Everyone is unique in the world. Everyone has a unique voice, so everyone speaks with his own accent. We should not discriminate against people with accents.

 

Communication is a human instinct. Everyone is born to communicate. In daily life communication, some people think that grammar is an essential part of communication, while others think that the purpose of communication is to make the other party understand what they want to express. What is language? Some people might say that several words are listed in a certain order. What’s the order? Well, the syntax is that everyone has a different way of arranging things and therefore everyone has a different grammar so that different people have a certain view of different people’s grammar. I found such an article on the Internet about a CEO’s view on grammar. Through the article, it can be understood that the author is the CEO of a company or even several companies. The author has published his myth of language on HBR. The author hopes that candidates who come to his company have what he considers standard English. Because the author’s company is doing iFixit and Dozuki（iFixit.com is the world’s largest online repair manual, and Dozuki helps companies write their own technical documentation, like paperless work instructions and step-by-step user manuals. ） The author is very tough on the requirements of grammar. And the author mentioned a writer in the article Lynne Truss and said he had a lot of sympathy with Lynne’s views that I am a grammar “stickler.” And, like Truss — author of Eats, Shoots & Leaves — I have a “zero tolerance approach” to grammar mistakes that make people look stupid. But later on, Truss and author disagree on what it means to have “zero tolerance.” Truss thinks that people who mix up their itses “deserve to be struck by lightning, hacked up on the spot and buried in an unmarked grave,” while author just think they deserve to be passed over for a job — even if they are otherwise qualified for the position.

Personally, I do not agree with the author’s opinion. I think the author will lose a lot of talent by doing so. First of all, the author published this article on HBR. Most readers of HBR are novices in business. Suggestions from leaders in HBR are very likely to influence the thoughts of novices in the workplace. Secondly, with the integration of the world, there must be some second-language learners in a university. They may not be good at expressing what they think in their mind in the second language, but they have knowledge in some fields that others do not have. Wouldn’t it be a loss of talent if, in the author’s view, these talents would have no use simply because the grammar of their second language is poor? This reminds me of an article written by lippi green that I read in this semester. At the beginning of the article, lippi introduced to us a second language learner who had been learning English for more than 20 years. Through the introduction of the author, we learned that the person in the author’s mouth was a double bachelor’s degree, namely art and education. This made it easy for her to get a job; Tell children stories. The ministry of education dismissed her from her job because of her “heavy accent, speech patterns, and grammar problems” despite her excellent skills and endearment with children. Is this not a brain drains? The answer, of course, is yes. So as my own opinion, I think the lippi uses this example to tell people like author that they will drain the talent of many second language learners, even though they employ people with good grammar, their knowledge reserve may be much lower than those who are rejected by them.

In another hand, with the development of The Times, many new words have been born, including some words or sentences that cannot be explained grammatically. However, most people acquiesced to the meaning of these words because people speak them every day. maybe many people in books, programs or instruction books think that normative language (using correct grammar) is necessary, but some emerging vocabulary may be more understandable, make people understand what the author wants to express, better convey the author’s feelings, and make people understand better. Sometimes it can be stressful to talk in a way that makes people look very serious, but if you change the grammar it may make them feel comfortable so that we can have a better friendly conversation and communicate with people better.

Now let’s go back to the original problem. What is language? It’s a way for people to communicate. Why do people communicate? It is to better express their own ideas so that the other side know what they want to express. Every generation has a different way of expressing itself so why do we continue to express ourselves in the same way as the last generation?

 

In general, I think people with poor grammar should not be disliked or discriminated against by the world. Everyone has his own way of speaking and everyone should understand each other. After all, no one is perfect.