Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
I'd never even heard that one before last year; sounds like a new coinage.
It is a new term, but the point is that many men never grew out of the toxic phase and now genuinely espouse this dumb incel mentality. I should have said mid to late 20s to make the point even more clear.

I get what you're trying to do here, but these are questionable as standalone propositions. There is a huge variation in lyrical content within all genres, and there are any number of popular hiphop songs with even fewer unique words and simpler sentence structure than a Sabaton song.
Sure, I love listening to six9ine as much as the next guy as well. But I believe the mechanics of rap definitely impart a culture (in some circles) that is willing to take on additional vocabulary to a degree other genres don't. As a rule of thumb, rap can (not always) place more emphasis on the spoken word than the underlying music.

Also it's no fun when it's no longer a blanket generality. :(

But the first point, in throwing around notions like "better" English (what does that mean?), is where you really have to be careful. That is, the idea of a group speaking a language "better" than another is something that needs to be interrogated and carefully defined. It's easy to devolve into simply praising someone for following certain conventions of style or register, such as not saying "ain't."
By better I mean the articulation of meaning is more precise in 'formal speech' and more available to audiences from varying backgrounds in the language, the vocabulary is typically more professional and again more reachable to a wider audience in that sense.

I don't consider anything inherently better in the context of 'informal speech'. Whatever works, works whether you are shakespeare or like me telling people "shit's fucked, man".

You tell me if I am wrong in this sense:

Informal speech does not need to adhere to any rules or conventions. The goal is merely to convey meaning, so in-jokes, regional slang, pronunciation, and all types of grammatical structure is fair game as long as both parties can understand.

Formal speech does require certain rules to the game as it is usually conveyed in either a textual format or in verbal situations where neither party has full knowledge of the other's background. Without an understanding of whether or not the other person can understand the in-jokes, slang, etc. we default to a common set of rules and structure to ensure a common understanding among all parties. Now even those rules evolve over time, I am not ignorant to that either but typically it evolves at a much slower pace than informal speech, which is why books from hundreds of years ago can be read somewhat easily but a transcript of informal speech 30 years ago could feel horribly dated and require further insight into the context behind word usage.