I spent most of my career thinking about, lecturing about and writing about language and one of the key concepts in the study of language has always been that language change is inevitable. We all know this. We know from the changes in this text that we all learnt by heart at school:

Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done
In earth, as it is in heaven.
Give us this day
Our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil:
For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, for ever and ever.
Amen.

We know that, when children do recite this text in school nowadays, they use a changed version.

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins
as we forgive those who sin against
us.
Lead us not into temptation
but deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power,
and the glory are yours
now and forever.
Amen.

Many people don’t like this change, but just think how those people felt who had become accustomed to the original English version of this text (in the Wycliffe Bible – the first English translation published around 1390).

Oure fadir that art in heuenes,
Halewid be thi name;
Thi kyngdoom come to;
Be thi wille don, in erthe as in heuene.
Yyue to vs this dai oure breed ouer othir substaunce,
and foryyue to vs oure dettis, as we foryyuen to oure dettouris;
and lede vs not in to temptacioun, but delyuere vs fro yuel. Amen.

The King James version (pub 1611) must have been a great shock!

Language changes – and even the most familiar expressions become dated and succumb to change.

And yet …

Even accepting all the evidence about language change, there are still language changes which irritate me. I wonder if you share my irritation?

Changes in vocabulary

• Since when did ‘regular’ mean ‘normal’? A regular coffee for me would be one that came regularly every hour (which betrays my caffeine addiction!)
• Terms such as ‘Thatcherism’, ‘Majorism’, ‘Blairism’ (thank God there’s no ‘Sunakism’ – yet!) seem to give these characters more importance than they deserve. On the other hand ‘Trumpism’ seems about right because it is used in a different sense. I guess ‘Trussism’ is the UK equivalent.
• I understand ‘sexism’ and ‘racism’, but resist ‘classism’, ‘ageism’, ‘fattism’ and even ‘Darrenism’ (I was once a primary school teacher!)
• Shortening words seems lazy. Is ‘brill’ so much better than ‘brilliant’? And what about ‘MacDo’s’, ‘Man U’ and ‘asap’?

Changes in meaning

• I am ethnic too! Although I’m not a minority.
• Should I be forensic in my examination of students’ abilities? Forensic simply means to do with the law, not the degree of thoroughness of an investigation.
• Something can be ‘patent’ or ‘obvious’ but not ‘patently obvious’.
• If I don’t care, am I ‘disinterested’ or ‘uninterested’.

Pronunciation

• I don’t mind ‘the idear of it’ but I resist ‘lawr and order’.
• ‘Libry’ and ‘tempry’ and even ‘Febry’ sound dreadfully sloppy.
• How do you say ‘adult’, ‘garage’, ‘aristocrat’, ‘controversy’?
• What about ‘Copenhagen’, ‘valet’, ‘fillet’ (as in steak), ‘deity’?

Grammar

• What is the plural of ‘formula’, ‘dogma’?
• How can you possibly say ‘the data shows…’?

See – we all have our personal irritants!