[PLUG-TALK] begging the question

Denis Heidtmann denis.heidtmann at gmail.com
Sun Oct 4 02:53:01 UTC 2009


On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 9:51 PM, John Jason Jordan <johnxj at comcast.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:18:20 -0700
> Galen Seitz <galens at seitzassoc.com> dijo:
>
>> Saw the following comment on slashdot.  JJJ, can you translate this
>> into something I might understand?  It's been ~31 years since my last
>> English class.
>>
>> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1390695&cid=29621279
>>
>> > Begs the question" has a specific meaning related to circular
>> > arguments.
>>
>> Yes, the intransitive construction "begs the question' does. The
>> transitive constructions "begs the question <question>" is also in
>> common use, and has a different meaning regarding calling for a
>> resolution of a question. The meaning of the transitive form is
>> essentially a generalization of the intransitive form such that the
>> intransitive form is identical to the transitive form with the assumed
>> object being the question actually at issue in the debate. This is a
>> rather elegant rationalization of the poor translation into English of
>> the dubious translation into Latin of the Greek phrase that ultimately
>> turned into "begging the question".
>>
>> Arguing that the use of the transitive construction is wrong because
>> of the well-established technical definition of the intransitive
>> construction is, IMO, one of the most inane forms of misguided
>> linguistic prescriptivist pedantry commonly seen, as the two are
>> distinct constructions which are impossible to confuse with each
>> other, and have meanings that are related the way one would expect the
>> meanings of transitive and intransitive phrases to relate to each
>> other (even though the more general, transitive form, is generalized
>> from the more specific, intransitive form in a way which reflects the
>> normal use of the English words in the phrase rather than etymology of
>> the transitive form.)
>
> Let's start with some definitions.
>
> 1) "Transitive" means the lexeme can (optional) or must (obligatory)
> take an object complement. Although the term can be applied to several
> different parts of speech, it is most commonly encountered when
> speaking of verbs. For example:
>
> The boy disappeared.
> *The boy disappeared the mess in his room.
>
> 'Disappear' in English is obligatorily intransitive. It cannot take an
> object complement and, if you try to do so, the result will be an
> ungrammatical utterance.
>
> The children left.
> The children left their clothes in a heap.
>
> 'Leave' in English is optionally transitive. Grammatical sentences can
> be formed with or without an object complement.
>
> *The crew constructed.
> The crew constructed a house.
>
> 'Construct' in English is obligatorily transitive. That is, it requires
> an object complement. If you use it without an object the utterance
> will be ungrammatical.
>
> 2) Prescriptive linguistics is in opposition to descriptive
> linguistics. Prescriptive is what you were told as a child in language
> arts classes was "wrong" or "incorrect English." Examples are negative
> concord ("We don't need no ..."), third singular leveling ("He walk")
> and a long list of other non-nos. Prescriptivists are convinced they
> are working to save the language from certain destruction.
>
> Descriptive linguists say "there is no right or wrong, there just is
> what is." If a native speaker utters it, it is grammatical. It may be
> grammatical only for a particular variety of the language, but it is
> still grammatical. Descriptivists make no value judgments.
> Descriptivists know that languages have always changed and will
> continue to change regardless of any attempts fix them, and no language
> has ever died from failure to follow the rules of self-appointed
> grammarians.
>
> 3) As for the meaning of 'beg the question,' in all human languages the
> majority of words and expressions have more than one meaning. If you
> don't believe me, pick up any dictionary and look at a random page.
> Most of the words will list meaning (1), meaning (2), and so on. That
> 'beg the question' has developed a second meaning is scarcely
> remarkable. Semantic drift is just another way in which languages
> continually change. It would be easier to stop the tides than to freeze
> language. If someone insists that 'beg the question' has only one
> meaning they are being a silly prescriptivist. Their efforts are doomed.
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG-talk mailing list
> PLUG-talk at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-talk
>
I am having a little trouble with this, being a bit of a
prescriptivist.  Shouldn't an utterance be unambiguous (unless
ambiguity is the intention)?  Or perhaps the discussion should be
about who qualifies as a native speaker.  If the intent is
communication, then utterances which grate are a distraction, and
interfere with communication.  Notice I did not use the word
"correct".

-Denis



More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list