8/8/2019 A Comparison of Books on the History of the English Language

1/2

A comparison of books on the history of the English language

At the start of the course on the evolution of the English language we were given two books to

analyze how the English language has evolved from the early period when Angles, Saxons and

Jutes settled in the British Isles and its present state as a world language. One is called The Stories

of English, by David Crystal, and the other, A history of the English Language, edited by RichardHogg and David Denison. Both books provide an extensive detailed analysis of Old English, Middle

English, Early Modern English and Modern English including all the latest linguistic discoveries

which have thrown light on the complexities of the study of English. The approach to the same

subject is quite different, however.

First of all, the titles of the books reflect the authors different perspectives. Crystal has chosen to

entitle his work The Stories of English to refer to the diversity of dialects and styles which make up

the English language, a fact that the mainstream tradition has often neglected. Traditionally, the

history of English has been presented as the story of a single variety of language, that is Standard

English, and he argues that this does not reflect the real situation. In fact, there are more English

speakers who use a nonstandard variety than the ones who do, and to omit or neglect such a fact

would mean a single-mindedness of vision.

On the other hand, Hogg and Denison have chosenA history of the English Language, as opposed

to the history, to signify that theirs is one story among the many that have been written so far.

Moreover, they have compiled the works of several experts on the field from different

nationalities in order to present a multiple perspective, thus avoiding a single subjective vision.

Not only from the title but also from judging from the covers of the editions, will the readers

impression be different. Crystals cover shows a late eighteenth century cartoon which combines

with informal typography. The cover looks engaging and friendly, inviting the reader as if on a tourguide, to discover a new dimension on the study of the English language, from a more popular

perspective. Hogg and Denisons edition present two illustrations which show the extremes of the

same story: an Old English manuscript and a text message. They provide a clear cut example of the

content of the book.

Also, the organization of each volume is completely different. David Crystal provides a linear

narrative, starting from the origins of Old English to the present day varieties and the role of

Standard English as a lingua franca. However, the task of presenting a multiple perspective and

providing a chronological exposition simultaneously is a quite difficult one. Consequently, Crystal

has had to adopt an unorthodox structure, developing a main chronological sequence, which isexemplified with numerous texts extracted from literary, religious, informal or official documents.

Illustrative panels are intermingled for additional data, and an interlude at the end of each chapter

gives further exemplification on nonstandard uses.

Hogg and Denison adopt a quite different scheme. As editors of the volume they introduce the

subject with an overview which locates the English language in place and time, from its origins to

the present day. Then, each part of the language worth considering to linguistic analysis is

8/8/2019 A Comparison of Books on the History of the English Language

2/2

developed by a different scholar, who provides a chronological account of the evolution of their

topic. In this way syntax, vocabulary, morphology and phonology, and other crucial aspects of the

language such as standardization, the distribution of English in Britain and North America and its

global spread are extensively covered. So, most chapters display a linear structure which describes

the continuing process of change that English has inevitably undergone during its 1500 year

history.

Both books have considerable stylistic differences as well. Crystals style is in line with the cover:

reader friendly, engaging, subjective, critical, enthusiastic, and insistent. He has categorical

expressions when he refers to the damage prescriptive attitudes caused to many nonstandard

users. He condemns conservative attitudes but also praises people who could foresee and accept

the changing, adapting nature of language. He also provides colorful metaphors to describe the

present state of Standard English. To him Standard English is no longer a cathedral but a

skyscraper standing among many other tall buildings. All of them have distinctive functions, and all

of them are worth a visit. This clearly illustrates the point he sets about to make from the first

pages to the end, that the true richness of English lies not only in Standard English but in all thevarieties and dialects of nonstandard users all over the world.

A History of the English Language, on the other hand, has no single style. Many authors have

contributed to the contents of the book and all of them have used an academic style, but there are

no striking individual features. The overall effect is of an impersonal, detached, scientific language.

In many chapters the vocabulary is grammatical, specific and less metaphorical. The main aim is

objectivity and sample texts are provided only when theory requires them, unlike Crystal, who

chooses to overstate an idea, presenting a myriad of examples.

Which one would I recommend? That will depend on the readers previous knowledge and

experience of the subject. For someone who needs to tackle the history of English for the first time

and is not familiar with grammatical terminology I would definitely recommend The Stories of

English. But if the reader is looking for straightforward information, clear grammatical

explanations, and objectivity, then A History of the English Language will be the best choice. It

could be quite like the varieties of a language: there is a common core but each serves a different

purpose.