Proofreading has also gone out the window. Again, I am not always the best proofreader. This very post almost certainly will get published with mistakes. But it’s not me I’m talking about. I’m talking about trained journalists. The other day on Reddit I clicked through to three professional news sites in a row and each one had missing or erroneous words in the articles. Obvious errors which any editor should catch as a matter of course. But if it’s online, mistakes are ok, right? Hell, maybe. That’s pretty lame, but sure, maybe there’s an exception to be made. Except I have been finding these same sorts of errors regularly in the New York Times. In the print edition! On Sunday! That’s right. El gordo, the Sunday paper. The paper that runs William Safire’s ‘On Language’ column.

So I guess what I’m getting at is that I see the deterioration/evolution of the language happening before my eyes. And I can only be quiet about it for so long before I have to say something.

First off, let’s talk about plurals and organizations. If McDonald’s comes out with a new Big Mac, you don’t say “McDonald’s have come out with a new Big Mac”. Do you know why? Simple: 1) Because you sound like a moron when you say it and  2) McDonald’s is a singular entity. They are not plural just because they have a lot of people who happen to work there. That’s the point of an organization: To be a single entity on behalf of a number of people. Companies, schools, unions, whatever. Singular. So when you refer to McDonald’s, you’re not referring to everyone who works at McDonald’s, you’re referring to the *organization only*. Get it?

Now, there seems to be some confusion about when to use ‘a’ or ‘an’. This one is really simple, because it is a rule designed to help people when they are speaking. Languages evolved to serve people and help them communicate. Your language wants to help you! So you only say ‘an’ instead of ‘a’ when you would otherwise sound like your ‘a’ was getting mushed into the next word. For example, “I want an apple” is much clearer than “I want a apple”. If you don’t understand, say that last one a few times fast and you’ll get what I mean.

And in that same way, saying “I listened to an history lesson” is wrong. But “I planted an herb garden” could be right if you are in North America where we ignore the ‘h’ in ‘herb’.

Speaking of English both inside and outside of North America, I believe there is wiggle room to allow for some honest misunderstandings. For example, Americans would consider an algebra class a “math” class while the British would consider it a “maths” class. Since mathematics really is a broad field of many (plural) disciplines, I can see it going either way. No big deal. But if you’re not British and you use words like ‘lest’ or ‘whilst’ you need to be punched in the face.

I have more to say on the topic of Engrish but since my blood pressure is rising to dangerous levels I think now would be a good time to draw to a close. Next time: Things to dangle your prepositions on.

Why? I’ll spare you a long exposition. The answer is this: Java’s libraries suck. Yes, there are tons of libraries for Java. And yes, I’m sure very smart people wrote them. But that’s actually part of the problem. An awful lot of a language’s character comes from its libraries. Better said, libraries encapsulate culture. So when your culture devalues simplicity, your libraries will reflect that. Worse, they will propagate that.

I’m sure the JVM performance is wonderful, and it has no doubt been analyzed to death to make it shiny and lickity-splickity fast. But it seems like an awful lot of people want to get their oddball language on the JVM to take advantage of Java’s libraries.

That’s just crazy talk.

For the first few years of my career I was a C++ programmer. Pretty serious about it too. I loved me some C++.

At that time there weren’t a ton of libraries for C++. Not by today’s standards, anyway. In fact, a lot of the libraries I used were directly descended from C or were just straight C libs that had been around forever. So for me, at that point, C++ really was a C with an object system and a few extra bells and whistles.

When I started to learn Perl, my expectations of C++ changed. Which eventually led me to the STL. The STL was a huge leap forward for me. It was only at that point that I felt like I was seeing C++ as its own language. Before that I could only see it as a C.

Many years later, when C# was announced, I winced. Here was M$, and it seemed they were going to just blatantly clone Java and everything that came with it. But that’s not what happened. Aside from out-iterating Java, the .NET platform (and therefore C#) actually got better libraries. Much better, in some cases. In other words, they managed to capture a lot of the advantages of Java without absorbing too much of the culture.

Similarly, a lot of people who liked VB 6 feel that VB.NET is hobbled because it has to be compatible with C# through those same .NET libraries. And they are probably right. VB culture was hugely impacted by the move to .NET.

So, language designers and porters, look before you leap. Putting your language on the JVM brings it closer to Java, a platform whose values are probably the exact opposite of yours. Don’t be surprised if your culture changes.