As you may have noticed, I took part in a debate for @GMB this morning, which was then picked up by the Daily Mail. It seems to have ruffled some feathers, leading to some viewers/readers being quite clear (and personal!) as to where I can put my 'woke' views. In response... 1/
... quite a few people have been in touch publicly and privately to check I'm okay with it all. Thank you very much. But honestly, this doesn't bother me in the slightest. I stand by absolutely everything I said, and I'm more than happy to have helped generate the discussion. 2/
This kind of thing does need to be talked about. Language-based prejudice is real, and it happens in far more subtle and complex ways than can be discussed in a 10 min slot on a prime-time TV show. 3/
Obviously the majority of people aren't going to change their minds, but you never know, a few might just reflect on just how appropriate it is to mimic or mock someone else's accent, and why they feel the need to do it. 4/
If you're interested in finding out more, there are lots of sociolinguists on twitter working in similar areas. You can also look at the @AccentismProj. The full debate from today is here if you'd like to watch the whole thing. 5/
That's all for now.
Rob,
Professor of Woke™
6/6
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Swearing survey - some results! [A thread].
In March 2020, I launched an online survey looking at the offensiveness of certain words. I've posted a more detailed version of this thread here: swearing.info.
The survey was very simple. Participants were shown 11 isolated words, and asked to rate each of them on a scale of offensiveness with the prompt: ‘How offensive do you find each word?’. They used a slider, with a scale of 0-10 to give each word a rating.
The survey ran for a week, and had 2788 complete responses. The age range and gender mix looked like this, and the top 6 nationalities were these:
Had a quick chat with @TheOfficialJVS on @BBC3CR earlier in relation to reports of @ian_cushing's article about language policing in schools. Argued that this approach does young people a disservice - they are more aware and adept at style-shifting than some give them credit for.
Instead, use 'slang' to explore the fluidity of language, and work out with the young people themselves what is and isn't appropriate in any situation, why this might be the case, and whose 'appropriate' it it anyway? Better than pointless and inflexible policing.
Monthly reminder that (in no particular order)... 1. Standard English is no better than other varieties, it just has a history of powerful people behind it. 2. Most grammar ‘rules’ that people get upset about aren’t actually rules at all.
...
3. Texting/messaging isn’t ruining the language. 4. Language is perfectly safe in the hands of young people. 5. Of course we need to teach young people to use standard English. But we can do so without belittling any other varieties they use.
...
6. Words can change meaning through usage. 7. All of the above does not mean ‘anything goes’; language is about contextual appropriateness, not arbitrary notions of ‘correctness’. 7. Criticising people’s language is always about more than language.
...