The PH internet was abuzz recently with news of Ricky Lo's interview with a seemingly disinterested Anne Hathaway. For starters, I don't really care what the interview was about and why it turned out to be that way. But this morning, when I was bringing up PhilStar on my office browser, there and behold a link to Ricky Lo's article, "Anne of thousand hits (http://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2013/01/23/899982/anne-thousand-hits)" that my mouse just easily gravitated to it and it was just an easy click away into reading it.
There was nothing really interesting about the article as well, as Ricky seemed to just brushed off the incident as just one of his interviews with 200 other Hollywood actors (but of course, with some stinging remark that those others were "absolutely more delightful, far nicer and totally engaging"). But what was really interesting was the comments that came with it, that pointed out that Ricky misused an idiom when he wrote "to the manner" born when referring to the dainty way Julie Andrews took her tea.
To quote the comment thread:
olinsky: It's "to the MANOR born", not "manner". Your writing is as bad as your interviewing skills.
eternatalya: From phrases.org.UK: "To the manner born." Meaning: Destined to be suited to something, by virtue of birth or custom and practice. To the manner born and to the manor born ("said" to be originated by Shakespeare) are also now virtually interchangeable, as per thousands of websites that detail both phrases' word usage. But you should already know that.
olinsky: I taught high school English, including Shakespeare, and if you had read Hamlet, you would know the original meaning of that idiom, and the distinction between "to the manner born" ("fitted by or as if by birth or rearing to a particular position, role, or status"-Merriam Webster) and "to the manor born" ("born into circumstances of wealth and privilege"-MW). The context in which Ricky used the phrase calls for "MANOR" not "manner". Perhaps you overlooked this when you Googled the phrase: http://www.word-detective.com/2011/10/to-the-manner-manor-born/
This is just one example of how netizens (but more specifically, Filipino netizens) who do not have anything on their name would all of a sudden build their portfolio by saying and make claims invoking some air of authority. In this case, one claims to be a petty high school English teacher, and invokes with that authority the right to be a usage cop. But in the end, it's all hubris and not to mention a fallacy (argumentum ad verecundiam).It does not need one to have a doctorate in linguistics to know that language evolves. And especially with the coming of the Internet, any language except probably to those which are considered dead (e.g., Latin) evolves and evolves in an ever faster pace. That language is dynamic is a reality which is hard to deny.
Even the quoted link admits that in modern usage, the terms "to the manner born" and "to the manor born", although originally different in meaning, are now losing their distinction. Or more accurately, the term "to the manner born" is losing its Shakespearian nuance (as noted, from Hamlet) in favour for the nuance connoted by the more modern idiom "to the manor born." Although, to be accurate as well, the quoted article seemed to favour keeping the two idioms distinct.
But the reality is that language is defined the community of users (not what the "authority" says it is). And overwhelmingly, the Shakespearian nuance is losing the battle against the modern usage.
Or, I don't know, I have to admit, it's the first time I heard the idiom. Maybe, the idiom itself is becoming passe, with the changing financial demographics of the modern world where there are more "nouveau riche" than the traditional "ancien riche" (i.e., for the passing usage cop... old rich).
Again, to quote Shakespeare, there's just much ado about nothing. And by that I didn't mean the debate on the idiom but on the online charlatans who dress themselves with the authority of nothing just like when the emperor's invisible clothes.
Pitious.
