Before:
Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language — so the argument runs — must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hansom cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half-conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes.
After lolprovement:
most people who botha wit matta at all would admit that english language iz in bad way… but it iz generalli assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anythin bout it. our civilization iz decadent n our language — so argument runz — must inevitabli share in general collapse. it follows that any struggle against abuse uv language iz sentimental archaism… like preferrin candlez 2 electric lite or hansom cabz 2 aeroplanez. underneath thiz liez half-conscious belief that language iz natural growth n not instrument which we shape 4 our own purposez.
