![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
1. I'm not a nice person. Nice seems to mean something like not saying what's true just because others disagree, or lying because other people have sensitive feelings and don't want the truth when they ask questions. I don't do that. I don't *like* doing that, I don't *want* to do that, and I'm not *going* to do that. So don't call me nice.
2.
I can't believe you are saying that standard English is a fancy dialect, and that most people consider it condescending to use it. That is just nonsense, not to mention the fact that you would look and sound like a total idiot changing the way you talk to fit every group and region you happen to find yourself in. Talk about condescending! I'd love to see how well that would go over with "most people."
A. Well, we weren't discussing English, if you're curious, and SAE *is* just another dialect. This isn't really the important part.
B. Nonsense? I don't know. It certainly fits in with my experience, where my manner of speech (standard english) was mocked behind my back (but where I could hear, don't you love it?) and where I got accused of being "snotty" for speaking the way I did. Well, not me usually. But other people who spoke the way I did, in real life and in books and on TV, I heard them all the time being called "snotty" and "show-offy" and "snobby" and, yes "condescending". I still hear that. I don't know what world you're living in that you don't hear this, but you're lucky. I hear it all the time. Did I say yet that I *hate* linguistic prejudice?
C. Well, *most* people change the way they talk to fit in with various groups. This is called code-switching. My mom, her coworker speaks Standard English at work, but Jamaican English on the phone talking to her family. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke a form of AAVE in some situations, and SAE in others. We've got recordings of this. My sister Lizziey, sometimes she speaks with a Southern accent, other times with a black accent, other times with a hispanic accent, other times with a Brooklyn accent, and sometimes like a Valley girl. This is all unconscious, but she's good at it. Most people don't speak the same way at home as they do at work. People *change* how they speak depending on the situation. It's all very interesting.
And then she said she's sure I'm very nice (gah!) and unfriended me. You'd think I'd insulted her religion! Well, in a way, maybe I did. But this is *important*.
Edit: And I'm still not nice. I answer questions truthfully, or not at all. You have been warned.
2.
I can't believe you are saying that standard English is a fancy dialect, and that most people consider it condescending to use it. That is just nonsense, not to mention the fact that you would look and sound like a total idiot changing the way you talk to fit every group and region you happen to find yourself in. Talk about condescending! I'd love to see how well that would go over with "most people."
A. Well, we weren't discussing English, if you're curious, and SAE *is* just another dialect. This isn't really the important part.
B. Nonsense? I don't know. It certainly fits in with my experience, where my manner of speech (standard english) was mocked behind my back (but where I could hear, don't you love it?) and where I got accused of being "snotty" for speaking the way I did. Well, not me usually. But other people who spoke the way I did, in real life and in books and on TV, I heard them all the time being called "snotty" and "show-offy" and "snobby" and, yes "condescending". I still hear that. I don't know what world you're living in that you don't hear this, but you're lucky. I hear it all the time. Did I say yet that I *hate* linguistic prejudice?
C. Well, *most* people change the way they talk to fit in with various groups. This is called code-switching. My mom, her coworker speaks Standard English at work, but Jamaican English on the phone talking to her family. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke a form of AAVE in some situations, and SAE in others. We've got recordings of this. My sister Lizziey, sometimes she speaks with a Southern accent, other times with a black accent, other times with a hispanic accent, other times with a Brooklyn accent, and sometimes like a Valley girl. This is all unconscious, but she's good at it. Most people don't speak the same way at home as they do at work. People *change* how they speak depending on the situation. It's all very interesting.
And then she said she's sure I'm very nice (gah!) and unfriended me. You'd think I'd insulted her religion! Well, in a way, maybe I did. But this is *important*.
Edit: And I'm still not nice. I answer questions truthfully, or not at all. You have been warned.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-12-28 10:46 am (UTC)I was speaking directly to Conuly, but I'll oblige you.
Date: 2004-12-28 01:26 pm (UTC)Goldsmiths College, University of London (BA Joint Hons Anthropology and Media & Communications)
University of Edinburgh (MSc Archaeology, specifically conservation of waterlogged wood)
University of Edinburgh (PhD, ongoing, Archaeology of Glen Mór)
My curiosity stems mainly from the majority of studying I've done combining sociology, anthropology and linguistics. Throughout my scholastic career, I have never come across such an unsupportable grand vision of linguistic freedom, as Conuly contends. I have read much of the debates surrounding language as a weapon/tool of cultural imperialism from early written records to the modern era; although I am sympathetic to those being oppressed by such mechanisms, I find it impossible to equivalate to that of starkly more meaningful oppression: genocide, trade sanctions, etc.
I comment as a stranger to Conuly, and wish no harm nor flamewar; I do believe she does not want to hear anyone else's opinion, as evidenced throughout much of her journal, and I felt that perhaps someone should challenge her point of view.
It's the only way people can change their opinions, and let me assure you as an educated person: her opinions concerning language are not facts.
Re: I was speaking directly to Conuly, but I'll oblige you.
Date: 2004-12-28 03:23 pm (UTC)Please see another entry:
Date: 2004-12-28 06:48 pm (UTC)Re: I was speaking directly to Conuly, but I'll oblige you.
Date: 2004-12-29 12:40 pm (UTC)See another post.
Date: 2004-12-29 01:52 pm (UTC)Regardless, my elaboration may be found on another page, further down, inclusive of the link.
I would furthermore caution you to read my comments with dispassion, for they were written with this frame of mind; my interest in this discussion is not to flame, but to dissent and express my opinion.
Re: See another post.
Date: 2004-12-29 11:44 pm (UTC)On the plus side, this means that in another day, I'll be reading everything with a completely non-emotional look, which means I'll be able to give it proper thought and consideration. Yay!
I'm also assuming, with every reply, that you're talking to me. That's the problem with the recent-comments-page, I don't know who's replying to what.