This abstract describes linguistic prescription, also called prescriptivism or

prescriptive grammar, which is the establishment of rules defining preferred usage

of language. These rules may address such linguistic aspects as spelling,
pronunciation, vocabulary, morphology, syntax, and semantics.
Linguistic prescriptivism may aim to establish a standard language teach
what a particular society or sector of a society perceives as a correct or proper
form, or advise on effective and stylistically apt communication. If usage
preferences are conservative, prescription might appear resistant to language
change if radical, it may produce neologisms.
The results of research in this field include the creation of
normative grammars for various languages, compilation of explanatory dictionaries
and dictionaries of language norms (orthographic, orthoepic, grammatical), work
on language culture, organization of language legislation, and societal measures to
regulate linguistic functioning.
Some authors define "prescriptivism" as the concept where a certain
language variety is promoted as linguistically superior to others, thus recognizing
the standard language ideology as a constitutive element of prescriptivism or even
identifying prescriptivism with this system of views. Others, however, use this
term in relation to any attempts to recommend or mandate a particular way of
language usage (in a specific context or register) without, however, implying that
these practices must involve propagating the standard language ideology.
According to another understanding, the prescriptive attitude is an
approach to norm-formulating and codification that involves imposing arbitrary
rulings upon a speech community as opposed to more liberal approaches that draw
heavily from descriptive surveys.
Prescriptive approaches to language are often contrasted with the descriptive
approach, employed in academic linguistics , which observes and records how
language is actually used without any judgment. In other words, descriptive
grammarians focus analysis on how all kinds of people in all sorts of
environments, usually in more casual, everyday settings, communicate, whereas
prescriptive grammarians focus on the grammatical rules and structures
predetermined by linguistic registers and figures of power.
Despite being apparent opposites, prescriptive and descriptive
approaches have a certain degree of conceptual overlap as comprehensive
descriptive accounts must take into account and record existing speaker
preferences, and a prior understanding of how language is actually used is
necessary for prescription to be effective. Since the mid-20th century some
dictionaries and style guides which are prescriptive works by nature, have
increasingly integrated descriptive material and approaches.
As for developing of this
linguistic approach we should turn our attention to the history. In ancient societies,
there were norms and rules regulating the use of language. These norms were often
associated with literary traditions, religious texts, or social status. For example,
there were grammatical descriptions and rules for Sanskrit. During the medieval
times and the Renaissance, the perception of correct language usage became
particularly important with the development of written culture and the emergence
of standard literary languages such as Latin. Also, the first grammars and
dictionaries were created, which relied heavily on prescriptive principles. During
the Enlightenment era and the following centuries, language and its appropriate
usage became topics of systematic analysis and debates. In the 19th and 20th
centuries, efforts to standardize and regulate languages within nation-states were
frequently linked with prescriptive approaches to language. Besides, in the 19th
century, linguistics began to develop as a scientific discipline, and prescriptive
approaches were criticized in light of new descriptive and comparative-historical
methods. The works of linguists such as Ferdinand de Saussure advanced the
understanding of language as a system and questioned ideas about "correct" and
"incorrect" language usage.
In modern linguistics, prescriptive approaches still have their place,
especially in educational and standardization contexts. However, they are often
seen as part of a broader spectrum of approaches to the study of language,
including descriptive, functional, and sociolinguistic approaches.
And this logically leads us to the statement, that
linguistic prescription is using in the study of the sociological aspects of language
or sociolinguistics. From my point of view, both fields deal with issues of language
policy, which involves making decisions about standardizing and regulating
language in society. Prescriptivists can influence the formation of language policy
through their recommendations, while sociolinguists can study how these political
decisions affect the social distribution of linguistic resources. Also, widely spoken
languages demonstrate some degree of social codification in how they conform to
prescriptive rules. Linguistic prestige is a central research topic within
sociolinguists. Prescriptive rules, such as grammar and pronunciation norms, play
a crucial role in shaping linguistic prestige. Standardized forms of languages are
often associated with higher prestige because they are typically codified in
educational agenda, used in formal settings like government and media, and
perceived as "correct". Another linguistic approach,
which makes use of prescriptivism is corpus linguistics. In the analysis of large
text corpora, prescriptive rules can be used to identify trends and patterns in
language usage across different contexts. Also, prescriptive
linguistics is important in different linguistic areas, such as standardization,
lexicographers utilize prescriptive principles to define word meanings, in stylistic
analysis, in language pedagogy.