[Linguistic Anthropology] Listening to Prescriptivists

[Alexandre]

[http://polyglotconspiracy.net/index.php/archives/2007/03/21/the-social-life-of-prescriptivism/]
Lauren Squires posted on her blog a useful summary of issues important
to most language scientists (including linguistic anthropologists):
polyglot conspiracy � The social life of prescriptivismAlso posted on
Language Log.A few comments, with quotes from Squires's blog entry.Then
there’s the language ideologies work, which goes beyond what people
think about language to ask what social processes are underlying the
attitudes, often by appealing to political systems, historical
influences, socioeconomic structure, and semiotic processes that turn
language into a carrier of social meaning in various ways. Language
ideologies are often defined as sets of ideas, attitudes, beliefs, and
behaviors that influence how people use language (by imposing some sort
of schema about what is “right,” “appropriate,” or whatever), and they
also serve as speakers’ means of rationalizing or otherwise explaining
the language that they or someone else uses.Neat explanation! This
could be useful in some teaching situations. On occasion, students have
difficulty understanding some of the work we do.My personal experience
as a French-speaker frequently living in English-speaking contexts
(Indiana, New Brunswick, Massachusetts, Quebec, and Internet) has
impressed me with the differences between Francophone and
English-speaking language ideologies. I tend to use these observations
a bit too frequently but the differences do strike me. For instance,
the positive attitude toward «langage touffu» in French ("obfuscated
language," but without the negative connotations) vs. the Orwellian
tendency to value "plain speech" in English. These differences are used
in academic, social, and even political contexts to great effect.Why do
Michiganders think they speak the most “correct” form of English in the
United States?This one sounds quite close to a comment made by a
Midwesterner (probably a Michigander, actually) in the movie American
Tongues. Can't remember the exact quote (maybe it's YouTubed) but the
gist of it was that "In the Midwest, the way we speak is pretty
boring." Yes, something close to Standard American English. But not as
an elevated dialect of the language. More as an umarked variety with
nothing fun to it.In order to make a usage gripe, you have to be aware
of the linguistic feature you’re griping about.Important point. As
descriptivists, we often gripe about those gripes when the linguistic
feature is not, in fact, incompatible with "normative language." In
other words, we wouldn't complain about a prescriptivist who points out
that "Furiously sleep ideas green colorless" is ungrammatical. But we
might become somewhat snarky when a prescriptivist argues that split
infinitives are incorrect when the splitless alternative would, in
fact, be ungrammatical.Yet, as observers of speakers (and signers), we
need to assess the process of linguistic awareness. What makes
something a "language pet peeve?" Some people can't stand the
unbelievably common confusion between "its" and "it's" (even among
language scientists). I react when I see "complimentary" in place
of "complementary." We probably all have some similar "peeves," even in
a language of which we're non-native speakers. These "pet peeves" and
all the language forms which make people react seem to have important
social implications. Given social stratification, it might well be that
stigma may only be associated to features which are
saliently "incorrect" to prestigious speakers. In fact, non-native
speakers who are afforded great prestige can "get away with" uncommon
forms, at least in English. For instance, on a recent Open Source
episode, film theorist Slavoj Zizek's two-syllable pronunciation
of "film" was almost revered by the status-conscious host.While I agree
that it would be nice to get some teachable moments out of the gripes,
I’m not certain that it would ultimately change anything until some
deeper cultural issues were addressed.While that comment seems to refer
to a specific context, I quite like this idea of "getting some
teachable moments out of the gripes." Many of our students come to us
with a prescriptivist tendency. Even if they don't, they may gripe when
some forms appear to them to be incorrectly used. As students of
culture, we can (should?) try to understand the cultural implications
and "social life" of prescriptivism.

--
Posted By Alexandre to Linguistic Anthropology at 3/29/2007 11:13:00 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/linganth/attachments/20070329/2ce0bb26/attachment.htm>