It is also notable that many prescriptivists are actually complaining about changes in their society about which they feel angry or upset, rather than about language per se.
Hmm, I DO think that's part of it. I resent being spoken of (or to) as though I were a computer. ("Can you generate that number for me? Can I get hard copy of that?") I will 'fess up to having a hate-hate relationship with computers, as one was the Other Woman in my first marriage.
Jargon (language peculiar to a trade) does not belong outside its proper venue. If you want to "access" a file on your computer, I will grit my teeth and let you. If you want to "access" my house, I will be waiting with a frying pan in hand. I don't use the jargon of my trade (art) on people, because I don't feel it's respectful - it's not appropriate to apply it to people and it's not kind or polite to speak a foreign language to someone who may not understand it.
I get tired of non-prescriptivists whose catch-all argument is that English is a living language. This usually means that they can't be bothered to check on the difference between "imply" and "infer" (or "flaunt" and "flout") and figure they're interchangeable.
The only way you can flaunt the law is by waving a judge around.
And a rural "rowt" is a bunch of farmers retreating in a disorderly fashion.
