- Save 10% on selected children’s books, compliments of Amazon Family Promotion exclusive for Prime members .
Weeds in the Garden of Words: Further Observations On The Tangled History Of The English Language Paperback – 16 Jun 2005
- Choose from over 13,000 locations across the UK
- Prime members get unlimited deliveries at no additional cost
- Find your preferred location and add it to your address book
- Dispatch to this address when you check out
Special offers and product promotions
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support?
'… for those who failed to brush up their grammar, hope is at hand from a new book that celebrates slang and poor punctuation.' The Independent
'… not all change is good. Burridge is quick to criticise 'evil weed' words, such as dishonest euphemisms that try to sound neutral when really they are negative, such as friendly fire and downsize.' BBC News Magazine
'… the fact that a book can stimulate such debate is proof positive that the English language is a rude and robust health. We should all celebrate that.' Daily Express
The English language is a glorious garden, but it also contains some weeds. Linguistic weeds may be slang expressions, non-standard pronunciations, or constructions that are out of place. But what one gardener calls a 'weed', another may call a 'flower'. The same goes for words and their usage in English.See all Product description
Top customer reviews
This sequel to Burridge's jolly Blooming English is clearly designed to illustrate the well-known English phrases 'cobble together' and 'cashing in'. On the 2nd page we get bete noires insted of betes noires (looks even sillier with a circumflex) and a little later 'improve' where 'ameliorate' was clearly intended. Other phrases that come to mind for this book are 'pale simulacrum' or 'whited sepulchre'; like the Cheshire cat's smile, all that carries over from Vol the 1st is vaguely abstracted affability, like a teacher vamping with one eye on the clock (while planning supper for all I know) plus CUP's cavalier editors - *three* are credited! When we read 'to quote Samuel Johnson again' we're not anticipating the exact same quote from 10 pages earlier! She betrays her principles when she says sism is the 'correct' way to pronounce schism; I'd agree, but earlier, as least where pronunciation's concerned, she's an 'anything goes' kinda gal - the 'whatever is, is right' pose that infuriates the purist. And she too can fall for a specious etymology; gimmick is far more likely to be from gimcrack than from the German. A linguistic barbie, but bring your own beer
Nine months later
I hear above the voice of the disappointed lover on his high horse. There are goodies among the fine print. 'At one time there was a popular theory that attributed the Australian accent to bad dentistry'; in parts of the Solomon Islands 'as much as 59% of the basic vocabulary is potentially taboo'. But Jean Aitchison's textbooks are far more illuminating, admirably lucid and just as jolly (see Language Change p9-12 on the 18c roots of our linguistic anxieties). And - 'horrid neoligisms', Kate/CUP?
And I don't understand my own comment (below) either
Most helpful customer reviews on Amazon.com
Taking a completely different approach from verbal hygienists (Burridge's phrase) such as the ever-cranky Lynne Truss (Eats, Shoots & Leaves), Burridge observes the evolution of English, without making judgments. She discovers that quite often, what is now considered correct grammar, spelling, punctuation, or pronunciation, used to be considered wrong. And vice versa. Because language is always changing, it's difficult to pin it down at any point in time and declare once and for all that the double negative is wrong and that the direct object form of "who" must be "whom." When people are using "incorrect" English every day and still managing to communicate effectively, who's to say what's wrong?
Well, there are always plenty of self-appointed fusspots and arbiters of linguistic goodness (as Burridge calls them) who want everyone to follow the rules they learned when they were in school. I suspect that the only people who read that type of book are people who already know the rules and just want to catch the author in a mistake.
For those who are interested in what unpredictable routes the English language is taking, Weeds is an entertaining collection of short essays that Burridge originally presented on the radio. She explores new words such as "earworm," a term for the tune you get into your head and can't get out. She muses over new trends such as the tendency to pronounce words such as "assume" as "ashoom." And she compares the different ways English is used in the United Kingdom, the United States, and in Australia (Burridge is Australian).
As a recovering stickler, I enjoyed reading this enthusiastic celebration of English in all its forms.
Look for similar items by category
- Books > History > Historical Study & Educational Resources > Study & Teaching
- Books > Languages
- Books > Reference > Language
- Books > Society, Politics & Philosophy > Social Sciences > Linguistics > Historical & Comparative Linguistics
- Books > Society, Politics & Philosophy > Social Sciences > Linguistics > Reference