Issues and analysis using third person perspective

Grammar

In his post entitled 99.9% of proper grammar is obsolete, David Wertheimer makes a number of claims to support his hypothesis proper grammar is obsolete. His argument rests primarily on the use of anecdotal evidence from current digital usage. The first argument is that outside of mainstream publications, things like capital letters, subject-verb agreement and full-length the necessity of such things is "already starting to decay."

As a fundamental underlying philosophy, he notes that "grammatical expertise wastes time and money. The implication is that grammar is a luxury that does not necessarily serve the interests of functional communication. He notes that "there is a cut-off point" were even those people who are knowledgeable of proper grammar "inevitably choose a level beyond which they will make no [further] effort." The author adds some anecdotes and straw men in an attempt to bolster his claims.

At this point, when he claims that those who strive for proper grammar "layer their text with a series of clauses, phrases and terms that add weight to every statement…increase the girth of their text…pump up the load on their servers" it becomes evident that Wertheimer is engaging in satire. On the surface, Wertheimer references repeatedly traits of grammar such as "spiraling time commitments of full sentences" and "stopping to capitalize or punctuate squanders a writer's time at a cost even the most proactive typist may be at a loss to calculate" the hyperbole becomes evident.

The use of hyperbole lends weight to further arguments that essentially call for a middle ground between the more absurd applications of arcane grammatical forms and the equally absurd online shorthand. Wertheimer uses an example of Internet speak to illustrate what happens when language becomes utterly devoid of structure. It is at this point that Wertheimer makes his case known. While initially making claims about the grammar's stiltedness, he comes clean in the finale with his hyperbolic suggestions for new rules, particularly for Internet speak. These include "ditch periods," and "kill capital letters while we're at it."

The biggest claim there is that grammar is critical to communication. While he takes a few jabs at some of the arcane grammar, his ultimate point is that grammar is critical to communicate. The cliche "garbage in, garbage out" is a supporting point, but it highlights the role that grammar plays. Devoid of grammar, communication becomes a jumbled mess, devoid of the very structure that makes language comprehensible across a broad audience.

This claim is not stated explicitly, but is implied in the way that the argument is framed. Wertheimer proposes new grammar rules that would render written communication entirely unintelligible. The use of tone -- in particular the tongue-in-cheek style of some of the arguments against grammar -- mocks the idea that grammar is no longer relevant.