When we discuss the English language,we illuminate our weaknesses,prejudices and ambitions.Language creates communities,and some of these are solidarities of complainers and pedants.A statement about proper English is a statement not only about the language,but also about people-about who the proper English are,or just about who the proper users of English are.Typically,the celebrants and defenders of proper English are celebrating or defending something other than language.Where does our sense of the sproper"come from?In arguing about what is right and what wrong in any language,we appeal to authority.This authority is embodied in academies,the Ministry of Education（or its equivalent）and universities,as well as in the pronouncements of people who have appointed themselves authorities and have become known as such.We commonly accept these judges"pronouncements.There are also geographical criteria.These are evident in statements such as"Natives of Perugia speak the best Italian"or"People in Alsace have funny accents".Typically,we feel that there are certain environments in which our language is decently used,and we favour the usage that obtains there.Sometimes,too,we defer to the example of a significant literary figure,saying that so-and-so is a model of correctness.A broader view is that"correct English is that which is used by the best writers",but who are they,and what are the criteria for their being so esteemed?The definition tends to be circular:the best writers are the ones who best use the resources of English.When we appeal to aesthetics,our arguments become vague.The aesthetically sensitive arbiter will argue that whatever is beautiful in language is good.The problem here would seem to be that the desire for beautiful language concentrates on language as an object-on the sensory pleasure it affords rather than on what it signifies.Besides,as we know from our observation of others,the constant pursuit of beauty can be embarrassing.Alternatively,we may claim that the most elegant usage is that of the social elite.Perhaps this now seems an absurd position,but not long ago it would have been perfectly normal.The democratic option is to say that all doubtful matters should be decided by ballot,or just to say that the majority is right.We also appeal to logic.Although there are discrepancies between logic and the ways we use language,we frequently use arguments from logic（or from what we imagine to be logic）in order to justify our choice of words or find fault with others"choices.In practice we tend to find our usual practices logical and anything else illogical."Logic"is often a mask for arrogance and extreme patriotism.