Verdict on slang collector: 'helio proctosis'

Yesterday's edition of the London Student newspaper ran an article on the use of slang among students and other young people. The article features an interview with Tony Thorne, a linguist working at the English Language Centre at King's College, home to the 'Archive of Slang and New Language'.

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.

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.

Feck that for a swear word!

And so the debate about swearing in the broadcast media rages on: this week TV chef Jamie Oliver joins Jonathan Ross in the ranks of TV personalities who are to be linguistically 'neutered'. But in the midst of the sea of language that is coming to be seen as ever more unacceptable, there exists a small island of tolerance... a final stronghold of mild expletive... a last bastion of semi-taboo language. Yes, I'm talking about FECK.

Immortalised by that fantastic comic creation Father Jack from the equally-fantastic 90s alternative sit-com Father Ted, 'feck' is an Irish word that suddenly found its way into common usage in British English slang. Whilst there's no doubt about the context in which Father Jack uses the word, in its wider and general use in Ireland it is actually not synonymous with the similar-sounding word that differs from it by only one vowel (he said, coyly). You can read what the OED has to say about the origins of 'feck' here, and its background and usage are also discussed in this article, which focuses on the word in response to a ruling by the Advertising Standards Authority that 'feck' is not a swear word and its use in a current Magners Cider advert (in which bees are told to 'feck off') is therefore entirely acceptable.

Well, that's one view. Another view, of course, would be that whatever the actual origins of the word, and regardless of its traditional usage, it has now come to be used in exactly the same way as its cousin 'f*ck' (largely - though probably not entirely - thanks to Father Jack), and therefore, the argument goes, it should be treated in just the same way. This is an argument, incidentally, that has been rehearsed with reference to a certain word used frequently on the new 'rebooted' Battlestar Galactica series (I know, I know, more sci-fi anorak references... but they're always so relevant!). This TV show is set somewhere out in space, sometime in the future.. or maybe the past (don't get me started on that one). Anyway, the writers of the show have managed to get around the stringent US censorship rules by inventing their own term to replace the F-word, and that word is 'frak'. Its use is exactly the same as the f-word that we know and love/loathe* (delete as applicable) and, to be honest, I'm surprised they get away with it on prime-time TV! Have a look at this compilation and you'll see what I mean.

No more smut, filth and obscenity...

...Well, not as much, anyway.

Since my last post on Smut, filth and obscenity...? there have been some interesting developments in the whole 'swearing on the BBC' row. According to this article, there is to be a crack down on the use of 'foul language' following "a review of bad language across the corporation's services".

Commissioned in response to what has come to be known as 'Sachsgate' (nice word formation there), the review comments not only on Jonathan Ross's use of taboo language but also makes the observation that Ross's language is frequently "gratuitous and unnecessarily offensive" and concedes that "it is possible that some language alienates some audiences unnecessarily". Who those audiences are, though, is not necessarily easy to determine - language that, for one person, is gratuitous and offensive might be considered by another person to be harmless and humourous self-expression. The BBC's recently-revised guidelines on offensive language take this point on board.

The guidelines state:

There is no consensus about words that are acceptable, when, and by whom.
Different words cause different degrees of offence in different parts of the
world. So a person's age, sex, education, employment, belief, nationality, and
where they live, all impact on whether or not they might be offended.

They also comment on what constitutes the most offensive language:

Language that causes most offence includes:• sexual swearwords• terms of racist
abuse• terms of sexual and sexist abuse or abuse referring to sexuality•
pejorative terms relating to illness or disabilities• casual or derogatory use
of holy names or religious words and especially in combination with other
offensive language.

As a father of three young children, I'm also relieved to read that the BBC guidelines stipulate that they "do not include any offensive language in pre-school children's programmes or websites (four years and under)". Glad to hear it!! After all, can you imagine Iggle-Piggle shouting the F-word at Macca-Pacca? Or PC Plum branding the youth of Balamory "a load of little s***s"? A little less reassuring, though, is the next line of the guidelines, which states that "We (the BBC) must not include offensive language in programmes or websites made for younger children except in the most exceptional circumstances". Except in the most exceptional circumstances??? I dread to think what that might mean...

Smut, filth and obscenity...?

I knew that would get your attention.

There's been a lot of talk about swearing in the media over the last month or so - prompted, of course, by the now-infamous 'Brand and Ross' incident. In case you haven't heard about this (where have you been?!), comedian Russel Brand and presenter Jonathan Ross have both been suspended from the BBC for making 'lewd' telephone calls to actor Andrew Sachs and broadcasting them on Brand's Radio 2 show. This has sparked a huge debate about the 'role' of swearing on the TV and radio, and quite a range of views have been expressed in one forum or another.

The writer of this article calls for a total ban on swearing in the broadcast media, observing that "it's just plain wrong". This view is supported by the writer of this article and, according to this report, by almost two-fifths of TV viewers. And as if it weren't enough that Messrs Ross and Brand have had their knuckles rapped for their bad behaviour, Radio 1 DJ Scott Mills and even the otherwise squeaky-clean Ant and Dec have got in on the act, each prompting their own flood of complaints in response to their 'smutty' language.

On the other hand, the writer of this article argues that there's nothing wrong with swearing, asking "should swearing sometimes be excused for the sake of its artistic merit?" (and answering his own quetsion with a hearty "Flip yeah!").

To look at things from a more academic perspective for a moment, American linguist Steven Pinker has argued that swearing is an inbuilt language characteristic and one which we revert to as a matter of pure instinct. You can listen to what Pinker has to say in YouTube footage here (click on the 'go' button once you've clicked the link), or in a Guardian podcast here.

So what are your views on swearing? Is it ever acceptable? Does it depend on context? Do any of the people expressing the views above have a point, or are they just talking a load of... well, you know what I mean. Post a comment and share your thoughts.