IGCSE Response Piece – There’s Nowt Wrong with Slang

Analysis of anti slang by Louie Jacques Kalvis

Isabelle Kerr wrote an article about the new generations’ use of slang, in august last year (2013). Ms.Kerr questions, or rather rants, why slang words “have been elevated to a level of permanence and authority” She also states that the future of the English language looks bleak (but who is she to judge the direction the English language is going in, she foolishly has the audacity to thinks that she is of such significance and mettle that she may judge thousand on the way they speak, as if she is a goddess among the pitiful), and she also said that she is apart of the generation (as she is in her 20s) using these slang terms that she is both ashamed and apologetic on others behalf, as if she can decide what is right and wrong, and thinks that her apology actually means something.

Isabelle Kerr said, “the new additions are mostly related to image, reputation and sex” yet she later said  “Shakespeare will be turning in his grave.” I would like to remind the jackanapes Kerr that the language of shakespeare’s time, was as much related to image and reputation as the slang used today, and nearly as much of it as ours to what Shakespeare would euphemistically (and neologically) call “country matters”. She acts as if this is something new, invented by the rebellious fools who are the youth, and should not let English evolve as a language. She has a problem with The Oxford Dictionary Online, stating that Dictionary Bods should not add these “preposterous” words to the English language. The only party involved with the moot who needs “a reality check” is her own. The Oxford Dictionary groups purpose is to record the development of the English language. It may be thought legitimate if Kerr was to complain about the speakers of such informal words, rather than those who record the words and usage, and yet how can she complain to the speaker, for it is they who define the English language itself. Above all of these points though, she said “shakespeare will be turning in his grave”, but was it not he who was famous for his use of slang.

Isabelle Kerr has a problem with the words being used themselves. The appellation “twerk”, may not seem necessary but actions have names and that was one without one, she also has problems with the dysphemisms such as “sick” yet she cannot see that as an alternative expression of your environment. And yet despite all her problems with these language devices, and mentioning that different terms are not real words, she still went on to use the proprietary eponym in a manner of seriousness, “googled.”

The article by Isabelle Kerr claims that twerking and selfies “Just like any fashion trend, come and go” however I disagree with the statement, as there are still examples like “cool” which have not been forgotten about as she had said, if technology with photography does not develop greatly, “selfie” might stay for many years. One thing which really draws me as a reader to dislike this article is the constant use of japes when discussing serious issues, their purpose is to display and mock slang, however slang when said and slang in writing are far different. Unless it was a joke or someone who I had no professionalism associated with, i might use slang in a text or say it to them and it would be fine, but in a letter, report or email it would be completely unacceptable. The point which Kerr has missed is that written and spoken language are different. I personally write far better than I speak, and the same applies to my colleges.

What would Kerr like for the youth of today (which she claims to be apart of) call a ‘selfie’ in its stead? would you rather call such an act a self portrait? you wouldn’t use it in the same way a pub is a public house, yet you do not hear many refer it to that.

To conclude, the imbecile who is, Ms. Kerr lacks validity to her arguments in the moot of whether slang should be used and brings her own negative view towards the generation using it and the OED (who are not responsible for the problem at hand). She has contradicted herself multiple times and has had the false thought that her opinion overpowers that of the masses.




One Response to “IGCSE Response Piece – There’s Nowt Wrong with Slang”

  • jnorth Says:


    This shows clear analysis of Kerr’s piece and a response that uses entirely your own style.

    1) You come across as overly defensive and sometimes attack Kerr’s character rather than her argument. This is called an ad hominem. Tone it down and see what happens to your tone if you remove it.
    2) Re-read and edit your spelling – at one point you confuse colleagues with colleges.

Leave a Reply