IGCSE Coursework: Response to the article“There’s nowt wrong with slang”

In this essay, I will be responding to the article “There’s nowt wrong with slang” by Belinda Webb. The article defends the use of slang and criticises those who oppose it. To begin, the official definition of slang is a type of language consisting of words and phrases that are regarded as very informal. I strongly disagree with this article on the basis that it is manipulating the English language. As slang is highly informal and holds no universal form, meaning it is not standardised and should be only used out of convenience. I shall be discussing the negative aspects of slang whilst also responding to the erroneous arguments made in the article ‘There’s Nowt wrong with slang’

The article seems to justify the use of slang by stating: “slang has been around for a long time”. This holds no justification whatsoever. Many people use slang out of its convenience, meaning the time period is irrelevant. Plenty of people will argue that the English language is evolving. Yes, they are absolutely correct. However, it is not just the English language evolving this is happening around the world, where there are various languages. This is because of new technology and experiences. Meaning there needs to be new words to represent this. Nonetheless, slang is corrupting this evolution by essentially creating a dialect only understood by some and excluding the majority.

To expand on the point of standardisation. Slang is restricted to a minority of people. The article itself picks up at this point “there are those who would complain it (slang) excludes many more than it lets in”. Which is absolutely correct! Slang excludes the majority of people. This is because slang is not standardised and there is no ‘one’ version for all. Many people from different areas of the country have their own version of slang, let alone the other English speaking countries. In general people from different age groups, education levels and backgrounds will not be able to adopt a different type of speech. Regional accents and archaic idioms also remain and are used in specific parts of the word. That’s why standardisation is a key element in the English language, a language that can be understood by all, not the minority.

“Teenagers In each generation seems intent on trying, which is to their credit. They may not consciously know this is what they’re doing, but they are speaking a language that represents their reality and in a way of creating a private space” first of all the author yet again points put that slang is only used by the younger generation and it excludes all others from trying to embrace the language. How can we have this among us in modern day society? Where one-half of society doesn’t understand each other. It just wouldn’t work out, there would be a backlash; therefore making the author’s point an erroneous argument, as teenagers need to accept it is not only them living in society today.

Finally, the author says, “Shakespeare helped bring in new words such as nervy, rancorous, puke, assassination and sanctimonious.” Rancorous is an adjective from rancour and assassination was no derived from the likes of Shakespeare but in fact borrowed from the Arabic language. This shows how the English language is constantly evolving. Those who seek to read Shakespeare and I don’t think of himself as an advocate of slang at all. To conclude the article is full of contradictions and erroneous arguments. Slang is highly informal and should be kept in the minority, used only for convenience.