Hi Squatter, thanks for an eloquent dissection [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Your comment about "rarely hearing mature opinions outside your own circle" just struck me as slightly amusing. I'd like to think that as open-minded people we can all accept there are a whole range of articulate and meaningful interchanges going on outside any of our own circles. However, I reserve the right (along with you) to be concerned and scathing about about the "dumbing down" of our collective culture, and where possible to name and shame the culprits.
I agree Mallory's saga was particularly French. I was really using it as an exemplar of the concept of chivalric love between warriors (knights), by way of exploring some of the male to male relationships within LoTR. There may well be other examples, and as Tolkien himself said, he felt there was a dearth of truly English epic narrative that had any of the grandeur or poetic depth of European mythologies such as Beowulf.
And yes, nouns and verbs are still different. But some are more different than others [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] And ones that were once different are no longer so.
Finally, the job of evaluating changes in language is a difficult one. As Maril stated above, there might well be differences between a linguists' view as opposed to that of an English Professor. As to what constitutes laziness, stupidity or inelegance, this is the key point. As I said, we all participate in language, and all take some degree of responsibility. In truth, we probably cherrypick some of the changes that appeal to us, or unconsciously adopt new expressions by way of our communal instincts. And we are bound by subjectivity in this - the idea that there is only 'one' correct or appropriate way of communicating, and that language must be used in a way that one or some of us deem intelligent and elegant, is elitist and also unrealistic, and takes no account of history.
Yet this is all relevant to Tolkien in a roundabout way. For he said of the Elves that they had become obsessed with the 'fading', and maintained archaic ideals of art that were unchanging and, as time moved on, diminishing in relevance and resonance. And this was their burden.
Let's use music as a comparison. There are many who would say that modern music (such as that which drowns out mature opinion) has none of the elegance, depth or aesthetic form of classical or ancient folk forms. Yet we are all affected by it, and all musicians absorb their era and synthesize some aspect of modernity in their work. Those who don't, for whatever worthy reason, are anachronisms (btw I do like some anachronisms). It's the same with the spoken word, and the feeling that "things are getting worse" is a peculiarly constant phenomenon.
So, like you, I don't like or appreciate everything that happens in language. And I will rail against the verbal shorthand of our age. But I take some (sheepish) responsibility for it too [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Anyway, these boards are certainly a place where lengthy and erudite prose can be found in abundance (in my case, more abundance than anything else), for which I am grateful.
Peace
|