Pylimitics

Let’s talk about “proper English.” English is not a centrally-managed language; it’s a dynamic set of conventions, and for the most part as long as you can make yourself understood, it works. But there are also social assumptions about how you use English. One that’s drummed into many of us in elementary school is that there’s such a thing as “proper English,” which is the “correct” version. That idea is active in the US as well as England, and it’s connected to the notions of “flyover country” and the “coastal elites” in the US.

The history of English in England is a history of local dialects. The people of West Staffordshire spoke just a bit differently (sometimes a lot differently) from the people in Surry, and by all reports this system worked just fine for centuries and is still working today. But in 1476 a man named William Caxton — an innovator and entrepreneur of the day — acquired (or possibly built) a printing press and set up shop in Westminster. He was well aware of the many dialects of English, and decided that he would use the dialect in use immediately around his new establishment as the basis of spelling, translations, and general patterns of usage. 

By the end of that century, as described in The English Language by David Crystal, “…the distinction between ‘central’ and ‘provincial’ life was firmly established. It was reflected in the distinction between ‘standard’ and ‘regional’ speech — the former thought of as correct, proper, and educated, the latter as incorrect, careless, and inferior — which is still with us today.”

That era gave rise to a new idea: prescriptivism. That’s the notion that English should be standardized. Prior to that, everybody was fine with tolerating whatever sorts of variations in language they found. Afterward, partly thanks to the printing press, a set of norms began to arise in English spelling, grammar, and usage. Pretty soon, spelling reformers, grammar scolds, and editors began to appear and take on (or at least claim) a certain air of authority. 

Taking the cue from these authorities (even though the source of their authority is somewhat unclear), the practice of ridiculing nonstandard usage and nonstandard users arose. The practice is as common today as ever. Maybe more so; social media users always seem ready to heap derision on anyone (particularly anyone famous) who uses English in any way outside the proscribed manner. This is even though “standard” English is not particularly uniform or consistent; there are plenty of variations from one “authority” to the next. 

So what does this have to do with flyover country? It’s simply the idea that there should be a “standard” for language, and social behavior, and that the standard is set by some group or location chosen — almost arbitrarily — as “central”. Before Caxton’s printing press, there’s little evidence that English (or England) exhibited anything but tolerance for regional variations. Afterward, that tolerance steadily waned, and although it apparently began with language, the same process occurred in other areas: fashion, behavior, manners, and so on. Many things come from language, and it’s possible that the selection of Standard English (which is no more than a particular dialect) as “correct” has had extensive influence on what we think of as normal and the tolerance we have for anything we’re told is “other.”