a joke about two pere ubuists

[Cyrus]

David Morris wrote:

>As a dialect emerges so do new rules.  Rules exist to be broken, of course,
>setting the stage for new rules.  Art and expression are usually the generators
>of these new rules because expressiveness often relies on novelty in order to
>be noticed.  But it is important for the continuity of a language that a
>"standard" is acknowleged and propogated, especially by those whose job it is
>to teach the language.  I suppose this could be considered an arbitrary
>political goal.
>
>Music has rules too, and the best rule breakers in that language are the ones
>who know the rules by heart.
>
In my understanding, first comes language, then come the rules. Rules 
are but a tool by which to examine how language works. Rules are 
descriptive (much like the famous Aristotelian "unities" in theater). 
Using them for prescriptive purposes is only valid in teaching, to 
facilitate learning. Standards are but temporary. Which is also true in 
the language of music: There, rules apply only in specific periods, and 
each period has its own set.

Cyrus