John Locke (Wrington, August 29, 1632 - Essex, October 28, 1704), said peace can be achieved by means of a universal definition of English words. He was part of a rational idealism. He believed order could solve everything. In my opinion wanting to organize everything is what causes chaos. The methodical and perfectionist ways of the world became a flu that only serves to stress us even further. It is even more unreal to think that humans can tolerate all their differences. But isn't that the best option? Either way, Locke's wish didn't come true. Language nowadays is more diverse than what his rational mind could have ever imagined. It is these diversity which builds on the humor of each place and develops trends as time passes.
Some time after Locke, scholars were making there own language. Reframing the words and creating new ones. They had to because their discoveries had no names. They did as we do in school, they created a language only for them. That creation of neologisms, I wouldn't say is a phenomenon. It happens quite often in any type of community that has any sort of innovation.
Later on, Jonathan Swift (30 November 1667 – 19 October 1745), voiced his concern for the growing conflicts with the understanding of English. This English being old but still considered the refined one. The strive for the endurance of the language persisted, and it still pointlessly does (seen in the prescriptivist and descriptivist arguments nowadays).
Samuel Johnson (18 September 1709 [O.S. 7 September] – 13 December 1784), had the brilliant idea of making a dictionary. The English dictionary, which became extremely popular. He, the creator of the dictionary, admitted that nothing would balm a language. The so desired immortality of the language was nothing more than a fantasy. The capacity to evolve would take with it the language. I agree completely with his accidental discovery. Accidental because it penetrated his mind when he finished the dictionary and thus noticed the malleability of language. Language cannot be tamed. Anyone can shape it and make their own arguments with it. After all language is purely political.
William Cobbett (9 March 1763 – 18 June 1835), known for his written work, Rural Rights, affirmed that without understanding grammar you can't expect to do something better than a poor man's work. Writing or speaking "properly" will get you a better life. Yes, as he said, education in the written and spoken word is important. Isn't that the reason why private schools teach english? And, why even though we are latin we put effort into learning the ways of the English culture? I think so. My English will ensure me a better business life and a better college. English also alienates me from the lower class and, as raw as it may sound, that is indeed one of our purposes.
Oh! Johnson also thought that shakespeare had ruined macbeth by using the word knife. Because it was used by the workers and, in his opinion, wasn't worthy of being in the play. For the love of God just because of a word he makes such a comment.
At the end of the 19th century, when women were getting more education opportunities, Jane Austen (16 December 1775 – 18 July 1817), wrote her novels. They showed and example of good English and set the norm. With industrialization came a change in language too. The terminology had mutations and new words were again needed.
Language will be forever in transition and it is, as I said before, pointless to desire the sudden stop of this movement.







