WSJ: There's an inverse correlation between power and proper grammar
That's pretty much the long and the short of the whole article (archive). But I would add that there is a correlation between proper grammar and respect. So when did power come to mean a lack of respect?
I am a terrible self-editor, but I do make every effort to not make, and certainly not send, grammatical or spelling errors. But according to The Wall Street Journal, in 2026, this makes me some kind of toady.
Have we become so blasé about written communications that we fail to comprehend that there is an etiquettical dimension to the process? Or do we just no longer care?
I mean even if I am communicating with a subordinate, I will make every effort to write properly. I might even make more of an effort, because I would not want them to think I am illiterate, right? That would be shameful. Or at least embarrassing.
Well...no.
Well...no.
The authors of this piece seem to be saying that we demonstrate our power by using bad grammar. Or at the very least, power gives us permission to dispense with proper grammar and editing. Personally, I think they have been reading way too much Foucault.
But this much is clearly true. People today like to assume that whomever they are communicating with will not assume that they are illiterate. The correspondent will simply assume that they are busy or blame the technology or whatever. Or, they assume that the correspondent will simply believe that they just cannot be bothered. So there is no embarrassment much less shame.
But this much is clearly true. People today like to assume that whomever they are communicating with will not assume that they are illiterate. The correspondent will simply assume that they are busy or blame the technology or whatever. Or, they assume that the correspondent will simply believe that they just cannot be bothered. So there is no embarrassment much less shame.
Is that the message that we want to send? And if it is, what does that say about us? Here's a question: What would your grandmother have thought about your grandfather if his love letters were full of grammatical errors and spelling mistakes? Maybe you would not be here.
No, consistently bad grammar and spelling is a signal. He just cannot be bothered. That's the signal.
Here's my question: What else is he not bothered about?
If you believe that bad grammar signals something else; maybe it does. It could represent any number of signals. But all of them are bad.
And if etiquettical is not a word, I will be ashamed.
