@MichaelHarvey Oh, quite. Formal/informal style and other types of register are hugely important. It’s essential to use the correct level of formality for the correct context. As long as we understand that formal doesn’t mean more grammatical and informal doesn’t mean less so!

@MichaelHarvey Punctuation and spelling are not part of grammar. If you want to correct people's punctuation and spelling, knock yourself out.

@jsw29 Spelling and punctuation are not part of grammar. It's fine to tell people what's standard and not standard in terms of spelling and punctuation. I cannot believe that you think that that's the central kind of issue being talked about?

What term would you use to describe postmanteau words such as "irregardless" in sentences such as "Pensions were awarded by the states in which veterans lived after the war, irregardless of which state the veteran served in" (quoted in Garner's Modern American Usage)?

@Shoe Who are you asking? If you are asking me, what are you asking? Are you asking me whether it's an adjective or a preposition? (Answer: preposition). Are you asking me about whether it's a word in standard American English? Are you asking me whether it's a word in British English. Are you asking me how many syllables it has? I don't think I'd necessarily describe it as a portmanteau.

Araucaria. I am basically in agreement with your position on the inadmissibility of the term "incorrect" for certain usages. The question above expressed my interest in the term you would use if one if your students wrote the word irregardless in an essay: incorrect, wrong, non-standard, or a circumlocution?

@Shoe How would you describe the OP's description, presumably backed up by jsw29, that "He is bigger than me" is less grammatical than "He is bigger than I"? Unlike jsw29's unfounded description of descriptivist linguistics, which is a myth, this type of description is typical of prescriptivist descriptions of English, and as evidenced by the OP does occur. It is indefensible to present this as expert advice on modern English grammar. No professional grown up language scientist could ever do so.

Thanks. There is a place for the good prescribers of this world, such as Garner, for people looking for advice on how to write well and avoid usages that might create a negative impression. I am opposed to a blanket condemnation of prescriptivism.

@shoe My guess is I'd simply advise a student not to use it in an essay or any other formal writing because many people would frown upon it. I would definitely avoid calling it incorrect if they had picked it up from their host family or other Americans where they were living. That would be pretty unhelpful. I might say "This word's not recognised in Standard American" or "This is a regional word" if pressed. [Most of all I'd be pretty impressed that they'd used this kind of linking word with the right meaning, even if the word itself is not appropriate. I'd definitely tell them that!]

FWIW: Garner's take on the bigger than issue is this: "For formal contexts the traditional usage is generally best; only if you are deliberately aiming for a relaxed, colloquial tone is the prepositional _than acceptable_".

@Shoe Sorry, cross-posting. One would expect style guides to be prescriptivist in their style advice. What else can advice be apart from prescriptive? It's fine to give people statistical evidence about the general public's acceptability judgements. Entirely scientific (and descriptive). Who could disagree? However, the OP has been clear about what they determine prescriptivism to be - and their assertions about the degradation of the language and their misinforming of the readers here, are not helpful. I can't see anyone giving a blanket attack on prescriptivism anywhere here. Can you?

@Shoe I would expect nothing less. The posters here would doubtless consider that weaseliness. jsw29 would, as they describe, would say "Why not just say it is incorrect?". I've thought about it a bit now. Basically I'd characterise Garner's approach to the language itself as entirely descriptive. It's the same kind of descriptive approach taken by the LPD or various EFL grammars.

Garner has an interesting essay in the introduction to his "Modern American Usage" with the title Making peace in the language wars (i.e. between descriptivists and prescriptivists.) I think you and me (!) have achieved peace in our views on the subject. Ok, it's lunchtime.

@Shoe I think our views on the issue brought up here remain far apart. For example, you studiously avoid commenting on "He is better than he" and also on jsw29's misrepresentation of descriptivists and their use of "correct". However, we agree that Garner is mostly a sensible grown-up style guide. But we never disagreed about that in the first place! ;-)

Ok. Lunch over. Considering I said earlier that "I am basically in agreement with your position on the inadmissibility of the term incorrect for certain usages." I'm not sure about what exactly we are still far apart on.

@Shoe How can you be in agreement with my position on something that I have not stated my position on? Where did you get my position from, jsw29's post?

First. It's nice to meet face to face as it were. As I understand it, your position is that it is inadmissible to categorize sentences such as "Please contact John or I if you have any questions." as incorrect. (I have responded in the main thread to your woah comment. perhaps we can talk about that too.

@Shoe I would indeed argue that that's not reasonable, but that has little, if anything, to do with the kind of case that jsw29 is talking about, and absolutely nothing to do with the case that the OP is talking about. Re your comment re my comment. I did not say that you had misinformed people. I said that you left a supportive comment underneath that post, which is one that is misinforming people.

Sorry, "supportive" there should be "supporting."

@Shoe OK, that's not what I said! But that's what I meant. I shall clarify, under that post.

Ok, got it. Now it's me making false inferences. In retrospect my comment about descriptivists following prescriptivists' advice was not particularly useful. Of course the CGEL marks usages as incorrect with a star and questionable with a question mark. My point was simply that they themselves wno doubt avoid the "Please contact John or I" usages.

...*will* no doubt...

ungrammatical not incorrect. i need to get used to this chat lark.

To which EdwinAshworth very reasonably wrote: How does one define 'more grammatically correct' if almost everyone is happier with and uses the objective in such examples? Isn't it time for the prescriptivists to let go?

Yes, full agreement. So, is there any issue that you still feel we are far apart on?

I'm beginning to wonder who these prescriptivists are that claim John is taller than he is more grammatically correct than John is taller than him. Are they simply the clueless die-hards on the internet? I would categorize Garner as a prescriptivist because he gives advice rather tahn simply describing usage.

(cross-posting) And on the basis of that we have an upvoted question on EL&U META, after a whole 10 years of EL&U having existed, publicly deploring the deterioration of English, and which conflates colloquial, informal with incorrect/ungrammatical. We have a top-voted answer which says that descriptivists don't use the term "incorrect" and which again, in a spectacular, mind-bending act of confusing the general public conflates "academic" with "correct."

I have a book on my shelf with the title 'Between you and I - A little book of bad English'. But most of it is pointing out stuff like the difference between flaunt and flout or the misuse of 'beg the question'. there is nothing about grammar. So I ask again, who are these dreadful prescriptivists that state John is taller than me is incorrect.

@Shoe So, well yes. You're an educator. This is a website for a) helping people who come here for advice and b) creating an encyclopedia style reference guide for posterity. Your contribution on that page doesn't seem to help, and whilst you're happy to do so here in private (where it doesn't really count for anything) you haven't made those points out there, where they would be useful. Good talking. Going to split. Ciao

@Shoe But before I go, I do appreciate you taking the time to talk.

Gleichfalls! Till next time.