Legal Commentary

I Before E ... ah ... Never Mind

By TChris

Language evolves, as does the United States Constitution, which after all in physical form is just an assemblage of words. Linguists and English teachers have identified a complex set of rules to govern language just as judges have divined constitutional rules that govern your rights. The rules of English, like judicial precedent, sometimes reach a nonsensical endpoint. At those times you just have to stop pretending there are rules.

The British government, as custodian of the Queen's English, has decided that children shouldn't learn "I before E except after C" because, even if you account for neighbor and weigh with an additional rhyme, you're left with sufficient and weird. Here's the argument in support of teaching the rule even if it's incomplete:

[S]upporters say the ditty has value because it is one of the few language rules that most people remember.

The lesson we should learn: If judges crafted rules of law in easy to remember rhymes, Americans would be more likely to understand their Constitution. [there's one more amusing fact ...]

The linked story quotes Jack Bovill of the Spelling Society and ends with this:

(This version CORRECTS spelling of Bovill, sted Bovell, in graf 4.)

Full post as published by TalkLeft on June 20, 2009 (boomark / email).