"What's Up?"

Remove all ads!

@Abomination
I know what you mean regarding the people talking in that language.. Its like hacker - speak: If i was typing as much as those people do I would use plain english or an abbreviated version when talking to other people. Visit http://www.google.com/intl/xx-hacker/ for an example. Its strange how as English becomes the dominant language, it begins to fragment itself.......

 

its slang and is, thus, considered as part of pop culture. it doesn't have to grammtically correct or anything (which is why it's not tolerated in essays and such), just widely used but as i said earlier, its a matter of preference. guys like chev don't like to use it but other guys do.

@Morsmorde

Didn't think you'd open up such a laaarge can of worms did you?

 

In truth do I say unto you, I don't care.

Well, guess I'm not part of pop culture, then. In some situations, it's better to say something grammatically incorrect if the correct build won't convey the intended sense, but ignoring grammar and saying things however you like it, that's too much.

 

It's always annoyed me when American's say y'all. But I have no idea why

 

chev, you really ought to study some English with your language nitpicking. If you did you would notice that there is not really anything which is correct or incorrect. There is a norm we use to standardize the language for better intelligibility but that norm changes as language change. The only true way to know what is correct is to see what people use, if many many people use the phrase "what's up" then it is correct and will sooner or later be incorporated in the codified norm.

 

I've not heard English people say "What's Up" before, it would sound very stupid in our accent. Instead of "What's Up" it would be something like "Awight geez haaz fings?". The thought of an American saying something like that makes me laugh.

 

I say "what's up?" If someone round here said what you suggested, people would think he escaped from a loony bin.

 

Where is "round here"?

 

@joacqin: I've studied it all my life, and a couple of other languages as well. There's always such a thing as proper form and proper structure and common use is not really there. There are different standards for different groups of people, I guess, but I'm actually quite far from accepting commonly repeated linguistic travesties as proper language.

There always is a group of people, even linguists, who believe that whatever said is proper, but that makes me wonder why they're still taking their salary, as it were.

 

As I said, the amateur view. That is how the hobby grammarian view language. It is not the view of contemporary scholars. To each his own, I just wanted to point out that the view you present has been discarded by the scholarly world for a few decades.

 

The scholarly world doesn't amount to a couple of liberal arts guys who consider themselves to be the most aware creatures under the sun. Everyone who disagrees is an amateur. Yeah, do I know this from somewhere.

Also, the word "contemporary" has no intrinsic positive value, it's a pure description. That something is contemporary, doesn't yet mean that it's also better than something that isn't. Just my two cents.

 

You a cockney then Sarevok?

From round here, blokes just go "Areet son, how tha guin?" etc.

And yeah, where you from Takara?

 

It may not have a positive value in its own, but as every other discipline change evolve so does the way in which language is viewed. Nuclear science is not viewed the same today as it was a 100 years ago the same goes for lingvistics and grammatics. Sure, we have codified rules but they change constantly. Just look at how we are dropping the possessive 's after proper names ending on "s" like Charles/Charles's. It is not codified yet but will most probably be in a few years, the grammars and dictionaries have quite naturally a lag of a few decades. Language is a tool for communication which belongs to the users of the language, it is not the property of those that write grammars or dictionaries, which even those who do write those kind of works have accepted. Just as the use of "what's up" is acceptable so is the way you use English acceptable chev, it is just that in the long run the "what up'ers" are in majority and it is the majority who dictates what language is the norm.

 

A norm of use doesn't have to be a norm of propriety, I would say. Oh, and it's Charles's. Always. Charleses' in plural, if there's a couple of Charleses around.

 

I would have used the name James but oh well

Define 'acceptable' joacquin. I've just been writing a university essay and if I used the term "What's up?" (or any incorrect grammar or slang) I'd lose marks even if what I was saying held subject merrit.

 

@ Sarevok and Morsmodre, I'm from the South of England, not some back alley in the middle of Brummyville or Burnly or some other weird place in England.

 

Abomination, academic writing is almost a language on its own. It is one of few domains where you are expected to follow the codified norm completely. For the simple reason that intelligibility is so important that there can be no mis-understanding. Academic writing also tends to have a high level of formality and higher the level of formality the closer to the codified norm are we supposed to use language. Acceptability differs from domain to domain but on the great whole everything is acceptable. It is all, in this case, English.

 

Ah, an ally! Yes, joacquin is saying everything (and more) of what I wanted to say, albeit in a much more technical way . I stand by my view though, its slang, and people use it, and it may not be acceptable in academic/formal writing/speaking but its still considered english Kinda like a "you say tom(ay)to, i say tom(ah)to" thing? hehe

 

I guess Dorset or Summerset right? Folk down there really do think the sun shines out of their arse holes. I don't live in a back alley you cheeky ****.

 

Bit harsh Takara. Pull your head outa your arse mate.