding. |
