Aren’t certain grammatical rules implemented for comprehension and clarity and wouldn’t this have value?
Grammatical “rules” aren’t bylaws that some committee decides upon and enforces. The “rules” are simply patterns of usage that have been discerned and articulated. The rules conform to how people use language, not the other way around. (You can enforce certain rules among a relatively small group of professional writers. But you can’t control how ordinary people will write, and controlling how people speak is utterly futile. And remember, speech is the primary mode for language. Writing, at best, is a johnny-come-lately, hanger-on.)
And “clarity” is often talked about when it comes to linguistic peeves, but rarely is clarity ever at issue when placed in context. And when a certain expression would be confusing in certain contexts, the better solution is to use something else in that particular situation rather than ban it in the 95% of situations where clarity isn’t a problem.
There are many idiomatic expressions that you understand in the context of how it was said, but a foreigner might not understand it in written form. Not everything can be deciphered in context.
True. Language is arbitrary and the way we do things isn’t always logical. That’s the way it is. If you want logic and consistency, try mathematics, not linguistics. Idiomatic expressions and preposition usage may be the most difficult aspects of English (or any language) for a second-language learner to grasp. They’re what you can typically use to discern a native speaker from a non-native one, because there is no logic to them. They’re second nature to native speakers because they’ve been absorbed since infancy, but are baffling to outsiders.
Is whom dying or it just that some people don’t know the difference between the subjective and objective cases; therefore, let’s eliminate it. Regardless, I find it to be one of the few mellifluous English words, sorry to see it go.
The entire system of declensions is dying in English. It’s a slow death; it started happening about when the Anglo-Saxons settled in England. It’s a long process. Whom will continue to be used for the rest of our lifetimes, but it will eventually go. And it’s not like we can decide whether to keep it or eliminate it. Whether it stays or goes depends on the whims of about a billion English speakers. As it stands now, it’s on its way out.
Regardless, I find it to be one of the few mellifluous English words, sorry to see it go.
That’s fair. We all have both the peeves that set us off and the tidbits that we really enjoy. But these are personal preferences, and you can’t demand that others share them. No one is forcing you not to use whom. (Although if you do, you will come off as stiff and overly formal in certain contexts.)
I understand that “I could care less” is correct as a statement, but how can it be correct if one’s intention is not to care less? Logic aside if one is trying to say one thing but says another does it not create confusion?
Because the phrase does not mean what the words literally do. The phrase means “I don’t care at all.” It’s an idiomatic expression and you parse it as a single unit of speech.