There is much to be worried about in this article, but one wonders how selective the examples are.

It is also worth remembering that without the use of slang and colloquialisms in literature, we wouldn't have had such masterpieces as The Catcher in the Rye.

After all, Shakespeare himself was not averse to the use of colloquial slang, such as the use of Coz for cousin. He also often made words up himself (what would today's examiners think of that????)

For me, the most bizzare point made in the Telegraph story is that 99% of those entering the exam passed it!!!! Either we are harbouring a generation of literary geniuses, or somethink funny is going on.

Traditionalist though I fear I am, and however much I dislike (OK hate) soap and tabloid language, the issue must be whether the evolving language retains the power to express subtlety. And not just express it but also to communicate it to the target audience. And beyond that still, whether those who deploy it are able to use it in a discriminating way. Is there evidence that this is so? I fear that such evidence is completely absent.

The more likely reason that this new language is so complacently accepted is that it is another aspect of 'the lower the standard the more can be included' mantra of the posturing heart-bleeding classes. You may be practically illiterate and unable to articulate an idea that has not been sloganised for you through the media, but that makes it all the easier to sweep you up into the all-providing bosom of the matriarchal state.

Civilisations die, runs one theory, when they suffer a loss of collective intelligence. No wonder we are so obsessed with the NHS. We must unconsciously realise that we are all on our deathbeds.

Modern language, literacy and standards of basic education was brought to us by the church and the philanthropists of the 19th cent. - so we were able to read the bible ourselves and do self-improvement things.

Since we dont go to church anymore there is really no need for most people to be able to read, hence the decline in language usage amongst the majority of the people. Indeed, modern tills makes it unecessary for shop girls & boys to add up - we have calculators these days.

Modern teenagers, and increasingly twenty-somethings, communicate using a series of short grunts and very slangy language - this is great fun -until you realise that is all they are able to speak. It all comes down to the quality of parenting and teaching and the value we put on these things.

Not much, it seems.

Game set and match? Yes, Ms Barnes approach does indeed sound like "surrender and win".

While one does not wish to catagorize every poor writer as intellectually substandard, the link between an ability to express oneself clearly in writing and the ability to think with the same degree of clarity is obvious. The "dumbing down" of our students is a fact. The corrective is to reintroduce the vigorous instruction of composition and grammar in schools. Simple.
The only question now is, "Who is against reversing this deplorable trend and why?"

J. S. Kern - Very interesting and astute question.

After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood.