W

hen me found out I’d 
been hired to work at The 
Daily I wuz so excited, I 

screemed.

If you cringed while reading this 

sentence, then I highly recommend 
you consider working as a copy editor 
for The Michigan Daily. My interest 
in joining Copy can be attributed to 
one of the reasons I similarly decided 
to become an English teacher: I 
enjoy working with the mechanics 
of writing — pulling a sentence apart 
one word at a time, deciding whether 

to use an em dash or a semi-colon and 
trying to gauge whether a sentence is 
approaching a run-on or not (take this 
sentence, for example).

At the same time I began working 

at The Daily last fall, I also began to 
attend the class English 305: Exploring 
the English Language. There I met a 
professor and linguist named Anne 
Curzan, 
who 
matched 
and 
even 

exceeded my passion for syntax and 
phonetics. She centered the course 
by introducing two contrasting ideas: 
prescriptive and descriptive grammar.

Prescriptivism 
can 
best 
be 

symbolized by the “red pen wielding” 
English teacher trope. This teacher 
uses “whom” in sentences and says 
you may go to the bathroom regardless 
of whether you can. A prescriptivist 
believes there is a correct way to speak 
a language, and in English that correct 
way is typically standard English (the 
English we see in most academic and 
corporate settings).

A descriptivist, on the other hand, 

views all the dialects of English equally 
in an attempt to understand linguistic 

change over time. 
This 
doesn’t 

mean there aren’t 
rules 
to 
each 

dialect — quite 
the 
opposite 
— 

but the main goal 
of 
descriptivism 

is 
to 
observe 

and 
analyze 

dialectical 
variety 
rather 

than 
to 
pass 

judgement 
or 

enforce usage.

While 
a 

prescriptivist 
might say English 
is “deteriorating” 
with 
newer 

generations, 
a 

descriptivist 
would 
say 

it 
is 
merely 

“evolving.”

English 
305 

came 
at 
an 

amazing time in 
my development 
as a student and 
future 
educator. 

For 
the 
first 

time, 
I 
began 

to 
question 

the 
“rules” 
of 

language I had 
been 
taught 

in 
schools. 
I 

soon 
realized 

I was a descriptivist surrounded by 
institutions like print media and 
education where prescriptivism has 
historically been imposed and, at 
times, lauded. Even now, many of 
my fellow copy editors rejoice in the 
“comforting” laws of the stylebook, 
and I empathize with them. I too have 
gone to look up how The Daily formats 
numbers and I have found solace in a 
concrete answer (the answer: Numbers 
from one to nine are written out, while 
10 and above are numerals).

But it is important to not mistake the 

laws of the stylebook with universal 
truth. In the process of making an 
article more “standard,” am I not 
still projecting a voice, a style, a bias? 
What we’ve come to know as standard 
English is not devoid of connotation, 
and it’s important to recognize at 
a 
prestigious 
university 
like 
the 

University of Michigan, where test 
scores measuring standard English 
literacy play an important role in who 
gets to be a part of the Leaders and Best. 
I don’t mean to say we shouldn’t teach 
or uphold standard English; I believe 
there is value in standardization in 
certain contexts. But when we perceive 
standard English as “unbiased” or 
“just reporting the facts,” we cease to 
read critically and consider the author 
behind the text.

While I still love my position as a 

copy editor at The Daily, I’ve begun to 
see the stylebook in a more nuanced 
light, as both a beneficial resource and 
a potential gatekeeper to marginalized 
individuals for whom standard English 
is a second language. Now, each time I 
edit an error in a columnist’s writing, I 
am conscious of the system to which I 
am adhering in the process.

As writer Rita Mae Brown said, 

“Language exerts hidden power, like 
the moon on the tides.”

It is the responsibility of readers and 

writers alike to consider these hidden 
power structures of language, and only 
by doing this may we progress in the 
right direction.

2B

Managing Statement Editor:

Brian Kuang

Deputy Editors:

Colin Beresford

Jennifer Meer

Photo Editor:

Amelia Cacchione

Editor in Chief:

Alexa St. John

Managing Editor:

Dayton Hare

Copy Editors:

Elise Laarman

Finntan Storer

Wednesday, September 26, 2018// The Statement 

Copy That: A descriptivist’s perspective

statement

THE MICHIGAN DAILY | SEPTEMBER 26, 2018

BY KATELYN CARROLL, SENIOR COPY EDITOR

ILLUSTRATION BY EMILY KOFFSKY

