Face the music of language changes

WHILE we know that all languages change and evolve over the centuries, I can’t help but wonder just when did we English speakers go from “thou” and “thine” to you and your?

And, why did the language change?

Did the people in Middle Ages England suddenly say: “Bugger it, enough with this ‘thou’ crap, from now on I’m addressing thou as ‘you’.”

Well, I wonder if language in the Middle Ages was transformed by a phase certain of the population were going through at the time and it stuck.

Perhaps we’re seeing the same thing now with certain of the English speaking world looking to replace words and phrases which appear more politically correct for the time.

For instance, when asked to define what a “woman” was, a nominee for the United States Supreme Court said she could not.

Now, there are people across the English speaking world redefining a range of words such as woman, man, mother, father, St George/Illawarra Dragons (for which club officials have recently sought members’ opinions).

I fear for the world’s sanity when we start tinkering with such long held traditions and definitions – I mean, what next “The Illawarra Dragons”? Sacrilege!

Yet, as people across the globe seek to redefine all these words, little thought seems to be going into the consequences of such actions.

What happens to our much loved musical hits of the past, our rock ’n’ roll and pop songs?

If this is accepted across the board, Percy Sledge will have to re-record his classic hit “When a Man Loves a Woman” into something like “When an adult non-breeding entity loves an undefined human”.

Growing up, I remember Percy belting out that song with so much passion.

Yes, I know Percy is no longer with us – and in light of what could be done to his hits, he may be grateful for that – but I’m not too sure how he (sorry, “they”) would go when the words are changed to something like:

“When a (man) adult non-birthing entity loves (a woman) an undefined human

“(He) They can do (her) them no wrong,

“(He) They can never (hug) close encounter with some other (girl) younger undefined human sans penis.

I mean, how romantic.

It would take him, er them, twice as long to sing the song.

The Beatles would have to rerecord virtually all of their hits or risk being banned from the airwaves.

No longer would “She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah” be acceptable and would be replaced with “They (or them) love you, yeah, yeah, yeah”.

John Lennon’s hit “Woman” will be subjected to a major rewrite.

“Adult birthing entity, I know you understand

The little (child) result of the union between adult non-birthing human and birthing entity inside the (man) non-birthing human

Please remember my life is in your hands

And (woman) birthing entity, hold me close to your heart

However distant, don’t keep us apart.

Surely, they couldn’t tinker with the chorus of:

Ooh, well, well Doo-doo-doo, doo-doo

Ooh, well, well Doo-doo-doo, doo-doo, well. So, please, before you people (or should that be “the collective result of the union between birthing and nonbirthing beings”) start changing the King’s English, please stop and consider the consequences.

I’m sure I’m not the only nonbirthing entity who thinks that way.