When I ask people who are not so well versed with mathematics, what is pi? I often get the answer 22/7.  It is even more surprising that many of them know that pi is irrational whereas 22/7 is not.  Let me recollect what pi is for the sake of those who do not remember it well enough.  It can be shown that the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter is a constant irrespective of the circle you take.  It can also be shown that the above constant is not a rational number.  This irrational number is denoted by the symbol pi.  22/7 is a rational approximation of pi, correct up to a few decimal places.  The reason they answer so, I think, is that they have a better understanding of 22/7 than of pi, or for that matter they have better understanding of a rational number more than of an irrational number.  For them, 22/7 is precise whereas pi (or any irrational number) with its non-recurring decimal places is imprecise, and thus they are unhappy with it.

I see a similar phenomenon in the domain of languages.  I think, the written language arose for the sake of correspondence between people who are separated by space or time or both and, the aim was to approximate the spoken language as much as possible.  I am sure everyone will agree that the tone, the facial expression, or body language in which a particular sentence is spoken can affect the meaning of the sentence.  These features of the spoken language are lost when we write it down.  The use of smileys or emoticons, for example, gives a better approximation, as they convey your emotion, but, is still not accurate.  I am of the opinion that the written word can never capture the full meaning of the spoken, which may be controversial but, I hope, you would at least agree that it is not perfect now.  Thus, I call writing an approximation of what is spoken.

More often than not, I have heard people say that, a particular usage accepted in one dialect of the language, is incorrect because, it is different from the one used in written language.  I think, this is like saying 22/7 is the correct value for the ration of circumference to diameter, and not pi.  Firstly, as I hope I have convinced before, the written is just an approximation of the spoken like 22/7 is just an approximation of pi.  Secondly, I found out from a limited sample, that, the reason they think the written language is the correct one is because it is well defined and precise like 22/7 and pi, again.  The spoken may be less precise, but it is the actual language.  It saddens me when the approximation becomes the actual.  Similar phenomenon might be there in other spheres of life as well and I urge you to think whether we should let the approximation become the actual just because the approximation is easier to understand.