Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Mind your language... again!
You might remember us discussing this very process in class in relation to ethnicity: we talked about the use of adjectives such as 'Chinese' - as in 'Chinese people' - as compared with the generally less acceptable noun 'Chinese', as in 'the Chinese' (or, even more contentious, the use of 'black' as a noun rather than as an adjective). You might think this is 'linguistic pedantry', but it's worth asking yourself whether these subtle differences actually make a difference to people's perceptions of the group or individual being represented. In some cases maybe not... but in other cases I think there is something to be considered here.
Thursday, 12 November 2009
War of the words...
Representations of young people
In the first of these articles, which is primarily about the new Michael Caine film Harry Brown, the writer considers the use of 'the hoodie' as a universal symbol of undesirable or even criminal elements in society. Although this is a text which more or less analyses representation (rather than creating its own representation of young people), the writer makes some interesting points about the ways in which society presents and views members of this age group. The following extract is a good example:
What separates hoodies from the youth cults of previous moral panics – the teddy boys, the mods and rockers, the punks, the ravers have all had their day at the cinema – is that they don't have the pop-cultural weight of the other subcultures, whose members bonded through music, art and customised fashion. Instead, they're defined by their class (perceived as being bottom of the heap) and their social standing (their relationship to society is always seen as being oppositional). Hoodies aren't "kids" or "youngsters" or even "rebels" – in fact, recent research by Women in Journalism on regional and national newspaper reporting of hoodies shows that the word is most commonly interchanged with (in order of popularity) "yob", "thug", "lout" and "scum".
The Women in Journalism article that is referred to in the quotation above contains some really interesting observations on language that relate very closely to the work we've been focusing on in class.
But are media representations of young people always as negative as this? In the first of a number of articles that appeared in the press last year, we see a number of examples of young people being labelled in precisely the way that the writer of the Harry Brown article was talking about. In this article the labels teenager and teen - which in themselves are arguably neutral - are used in collocation with descriptors such as callous and reports that these young people "casually snacked on McDonald's burgers as an 82-year-old driver lay dying with his wife critically injured beside him".
By contrast, this article uses the term teenagers in a much more neutral way, reinforcing the representation with the far more positive label young people. Similarly, in this article and this article the victims of violent attacks are given the neutral label boy, while their attackers are labelled far mroe negatively as youths and gangs.
Friday, 16 October 2009
The writing's on the wall...
I've always imagined the world of Forensic Linguistics to be an exciting one, but it's an area that I've never really had the opportunity to look into in much detail - until now. In doing one of my usual net-trawls for interesting stuff to post on this blog, I came across this article. It reports on the work of researchers at the Centre for Forensic Linguistics at Aston University, who have been carrying out detailed studies of the language used in hate mail. One of these linguists, Dr Tim Grant, comments in the article on the way in which his team have come to the conclusion that the 57 letters they have been studying could have been written by a woman. They have based this hypothesis on a range of observations about the language used within the letters, much of which conforms to what many linguists consider to be female linguistic traits. Dr Grant's comments contribute significantly to the debates that we've been having in A2 English Language about gender variation :
He said: "One of the things that were striking about the letters was the heavy use of expressive adjectives, which is more typical of women than men. You could say women use more adjectives because they can be more socially evaluative but we don't look at why rather than how the two different groups behave. We just know that's the case because we read a lot of letters and make statistical correlations. The words (in the letters) used were things like 'squalor', 'dirty' and some sexual adjectives which were suggestive of women's writing. Another thing we know is that women tend to use fewer first person pronouns, such as 'I'."This line of argument of course flies in the face of some of the most recent observations on gender variation made by the likes of Deborah Cameron (who argues that the supposed differences between male and female linguistic behaviour are nothing more than myth). It'll be interesting to see if the boffins at Aston Uni turn out to be right...
If you want to find out more about the work of the Centre for Forensic Linguistics, then take a look at their website.
Tuesday, 29 September 2009
Mind your language!
The writer of the article discusses the language that is currently being used by politicians engaging in the debate about government spending cuts. According to a recent survey, voters are more likely to support proposed reductions in spending if they are talked about in terms of 'controls' rather than 'cuts'. This is not just anecdotal either - the survey claims that 76% of people would support 'controls' as an alternative to tak rises, while only 64% favoured 'cuts' over increased taxes. More fool Nick Clegg, then, for his comments about 'savage cuts'! The article goes on to explore some of the other terms being used too.
The issue of linguistic representation has cropped up in another recent article too. In what some might see as something of a regressive move, a new publication of the popular New International Version of the Bible is seeking to move away from some of the gender-neutral language used in the earlier Today's New International Version publication:
For instance, in some cases where original texts were not specific, the TNIV uses "children of God" instead of "sons of God", or "sister and brothers" instead of simply "brothers". Critics of the TNIV call its gender neutral pronouns inaccurate interpretations. However, others say such modifications can be more truthful to scripture's original intent.The debate surrounds the issues of 'truth' and 'meaning':
It's an interesting argument, the key element of which is the notion that the manipulation of language can alter people's perceptions of meaning and ultimately, perhaps, their view of 'truth'.. and this is what Representation and Language is all about.One's interpretation of "Truth" may not be as simple as literally translating a text word for word. "People on both sides could argue their translation is more literally accurate," said UT Religious Studies Professor Christine Shepardson. "The difference comes much more so when you're talking about the meaning of the text." The "meaning" of the text refers to the intent of the original authors. "Do you want the most literal translation? In which case, if you're translating the English phrase 'break a leg', then you'll end up with the wrong meaning," Shepardson said. "Or do you want the most accurate meaning of the text? Then you're opening it up to the person's interpretation of that meaning."
Wednesday, 9 September 2009
WELCOME...
The purpose of this blog is to help you to keep up to date with current news articles, websites and other resources that focus on aspects of English Language and that will support your learning. The blog is updated by members of the English Language team on a regular basis, so please do log in as frequently as possible. If you've got something to say about the issues raised in one of the blog entries, please do feel free to post a comment. Similarly, if you happen to come across an interesting language-related resource/website/news item somewhere and you think other students would benefit from accessing it, then please email the details to Jason, Nicky or Tracey at jjones@strodes.ac.uk, nwhillans@strodes.ac.uk or telliott@strodes.ac.uk and we'll post it up.
*probably
**no doubt about this one
***well, we like to think so
Friday, 15 May 2009
Accentuate the positive (or negative...)
In the first article an MP from Wearside in the North-East of England argues that negative attitudes towards her accent once lost her a job. This might surprise you, given what we've been saying about the increased popularity of the varieties of the North-East over the past few years, and the article does indeed go on to acknowledge this, pointing out that the negative attitudes which this MP experienced actually occurred 20 years ago. It's a good example of how the fortunes of a regional variety can change in a relatively short period of time.
A separate article in this week's Guardian discusses the use of regional accents in advertising campaigns, observing that not everyone likes to hear their own accents used on TV:
The research clearly shows that the accent used in radio and TV advertising canIt's well worth reading the full article as it will give you some excellent ammunition when it comes to your exam.
have an impact on how the ad is received," said Brian Jenkins, the head of radio
at the COI. "Regional accents can make a difference but not necessarily a
positive one. There was quite a negative reaction from people in Birmingham and
Bristol to their own accents," he said.
Jenkins added respondents in both
cities were "very proud" of the way they spoke, but seem to have been affected
by "other people's perceptions of their accent".
Thursday, 30 April 2009
When does a word become a word?
All of this speculation and uncertainy has prompted discussion in the media of what actually constitutes a word. Can, for example, short-lived slang terms be classed as words in their own right. Are we going to let 'text speak' words into the dictionaries if they show signs of having crept into our spoken vocabulary? These are some of the questions addressed in this video report from the BBC. Members of the general public are asked to give their views on words such as chav ("It's a term that's been coined... it's slang... I don't think it's a real word.") and LOL ("Everyone's using it.. it's fun."), while a lexicographer from the Collins Dictionary points out that "a word needs to be used in a wide variety of [contexts] for it to be included in the dictionary". The report also looks at some of the new words that are helping the language to clock up its one million - words such as Obamamania and to defriend (the process of dumping someone from your list of firneds on Facebook).
In another part of the same report the issue of 'word death' is also discussed. Professor Mark Pagel from the University of Reading observes that words like to stab and to throw have a relatively limited life span of about 800-1000 years, while words such as I, to, five and who can be around for as long as 20,000 years. This in itself ios not surprising, given that the words in the latter category are either function words or fundamental basic content words, while those for which he predicts a shorter life belong to the content or open class word group, where, as we know, new words come along and de-throne old words all the time!
A special edition of the Forbes Magazine has recently looked at this issue of language growth. You can read the full article here, but I've picked out a few key points form it below.
On the issue of the one-millionth word:
An outfit called the Global Language Monitor claims that English is about to add
its millionth word, boldly (and absurdly) projecting the event to transpire some
time around June 8, 2009. But that gives the patina of precision to the
ultimately subjective task of determining what counts as "English" nowadays--and
what counts as a "word." Even if we content ourselves with the paltry number of
neologisms that get included in dictionary updates, it's instructive to see
which words make the cut. Recent additions to the Concise Oxford English
Dictionary, for instance, include biosignature, botnet, locavore, mocktail,
plus-one and vanity sizing. In some cases we know exactly where these words are
coming from. Locavore, meaning "a person whose diet consists only or principally
of locally grown or produced food," was coined in 2005 by a group of four San
Francisco women who challenged local residents to eat only food grown within a
100-mile radius. It was then picked up by like-minded activists around the
country.
On the issue of new prefixes and suffixes:
Suffixes and prefixes are the Legos of word-making, handy attachments we slap
onto words as needed. Most don't make us blink: like the "pre" and "s" in
"prefixes" itself.
Others are a little more creative, gaudy and
eye-catching. It's no longer unusual to spot "-y" suffixed words like "women's
magazine-y" and "false-prophet-y" or words with " 'tude" such as
"braindead-itude," "poor-human-being-itude" and "warlorditude." There's nothing
new about "nano" in conjunction with a very small iPod or scientific words like
"nanotubes," but slangy, informal words like "nano-brained" are adding fancy new
features to the insulter's toolbox. The celebutante-inspired prefix "celebu-"
has spawned many recent coinages such as "celebu-tats," "celebu-chefs,"
"celebu-ooops," and "celebu-scent."
On the issue of words that have come into the language from the world of gaming:
Sometimes new words are not invented, but are crafted from old words. In
gaming, a "griefer" is a player who intentionally disrupts the gameplay of other
players--a griefer gives other players grief. Gamers took a word that already
existed and added the highly productive suffix "-er" to make a word that fit
their language needs. On the history of new words:
Shakespeare popped off
hundreds of neologisms, such as "excellent," "lonely" and "leapfrog," that have
long been accepted as words, but which, if dictionaries were being written in
Elizabethan times, would have been flagged as suspiciously colloquial. Given
that it is nearly impossible to create a word for something out of thin air and
see it adopted by the rest of the English-speaking world--i.e., if you randomly
decided to call the cover for your memory stick a "verch," no one else would
join in--most of the words that have accreted in the vast English vocabulary
over the 2000-plus years of the language's existence have been created in
various ways.
Saturday, 4 April 2009
LAD plays a part in second language teaching
In theory, there is every reason why this method should work - if learners have already gone through these processes of acquisition as a baby, then it seems reasonable to assume that they will be able to repeat their successes as an adult learning a second language. An interesting idea...
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Linguists go bananas over chimp talk
After years of carrying out extensive research trying to find evidence to support their hypothesis that Bonobo chimpanzees are capable of developing human linguistic skills, scientists are claiming this week that they have finally found conclusive proof that humans are not the only mammal that can ‘talk’.
Studies of Bonobos’ comprehension of human language have been going on for years, with linguists such as Sue Savage-Rumbaugh of Georgia State University (USA) publishing countless research papers focusing on the way in which apes can be taught to recognise basic human words. Well known among today’s psycholinguists and anthropologists is the case of Kanzi, an adult female Bonobo chimp who was able to demonstrate understanding of simple instructions issued in verbal form by Savage-Rumbaugh and her co-researchers. But this considers only the comprehension of human language – and let’s face it, even dogs can be taught to obey basic commands such as ‘sit’ and ‘walkies’ (not that I’ve got anything against dogs, you understand – I’ve met some very intelligent dogs in my time, to be fair… smelly, like most dogs, but intelligent nonetheless). Anyway, where was I… yes, even dogs can be taught to understand some basic human words. It’s one thing to say that Bonobos can understand what humans are saying, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that they are capable of language production. Even Savage-Rumbaugh’s evidence suggesting that these primates can be taught to use basic sign language as a means of communicating on a superficial level does not really provide convincing proof of the existence of an ‘articulate ape’.
But that’s all about to change! In research that is due to be published this week, another team of linguists from the Department of Linguistic Science at University of Thistlebeer Oaks in the USA are claiming that, given the appropriate exposure to a basic model of human language, Bonobos can actually acquire the ability to use human language in its verbal form and to hold spoken conversations with humans.
For the past six years, Professor of Linguistics Juan Foronign has led a small team of researchers who have lived 24 hours a day, seven days a week in the company of a pack of wild Bonobos deep in the heart of the jungle in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Prof Foronign recalls that at first the Bonobos were very wary of the researchers’ presence and it too
k “more than 18 months for the Bonobos to start behaving normally” in the presence of the team of linguists. However, once the researchers had become part of the furniture, so to speak, “the Bonobos began to lighten up… and this was when [the researchers] started to observe some very interesting behavioural patterns”. What the professor goes on to describe in the preview to his forthcoming publication Bonobo Chimpanzees and the Acquisition of Human Speech is nothing short of breathtaking.“After some time living with the chimps, one of the younger Bonobos started to become very friendly with some of the researchers, and would actively seek out their company. At the very start of our research project we had named all of our Bonobos after famous linguists and anthropologists, and this was the chimp that we had called Rillfeul (after a mid-20th century psycholinguist whose work was among the earliest to focus on the language skills of primates). Rillfeul, a young male, would interact with the team, offering them food and ‘inviting’ them to play with him. Part
of this interaction would involve certain basic vocalisations, and it was only when our researchers began to observe certain patterns of sounds and consistent responses to the same stimuli that we began to notice something more than just basic ‘chimp noises’ going on.”The scene that Prof Foronign goes on to describe is fascinating… and more than a little unnerving. He explains that, as time went on, the behaviour of this particular Bonobo would become more and more human-like, and that he would mimic certain body language features and, more significantly, linguistic vocalisations of the researchers. The two linguists to whom Rillfeul became most closely attached were both native to the Congo, and both spoke Swahili as their first language. Amazingly, Prof Foronign goes on to describe what he claims to be the acquisition of elements of Swahili by this primate:
“At first it would just be the odd word here and there, and our first thoughts were that it was just a coincidence that Rillfeul was using what sounded like Swahili lexemes. But after a while we could not ignore the fact that these lexemes were being used at the appropriate times – in other words, the Bonobo would use a specific word in relation to the object – or even concept – for which a human speaker would use it.”
This went on for four or five years, and Prof Foronign describes a pattern of language development during that time that was not unlike that of human babies – that is to say that Rillfeul gradually developed the skills to articulate fully-formed complex, multi-word sentences, and to use these accurately and appropriately in communicating with humans. Furthermore, as the linguistic skills of this chimp developed, the researchers also began to observe signs of verbal linguistic behaviour emerging in Rillfeul’s mate, the young female they had named Rank (after American cognitive linguist Mary-Jane Rank). The research that is to be published later this week shares with the world the linguists’ astounding observations of this process of language development in these two primates:
“These two Bonobos – recorded in our research files simply as Ape Rillfeul and Ape Rank – are without a doubt the first primates to have acquired human language – specifically Swahili”.
In presenting his team’s findings at the 2009 Psycholinguistics Symposium in Geneva later this year, Prof Foronign is expected to show a video of Rillfeul, the male, articulating in very clear Swahili “Hyor s’ohgh ullib li’fyu buhll ee’fen yofth iss” which, roughly translated, means “Would you like to share my bananas with me”. On the same video footage (which you can access on YouTube by typing in “Ape Rillfeul’s Day Has Come” – but which cannot be linked here because of the college web filter doodah) the primate can also be heard saying “aymjh ust’wayn d’inyupph” which in Swahili means something along the lines of “I’ve an awful itch, old friend, I don’t suppose you would mind scratching my back for me please”. Astoundingly, Ape Rank obliges!
So what do you think? Evidence that ‘we are not alone’ after all when it comes to the one thing that most people argue distinguishes us from the animals, or just a load of monkey business? Post a comment below and have your say.
Thursday, 26 March 2009
Jargon-busters pass sentence on local council 'gobbledegook'

"Congratulations Dave! I don't think I've read a more
beautifully evasive and subtly misleading public statement
in all my years in government!"
The first of these articles lists some of the words and phrases that have now been banned, while in the second article Ed West looks at some examples of local council job advertisements that use such jargon and asks 'What does any of this mean?' A good question, Mr West. Apart from just being downright baffling, though, Ed West argues that 'jargon makes it easier to disguise one's actions with euphemisms for inaction, bureaucracy or waste'. This is surely a serious point, and one which draws on some of the issues that we have considered when studying Language and Representation, and which we are about to come back to in the A2 Language Debates synoptic unit.
Of course, Ed West is not the first person to make this kind of observation about the language of politicians. One of the most famous diatribes on such linguistic 'trickery' is George Orwell's 'Politics and the English Language', written in 1946. In this seminal publication, Orwell argues:
In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism., question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the
countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants
to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.
Orwell goes on to condemn a range of jargon and euphemistic terms used by the politicians of the day and, while he was writing more than 60 years ago, much of the language to which he refers would be very much at home in the lexicon of a 21st century politician. You can read the complete essay here. You'll find this a very interesting read... and a very useful one if the topic of Language and Ideology should happen to come up in this year's synoptic paper!
With thanks to Jeremy for bringing the first Telegraph article to my attention.
Saturday, 7 March 2009
The joy of txt
One of the psychologists conducting the study claims that 'children's use of textisms is not only positively associated with word reading ability, but may be contributing to reading development.' Addressing the issue that seems to be at the heart of fears over the corrupting influence of text messaging, Dr Beverley Plester goes on to say that 'children text in a type - or register - of language which is supposed to keep the grown up out. As a general rule they do not use text language in their schoolwork'. So the language of texting is as much about in-group identity as it is about economy and speed. Interestingly, the study observes that girls use 'textisms' more than boys do, and it might be interesting to ask why. Does this suggest that girls are conforming to the stereotype that females generally use langauge for social purposes, while for males langauge is generally referential? Or does it mean that girls are more adept at mastering a new linguistic code such as 'text speak'?
I'm interested to hear what you think about the views expressed in this article. If you're an A2 student this is exactly the kind of text that you might see on your ENA6 paper in the summer... but let us know what you think even if you're not an A2 student.
Wednesday, 4 February 2009
Crotchdogs, mousemobs and piersonalities
We've looked at this sort of thing many times before, so if you've got five minutes and you want to have a go at coming up with your own spoof neologisms I'd love to see them. Post them as a comment below (together with your analysis of the word formation process) and I might even find it in my heart to give a prize for the best one (and the most accurate analysis). Here's my effort:chudge (chudj) n. An underqualified judge on an underwhelming TV talent contest.
craptitude test (krap-ti-chewed tessed) n. A televised talent contest with a panel of chudges (qv).
zerotoleriddance (zero-toller-riddantz) n. The moment the public mood finally and irrevocably turns against a hitherto-just-about-tolerable minor celebrity; eg, "We put Danielle Lloyd on the cover and sales nosedived; looks like she's hit zerotoleriddance."
bincentive (bin-sent-iv) n. A motivational 'prize' offered by one such as an English Language teacher, which, while purporting to be of high value (e.g. a Mars Bar, a Cafe Nero voucher) is, in fact, worth nothing (e.g. said teacher's 'applause' and 'respect'). Blend of 'bin' and 'incentive'.
Your turn...
Sunday, 1 February 2009
Apostrophes about to meet it's maker.
It seems that the death sentence has finally been passed on that most problematic of punctuation marks, the apostrophe - in Birmingham, at least. This week Birmingham City Council announced that they would be abolishing the apostrophe - the proper use of which has been the source of much confusion since its first appearance in our langauge 300 years ago - from all newly-produced street signs. You can read more about the reasons for this decision here.Sunday, 25 January 2009
Beryl bashes Scouse brogue
But it's not just Beryl Bainbridge who's been attacking the Liverpudlian variety this week. This article in The Sun considers once again (for this is something that seems to occupy newspaper writers on a regular basis) those linguistic varieties considered to be the 'best' and 'worst' in Britain, and Liverpudlian doesn't fare well. As also reported here, it is frequently the case that people feel the need to change their accent and/or dialect when in a high-stakes situation such as a job interview.
Thursday, 22 January 2009
Tuesday, 20 January 2009
Verdict on slang collector: 'helio proctosis'
The article lists some interesting slang terms, and if you're keen to follow this up then why not pay a visit to the Archive of Slang and New Language website, where there are literally hundreds of slang terms listed, together with their origins and uses. The article also makes some interesting references to attitudes towards slang usage, which are relevant to the kinds of debates that we're going to be having in ENA5 (A2) very soon and then later on this year in ENA6.
Monday, 19 January 2009
The language of conflict... part 2
Thursday, 15 January 2009
Derbyshire dialect deliberations
Thanks to Conor for sending me the link to this article, which contains some very interesting information and links relating to the dialects of Derbyshire. This is useful stuff for your ENA5 Language Variation paper, for which you'll need to be armed with a stock of features from non-standard linguistic varieties.
Monday, 12 January 2009
The Prince and the P-word
If you've been listening to the news this weekend you'll know that there's been a right royal stink-up about Prince Harry's use of a certain ethnicity label. No stranger to controversy - Harry was in trouble a few years ago for dressing as a Nazi at a fancy dress party - the prince has once again demonstrated a degree of linguistic sensitivity at which even his grandfather Prince 'Foot Firmly in Mouth' Phillip would probably wince. In three-year-old video footage that has been leaked to the press, Harry can be heard referring to one of his fellow army cadets as a 'p*ki', and is also cuaght on camera using the racist term 'raghead'.In Prince Harry's defense a spokesperson said:
'Prince Harry fully understands how offensive this term can be, and is extremely
sorry for any offence his words might cause. However, on this occasion three
years ago, Prince Harry used the term without any malice and as a nickname
about a highly popular member of his platoon. There is no question that
Prince Harry was in any way seeking to insult his friend.'
On the other hand, Khalid Mahmood, MP for Perry Barr in Birmingham, points out that 'this might have been said in a light-hearted manner but ultimately it's offensive to a lot of people'.
You can read the full story here and here, and if you want to have a look at some older articles on the use of this and other racist terms, then take a look at this, this and this. There's also another interesting article here about the use of racist language in the army.
It's a debate we've had many times in class: can racist language ever be acceptable if used as a term of solidarity? Let us know what you think.
Thursday, 8 January 2009
The language of conflict
Out with the old...
Welcome back to the blog - and a somewhat belated Happy New Year to you all! And what better way to celebrate the arrival of 2009 than by having a look at some of the most annoying words of the year just gone? (OK, you can probably think of lots of better ways of celebrating the arrival of 2009, but just work with me on this one, will you??). Lexicographer and all-round word boffin Susie Dent has compiled a list of the worst words of 2008 as voted for by the general public. You'll find some old 'favourites' in here, as well as a few that you might not have heard before. Always useful for ENA5 Language Change and other language debates.