³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

What Emma Thompson and various other commenters on this story need to understand is that her dislike of various aspects of teenage speech is completely intentional. The whole point of irregular (and often very creative) developments in language is to draw a distinction between the young and the old. It is exactly the same underlining of generational divisions that we find in trends in art, music, literature, etc. Every generation rebels and then grows up to complain when the next one does the same. Perhaps she doesn't even realise it, but Mrs Thompson's real problem is that the "youth of today" aren't using the right kind of slang - hers
Jim O'Connor, Winchester, UK

Andrew (Tuesday's letters), you may think that "kids" isn't a good word for children, but the use was first recorded in 1690. After that length of time, should we really still be making "baby goat" jokes?
Peter, Swindon, UK

To follow us on Facebook, click here (and then click on the word "like"). Emma Thompson will, like, be furious. Or should that be "will be, like, furious". It's a grammatical nightmare.
Stephen Turner, Preston, Lancashire

It is only me? When the new Labour (or should that be New Labour?) leader smiles broadly, does he not remind anyone else of Wallace (as in Gromit)?
PollySaxon, Lichfield

No wonder countries are struggling to meet the [HIV drugs] goal, when the medicine is being wasted for photo opportunities.
John, Harbrough, Ireland

Pleeeease take away the picture of that mouse. It's putting me off my food and I haven't eaten in days!
Sarah, Oxon

I see that Wednesday's letters page (gremlins permitting) will be the 1,000th. What time's the party? Have you got enough cheese and pineapple sticks for all of us?
Ruaraidh, Wirral, UK

Monitor note: Sorry, the Magazine started without you. There's only a couple of pickled onions and a curled-up cheese sandwich left.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?