REGARDING your article on the Queen's English (LET, December 29), was it written to curry favour with the unwashed masses, or just as copy filler?

If, seriously, not either, then what is really disturbing is the attempt to propagate corruption of the English language by using the Queen to belittle English pronunciation.

English is spoken in hundreds of corrupt dialects, which is acceptable only because it is a means of communication around the world by a mixture of nationalities.

Top universities and also the BBC in world broadcasts used English with correct pronunciation for decade after decade. At that time, they were world famous for it.

Listeners praised the clarity of the programmes -- that is, until the media pandered to the masses and began the corruption process.

Nowadays, half the time no one can tell what they are talking or singing about.

The BBC, whose pronunciation was once impeccable, now has every nationality that can be found to read the news, etc and has been undermined, so much so, that they can't even tell the time to start the programmes.

Obscene language is the norm in many programmes and films, under the excuse of it depicting the true lifestyle of modern society.

English should be preserved as a whole in every way, with a set of fixed standards so as to stop the erosion and it may be time to make it a dead language in a frozen state, like Latin.

The French have been defending their language from 'Franglais' for several years and are aware of the problem. The English should do the same. Then, the separated, ongoing, corrupt, foul-mouthed style could be called the British political language and people could do with it whatever they wished.

To have an English language and a separate "British political language" could be a great idea, something like an organic and non-organic version respectively.

A WALMSLEY (Mr), Greenside Avenue, Blackburn.