political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Friday, June 08, 2007
Mind Their Language
Dizzy demonstrates today why he is in the blogging Premier League (perhaps the equivalent of Bolton Wanderers!) with a simply brilliant post about how kids use language today. It's related to the Big Brother race row.
Dizzy is right that words are defined by their users and their recipients but there is a stable equilibrium where people agree not to use certain terms with people they aren't close friends with. It's called politeness and NIG**R is not a polite word.
BB's lasting legacy will be that the kids of this country, having worn out the f word and to some extent the c word, have a new word to shock and silence the teachers at School and give them something to debate in the staff room.
Ed, I think you'll find I actually said just that when I mentioned that sometimes people make misjdugements about the level of familiarity they can assume with people they may have just met.
I;m not actually saying that people should walk around saying these things to all and sundry, but rather more am cocnerned with the manner in which labels are thrown at people and the debate is stifled because a failure to acknowledge the reality of how people use language.
The real question is her intentions behind the use of the word. If to be offensive, then obviously racist and unacceptable.
If she didn't, and was just using youth/street/slang (and as a 27yr old white accountant its not something I'm 'down' with), then it was probably unwise, but understandable (she is only 18).
Should she be deemed a 'racist' for the rest of her life for the use of one word, which was used in a different context?
Communication is difficult: 97% of communication is non-verbal. Body language and tone/intonation make up the vast majority of 'what we say', and words are a tiny percentage.
Although words can be offensive, the same word which causes offense in one context would cause no offense in another context.
Andy d: Since the poor girl was messing around and having fun with two coloured girls whom she clearly likes and gets on well with, what are the chances of her being a racist?
I think it is commendable that the two other girls didn't 'go off on one' and start getting all self-righteous about the use of the word. It seemed they instantly understood that (a) it wasn't intended to be offensive and (b) it was a PR disaster for the poor Miss Parr!
It is simply that she did something that was socially unacceptable. We all do things like that at some time in our life, but it doesn't make us a bad person/people.
It's just sad for her that she did it on live TV in front of millions of people (sorry, millions of sad people who IMHO should get a life rather than watching this rubbish), and she did the one thing which next to abusing children or being cruel to fluffy animals is unforgivable in the eyes of the social workers who now run this country!
She is stooopid and immature. But I doubt she is a racist. An apology and her public humiliation should suffice.
But, then again, who am I to comment, I am white, and therefore 'officially' I can never be the victim of racism or understand the impact it has on people.
I think this is a macho street culture thing, ie they can talk that way but you don't dare. Similar to wearing heavy gold jewellery. The badass guys wear it because they can. Anyone else wears it, they get it taken off them.
Is that the same thing as context or does it need contextualising Tsk tsk the way these young people talk eh? …..The Rolling who ?
Dizzy when we talk about the use of language we sometimes use a definition like “Received Pronunciation” this is the language style that was until recently associated with the BBC.It is the accent taught to foreign language learners and contains the inference in the language itself but not as may be further complicated by an infinite numbers of contexts.
A word can obviously take on different shade and associations for any speaker or group. Think for example of the progress of the metaphor “Key “ as in Key stone through to Key note speech which is an interesting development of sub groups back into RP . Of all the subcultures of language that there are, and there are many recognised, the least interesting is the language of the youth ( or yoot’) which changes at frightening pace , the inexplicability of it being the whole point .To the graveyard where, “cats” “ Square” “daddyo” have gone ,so will the rap based “ Chat” around London today.
It is important to understand the irrelevance of this and other dialects of more importance now patronised by the BBC, local Coucils and so on. It has become impossible to have any discourse between different groups not because of a lack of understanding of sub dialects but because we have abandoned gold standard RP by which all groups can enter a similarly “ Contextualised ( you barbarian) , discourse . All conversations, become coarsened by allowing consideration of every perturbation on the linguistic pond. This is a Liberal attack on cohesive culture in favour of a pluralism which ghettoises communities including the young.
As far as the N word is concerned, that yoots use it is of no interest. That they are incapable of understanding the mainstream and unacceptable meaning of the word with its inference is the problem. You are encouraging the disintegration of civilisation and I see clearly that our culture cannot be left in the hands of computer bods .
The precious chalice must immediately be handed back to English graduates.
Under such circumstances we can expect no need to watch big brother in the first place. This point by the way in one from or another is developed by the pro Cameron book " After Blair" which I would recommend. This and perhaps a bit of Roger Scruton and you met yet become a proper Conservative
12 comments:
Dizzy is right that words are defined by their users and their recipients but there is a stable equilibrium where people agree not to use certain terms with people they aren't close friends with. It's called politeness and NIG**R is not a polite word.
BB's lasting legacy will be that the kids of this country, having worn out the f word and to some extent the c word, have a new word to shock and silence the teachers at School and give them something to debate in the staff room.
Ed, I think you'll find I actually said just that when I mentioned that sometimes people make misjdugements about the level of familiarity they can assume with people they may have just met.
I;m not actually saying that people should walk around saying these things to all and sundry, but rather more am cocnerned with the manner in which labels are thrown at people and the debate is stifled because a failure to acknowledge the reality of how people use language.
p.s to Iain, Bolton?
I agree with you Dizzy. I think I didn't get right to the end of the article because my attention span is...
The real question is her intentions behind the use of the word. If to be offensive, then obviously racist and unacceptable.
If she didn't, and was just using youth/street/slang (and as a 27yr old white accountant its not something I'm 'down' with), then it was probably unwise, but understandable (she is only 18).
Should she be deemed a 'racist' for the rest of her life for the use of one word, which was used in a different context?
Precisely! Charley (aka Kerion Richardson's cousin)said it herself. Why was she not dsiciplined in the same manner?
Communication is difficult: 97% of communication is non-verbal. Body language and tone/intonation make up the vast majority of 'what we say', and words are a tiny percentage.
Although words can be offensive, the same word which causes offense in one context would cause no offense in another context.
Andy d: Since the poor girl was messing around and having fun with two coloured girls whom she clearly likes and gets on well with, what are the chances of her being a racist?
I think it is commendable that the two other girls didn't 'go off on one' and start getting all self-righteous about the use of the word. It seemed they instantly understood that (a) it wasn't intended to be offensive and (b) it was a PR disaster for the poor Miss Parr!
It is simply that she did something that was socially unacceptable. We all do things like that at some time in our life, but it doesn't make us a bad person/people.
It's just sad for her that she did it on live TV in front of millions of people (sorry, millions of sad people who IMHO should get a life rather than watching this rubbish), and she did the one thing which next to abusing children or being cruel to fluffy animals is unforgivable in the eyes of the social workers who now run this country!
She is stooopid and immature. But I doubt she is a racist. An apology and her public humiliation should suffice.
But, then again, who am I to comment, I am white, and therefore 'officially' I can never be the victim of racism or understand the impact it has on people.
I think this is a macho street culture thing, ie they can talk that way but you don't dare. Similar to wearing heavy gold jewellery. The badass guys wear it because they can. Anyone else wears it, they get it taken off them.
contextualisation
Is that the same thing as context or does it need contextualising Tsk tsk the way these young people talk eh? …..The Rolling who ?
Dizzy when we talk about the use of language we sometimes use a definition like “Received Pronunciation” this is the language style that was until recently associated with the BBC.It is the accent taught to foreign language learners and contains the inference in the language itself but not as may be further complicated by an infinite numbers of contexts.
A word can obviously take on different shade and associations for any speaker or group. Think for example of the progress of the metaphor “Key “ as in Key stone through to Key note speech which is an interesting development of sub groups back into RP . Of all the subcultures of language that there are, and there are many recognised, the least interesting is the language of the youth ( or yoot’) which changes at frightening pace , the inexplicability of it being the whole point .To the graveyard where, “cats” “ Square” “daddyo” have gone ,so will the rap based “ Chat” around London today.
It is important to understand the irrelevance of this and other dialects of more importance now patronised by the BBC, local Coucils and so on.
It has become impossible to have any discourse between different groups not because of a lack of understanding of sub dialects but because we have abandoned gold standard RP by which all groups can enter a similarly “ Contextualised ( you barbarian) , discourse . All conversations, become coarsened by allowing consideration of every perturbation on the linguistic pond. This is a Liberal attack on cohesive culture in favour of a pluralism which ghettoises communities including the young.
As far as the N word is concerned, that yoots use it is of no interest. That they are incapable of understanding the mainstream and unacceptable meaning of the word with its inference is the problem. You are encouraging the disintegration of civilisation and I see clearly that our culture cannot be left in the hands of computer bods .
The precious chalice must immediately be handed back to English graduates.
Under such circumstances we can expect no need to watch big brother in the first place. This point by the way in one from or another is developed by the pro Cameron book " After Blair" which I would recommend. This and perhaps a bit of Roger Scruton and you met yet become a proper Conservative
XX :)
If this blog had 5 points deducted, would it still be in the Premier League?
Actually, Dizzy is the Everton of Bloggers, not Bolton.
Post a Comment