Introduction
Many people believe that there is one form of their language that is more correct than others. They may believe for instance that British English is more correct than other varieties; or that written English is more correct than spoken English; or that standard spoken forms are more correct than dialect forms. Often this belief is supported by reference to grammars, usage guides or dictionaries: if something conflicts with a rule in a grammar, or if a word isn’t in the dictionary, it ‘must be wrong’. Since the reference books are most often based on observation of the standard written language (and not by reference to a great grammar book in the sky), the argument is really circular: these books will naturally describe standard usage, because that is what they are for; but this does not mean that there is anything wrong with other kinds of usage that are less often described.
A better way of looking at things is to say that usage is ‘correct in its place’. Standard American English is correct in an American context, British English in a British context, Indian English in an Indian context, spoken grammar in casual speech, formal written grammar in formal writing, dialect forms in the appropriate dialect. The only forms that are wrong in all contexts are learners’ errors (I have forgetting the your address), obsolete forms and structures (I had rather not answer you) and slips (One of our chairs are broken). This means that there is no one answer to the question: ‘What kind of English should learners study?’ It depends on their purposes. Someone who wants to use English mostly in, for example, Australia, South Africa, India or Canada, will do well to study the standard variety of that region. For many learners, however, the best model is one or other of the two main standard varieties: British or American English. Neither of these is ‘better’ than the other, and they are both used and understood worldwide. The differences are generally unimportant: for details, (see here).
People are also worried by language change. If younger people ‘break’ the rules that older people have learnt, or use language in new ways, older people often feel disturbed: they are concerned that younger people no longer know their grammar, and that the language is going downhill. This is a needless worry: change is natural and inevitable, it cannot be halted, and it does not generally affect a language’s efficiency as a communicative tool. A great deal of modern English grammar would have been wrong three hundred years ago, and will perhaps be wrong again three hundred years from now.
The company has doubled it’s profits this year. (see here)
I could not understanding the lecture. (see here)
I ain’t done nothing. (see here)
I wants a drink. (see here)
Jack and me went to the cinema. (see here)
They’re different to us. (see here)
There are less people here than usual. (see here)
Somebody’s dropped their keys. (see here)
What are you waiting for? (see here)
You need to really concentrate. (see here)
I’m making a concerted effort to eat less. (see here)
Here’s your papers. (see here)
The data is unclear. (see here)
Who do you trust? (see here)
If I was younger I’d do it myself. (see here)
You pronounced it wrong. (see here)
Be not afraid. (see here)
I lost my coin-purse. (see here)
You’re tired, is it? (see here)
Will I call back later? (see here)
Can be that Ahmed calling. (see here)