Simon Heffer

English is under attack: it’s being swamped by Americanisms, by the linguistic and grammatical laziness encouraged by spur-of-moment digital communication, by an ever-increasing ignorance of the rules within which the language of Waugh and Greene developed’. So say the traditionalists. Their opponents prefer the idea that, linguistically, ‘anything goes’, that it is perfectly acceptable, for example, to use the words ‘flout’ and ‘flaunt’ synonymously.

Scarcely English is Simon Heffer’s third blast of the trumpet in defence of Standard British English following his Strictly English (2011) and Simply English (2014). ‘I am not,’ he writes, ‘remotely against change in the language, nor do I deny that it happens: I should have to be exceptionally obtuse to take any other view’. As we all know, it happens constantly. Indeed, many would say that English’s adaptability is its greatest strength and one of the reasons for the global dominance it now enjoys. Heffer sets out his stall on the book’s first page: ‘The purpose of speaking and writing correctly is not just in order to be understood … but so that those with whom one speaks, or who read what one has written, should treat the speaker or writer as an intelligent and thoughtful person as opposed to an ignorant one’. Who would argue with that?

English is now used across the globe and has developed definite variations in, for example, America, Australia, India and Africa and, as Heffer writes, ‘the idea of the English language flourishes by such distinctions’. The opposite, ‘a conformity produced by digesting the latest, often illogical and unintelligible, fashions can only dilute the strength of the existing standard, and rob it of its distinctiveness and richness’. Correct usage is not the enemy of linguistic adaptation and evolution. Heffer will be discussing his new book and, no doubt, the state of English when he talks to the Sherborne Literary Society on Tuesday 26th November.

There is much to enjoy in Scarcely English. Anyone with the slightest interest in the language will find themselves nodding in agreement with Heffer on almost every page. One of his complaints concerns the practice of converting nouns into verbs where perfectly serviceable alternative already exists: for example, an athlete who runs into a place - first, second or third - in a race is now often said to have ‘medalled’ or ‘podiumed’ where, a few years ago, the simple verb ‘placed’ would have sufficed. The reverse process is also in action. Consider the use of the phrase ‘the big reveal’ at the climax of, say, an interior decoration television show. ‘Reveal’ is a verb pressed into service as a noun where one already exists, ‘revelation’.

Heffer identifies this tendency as an ‘American trait’ in which category he also includes, among other corrosions of Standard British English, the practice of avoiding pronouns. Not long ago, we ‘used to protest in favour of something, or against something, or about something: now one simply protests something, and to hell with the preposition or prepositional phrase’. Consider also in this context the use of the word ‘debate’ without its usual prepositions. The American usage ‘I debated John’ suggests to British ears that John was the subject of the discussion rather than a party to it, in which case ‘I debated with John’ would be much clearer.

‘Corporate speak’, much of which originates in the United States, is an especial object of Heffer’s ire. ‘It is a jargon,’ he writes, ‘often unintelligible to those outside, but it enables those who speak it fluently to pretend they are accomplishing something useful, and to appear impressive to underlings who have developed insufficient reserves of cynicism.’ One of the funniest entries in Scarcely English is the paragraph dealing with what Heffer calls ‘Fast foodspeak’. ‘There is,’ he writes, ‘a whole new language, its origins apparently entirely in demotic American English, that one is expected to use in order to communicate comprehensibly when buying fast food’. Examples include ‘to go’ (‘take away’) and ‘hold’ (that is, ‘I don’t want’). The phrase ‘can I get’ is especially absurd because of ‘the suggestion it makes that the enquirer is seeking permission to go into the kitchen either to collect his selection of cholesterol or, possibly, even to cook it himself’. Heffer speculates that, in time, this trend may construct a link between poor diet and language abuse.

There are some matters about which Heffer, to this reviewer at least, is surprisingly relaxed. One of these is ‘alright’. It wasn’t long ago that the editor of Fowler’s Modern English Usage felt moved to write that ‘The use of all right, or inability to see that there is anything wrong with alright, reveals one’s background, upbringing, education, etc., perhaps as much as any word in the language’. Scarcely English, almost calmly, regrets its passing as a ‘largely forgotten form.’ Likewise, he is surprisingly emollient about the confusing modern usage of the pronoun ‘they’ to denote a single individual. Even reputable newspapers nowadays condone this grammatical solecism but as Heffer notes, ‘it is increasingly clear that ease of communication will not be allowed to impede what has now become a political question’.

Scarcely English is an enjoyable book which demonstrates that Standard British English is worth preserving ‘as an act of cultural necessity’. It should sit on the desk of anyone who cares about our wonderful language.