DESCRIPTIVIST

…who seem far more dogmatic than many so-called PRESCRIPTIVISTS.

Why can’t those who piously abhor prescriptivism (as I suppose we must call it) realise that an awful lot of people who have to use words regularly need to know how these words are spelt or pronounced, what they mean or have meant and how they are used?

This need stems from a desire to make oneself understood.

Very few normal people would deny language change takes place, is in fact necessary and often delightful.

But quite often change takes place through a muddiness of thought, a desire to appear impressive, to trim, to strive for tone at the expense of meaning thus denuding words of their power.

Are ‘ramp up’ or ‘raft of policies’ really welcome additions to the our language? The prescriptivist will accept them, but he or she does not have to like them, and would be right to be on guard when they are used.

This is what I meant about descriptivists being more dogmatic than supposed prescriptivists.

In fact of course, there is no battle here. Descriptivists describe language and the processes language change, and prescriptivists prescribe careful and alert use and are wary when people use words with apparent disregard for meaning.

Keep up your bright swords, or the dew will rust ‘em.

Language is not just an object of disinterested study, but also a tool that must be kept sharp.

‘One of the only’ seems fairly harmless to me though, I have to say - its apparent illogicality embedded too deep to confuse anyone hearing or reading it.

Second of all, as far as I can see you’ve misunderstood what’s going on. “One of the only internet providers to donate to charity” here means “A member of the limited class of internet providers who donate to charity”. To show you what I mean, remove ‘only’: it’s just “one of the internet providers to donate to charity” which is really fine English despite the slightly clumsy infinitival clause. ‘Only’ applies to the plural, indeterminate class of internet providers. If we take ‘alone, solitary’ as synonyms for ‘only’, to clarify, then it applies to the solitary CLASS rather than the solitary provider. I hope that makes sense; I know mentally why it makes sense when one takes it apart but I can’t verbalise it.

And anyway, do you deny the existence of idiom entirely? If so, hilarity.

Also, ‘plus’ here seems to be used as a conjunction identically to ‘and’, and although it’s a matter of style I’m pretty certain it’s fine to put a comma before such a conjunction (as I did just then without thinking about it).