How is Standard English determined? Do we base it on speeches made by reporters, writers, politicians, preachers, and teachers? Is it based on the usage of Time magazine or of the Congressional Record or of your local newspaper? Considering the variety of English that is spoken in North America alone, just whose standard is the standard? Just what authority makes it standard, and where does that authority come from?

Some scholars define Standard English as the “prestige dialect” of our language. A Mark Twain or a Will Rogers can achieve humorous effects by deliberate and pointed use of nonstandard idioms; however, the radio and television news is usually delivered in a formal, generalized Standard English with little or no distinctive regional flavor.

Business letters, legal arguments, scientific description, magazine articles, and ceremonial speeches are also normally written in Standard English. Mastery of this prestige dialect is a key to success in most of the most prestigious activities of our world.

An unofficial consensus exists that recognizes certain idioms as standard and certain others as definitely nonstandard, but leaves many others as uncertain or debatable. Is it standard to split an infinitive, to write different than or the reason is because? Is flaunt misused for flout, or infer for imply? Are the words hopefully and finalize acceptable? Does disinterested mean “not interested” or “not motivated by self-interest”?

These questions remain because Standard English is not defined or fixed by any official authority. It emerges from a common consent that leaves plenty of room for disagreement and plenty of room for change. It does not exist in a vacuum but is part of the huge pattern of variety that makes up the English language worldwide.

The true basis of determining usage is to look at what the language itself is doing; that is, at how people are in fact using it. Some usages are better than others, better because they are clearer, more effective, more pleasing, more sensitive, or sometimes better merely because a consensus of influential people prefers them. Some issues are head-on collisions, with admired writers and speakers irreconcilably opposed on both sides, Other matters turn out to be so complicated that few people, if any, dare take a strong position on their usage.