"One must speak properly".
With just two days to go until the wedding of Prince William and his bride-to-be, Kate Middleton, it seems like the ideal time to once again consider the use of The Queen’s English in today’s society.
I have a vested interest in this topic as my mother grew up in Inverness where, according to linguistic experts, the best Queen’s English is spoken. I had my speech corrected from an early age and, to be honest, I still have it corrected today. However I am pleased that this is the case as it has definitely been an advantage to me in my chosen career of communication – although my colleagues can vouch for the fact that I can by no means claim to be a grammar or pronunciation Queen!
Award winning films, such as The Queen and The King’s Speech, which have been viewed around the world by millions, have allowed this old fashioned way of speaking to be shared on a global scale but does it make sense to protect this form of the English language, which is now considered by many to be dated, indefinitely?
English has changed significantly over the years. The term, “The Queen’s English”, dates back to the 16th century and I’m not sure that anyone from the Elizabethan age would understand what some recent entrants to the Oxford English Dictionary, such as OMG, actually mean!
The Queen’s English Society certainly has a strong view, with its president publishing a very interesting article in The Independent newspaper highlighting concerns around the dumbing down of the English language.
So, should we be encouraging native English-speakers to adopt the traditional and regal way of speaking or does it confuse people trying to learn English as a second language? Similarly, does it complicate things for the translation community. English translation of a company’s literature, brochures and websites might read strangely to English speakers if adhering to the rules of the Queen’s English and most businesses hope to convey their brand and messages using a conversational style and tone that has become commonplace in today’s marketing collateral. At the same time, however, would you dismiss a job applicant’s CV if it was written in an informal style and do you still expect job seekers to submit a CV written in the Queen’s English? It seems to me that there is a time and a place for the most traditional use of the English language and I am sure that the royal wedding attendees will be putting their Queen’s English into practice this weekend.
One final point for those champions of the English language. All languages evolve over time and let us not forget that English in fact a West Germanic language that originates from Anglo-Frisian dialects!
Lots of issues in this article! Some groups like to have a prescriptive approach to language (“death to anyone who fails to use an apostrophe correctly!”)and miss the point that language is constantly developing. Others feel that anything goes and that a CV written in informal language or a business email that uses “text-speak” is fine. I think the point should be: Is the language appropriate for the occasion?
Using text-speak is fine if you are sending a text (and in fact a lot of text-speak actually shows a good command of phonology) but can that person also write a business email that is equally “correct” and appropriate?
Everyone uses variations in their English according to the setting, purpose and topic, so no, we don’t expect people to use “the Queen’s English” when discussing football with their friends but people should avoid using language inappropriately.
And yes, the Inverness accent is lovely to listen to!
Speaking the language that suits the situation is desirable. But sometimes there are occasions when using a specific language service is better, even if it’s not about actually translating a text.
Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have truly loved surfing around your weblog posts. In any case I’ll be subscribing on your feed and I’m hoping you write once more very soon!