35.1474, Disc: Movie mistakes in linguistics

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-35-1474. Mon May 13 2024. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 35.1474, Disc: Movie mistakes in linguistics

Moderators: Malgorzata E. Cavar, Francis Tyers (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Justin Fuller
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Steven Franks, Everett Green, Daniel Swanson, Maria Lucero Guillen Puon, Zackary Leech, Lynzie Coburn, Natasha Singh, Erin Steitz
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Justin Fuller <justin at linguistlist.org>

LINGUIST List is hosted by Indiana University College of Arts and Sciences.
================================================================


Date: 10-May-2024
From: Alex Baratta [alex.baratta at manchester.ac.uk]
Subject: Movie mistakes in linguistics


My proposed discussion forum would be dedicated to any and all
instances in movies in which language and/or information pertaining to
language/linguistics is incorrect. For example, here are two examples
that have been bugging me forever, hence my desire to start a
discussion forum.

Return of the Jedi (1983) - C3PO refers to the Ewoks as speaking 'a
very primitive dialect'. There's no such thing as a 'primitive'
language. If one variety is less complex, say phonologically or
morphologically, than another, it will often make up for this in other
ways, as well as the fact that there are legitimate reasons for its
relative lack of complexity when compared with other varieties of the
language. It has nothing to do with speaker intelligence. I think
Lucas was perhaps making the point that a band of 'primitive' Ewoks
were nonetheless able to help defeat the almighty Galactic Empire, but
the reference to their language as being primitive is simply incorrect
from a linguistic point of view. The fact C3PO referred to their
language as a dialect per se, might also reinforce the negativity
attached to their speech, in that public perception is sometimes still
of the opinion that dialects are somehow 'wrong', simply as they are
non-standard forms. We know this is not true.

Likewise, Princess Leia, disguised as a bounty hunter at the start of
the film, uses a language in which much is communicated using the same
repetitive phrase of 'yoto' for the most part. Not a mistake per se,
but a unique language indeed to communicate so much with so little!

The Living Daylights (1987) - In this 007 film, James Bond refers to
his love interest, Kara, with the word ښايسته [Kha-yessta]. However,
he identifies the language as Afghan - there is no such language as
Afghan! Surely, someone who is as knowledgeable as our James would
know this! The language in question is Pashto.

Linguistic Field(s): Applied Linguistics
                     Discipline of Linguistics
                     General Linguistics




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please consider donating to the Linguist List https://give.myiu.org/iu-bloomington/I320011968.html


LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

De Gruyter Mouton https://cloud.newsletter.degruyter.com/mouton

Equinox Publishing Ltd http://www.equinoxpub.com/

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Lincom GmbH https://lincom-shop.eu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Wiley http://www.wiley.com


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-35-1474
----------------------------------------------------------