Robert Lane Greene: "You Are What You Speak"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-03-21/robert-lane-greene-you-are-what-you-speak
Robert Lane Greene
Random House
Some people become absolutely apoplectic when speakers and writers make errors in grammar and usage. According to journalist and author Robert Lane Greene, these so called “grammar grouches” are fighting a largely losing battle, and although correctness may seem to be a goal, language wars, he says, are actually battles for political identity. In a new book he outlines what makes a language successful, how and why languages change, and the origins of some of the seemingly arbitrary grammar rules in the English language. Please join us to talk about why we talk the way we do.
Guests
Robert Lane Greene
Correspondent for "The Economist" and an assistant professor in the Center of Global Affairs at New York University.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
"tarascon wrote:
Hope someone addresses the double-"is" habit. Sometimes even triple-"is"! Talk show hosts are the biggest offenders. AM and cable talk shows, of course, not the DR show!
For example: "The problem is, is that people aren't paying attention to what they're saying."
March 21, 2011 - 9:54 am"
It depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
The Canadian "aboot" is common in Tidewater Virginia and I think it may be a non-French Acadian usage.
Monte Haun mchaun@hotmail.com
Oh, glory! It's risking bad manners by posting so many messages; plain that this is one of my passions.
Indeed, the first draft of this post was probably about 4,000 characters!
It seems to me that nobody intentionally uses a form of their language that he/she knows to be inferior.
The Web site http://slashdot.org/. is a hangout for computer enthusiasts that occasionally has a literate message, but typically a plethora of specimens of the "Popular English" written dialect.
On the other hand, there's a literate variety sometimes called International English. One may see "allows to", or "f. ex." (for example). Indeed, native speakers of other languages often spell (and use) English far better than typical Americans.
Spelling? Good grief. As a nation, we have a lot of trouble even with two and three-letter words! We can't even spell "off"!
Our ability with names is dismal. A neighbor's last name is "Swain", and I worked for a fellow named "Murray". Both assure me that their names are too difficult for many Americans to spell, or to pronounce when reading them. We also somehow fail to notice final double consonants, such as "Buffett", "Marriott", "Kellogg", etc.
I go ballistic emotionally when thinking of the "whole word" method of teaching the written language. It has resulted in appalling sub-literacy. This method teaches our written language as if it were logographic, like Chinese! Phonetic awareness is akin to mortal sin -- forbidden.
Consider omitted syllables, such as the ubiquitous sign on a door: "Sorry for the inconvience", to realize how seriously our literacy has been sabotaged. Victims of the "whole word" method are crippled when they try to read aloud trade names such as "Corfam" or "Yodolo", both of which are straightforward phonetic spellings. Ditto for "Ubuntu".
See _Why Johnny Can't Read_ by Rudolf Flesch.
Copy editing Wikipedia is fun.
It would seem Mr. Greene's thesis on language mirrors my linguistics professor as an undergraduate. This was in the early seventies and he was a "good ole boy from Texas. It was undoubtedly one of the most useful courses related to my public teaching career. It appears to me most of the posters missed his point. That being that we operate under several or perhaps many languages each with its own rules. "Proper grammar" is the one of success and should be learned and utilized when appropriate but not a 100% necessity at all times and locales.
It seems that voice placement (particularly among young women, not that I like to single them out) has a tendency to pitch as high as anatomically possible. There's some resemblance to ducks quacking.
I was chatting with a very nice fellow from India about this tendency, and said, "You can tell when an American is speaking" and then mimicked this squeaking form of speech. He laughed so hard he had to brace himself to stay standing.
Nevertheless, I understand that a few centuries ago, such voice placement was expected of women in Japan.
=+=+=
Although I'm slow to realize it, English is fragmenting (as did Latin, two millennia ago) into mutually unintelligible dialects.
=+=+=
Interesting usage: In the computer field, the process of making software usable by anyone, regardless of their language, is called "internationalization". People who work in that field need to use that word often, so it's understood by them that "i18n" is OK as a variety of abbreviation. (The full word has 20 letters.)
Regarding abbreviations, the two-letter postal codes for states (and territories!) are not technically abbreviations according to traditional rules, but even the USPS "gave in", referring to them as such. My choice is to use them in postal addresses, but traditional abbreviations (such as "Mass.") elsewhere. I'm a certified fogy, though!
Inability to spell is so ingrained that even the legal names of companies are misspelled. Among these is Symantec, which came from "semantic". (This was told to me by a literate employee.) Others are the Millenium Hotel in NYC (was that intentional?), Meggido Enterprises ("Meggy-doo"!), Spitin' Image, and several businesses along Waverley Oaks Rd. near Boston that try to adopt "Waverley" into their company names, but do so as "Waverly".
(Both spellings are legitimate.)
Misspelled street signs are uncommon, but definitely exist; I can recall "Talyor" for "Taylor".
In Framingham, Mass., one long street had all but one sign misspelled, and last I heard, they decided to leave things that way; costly to fix.
Boston's MBTA is not particularly literate; they have had several bus destination signs (inside and out) misspelled. However, they made a costly mistake with subway station signs, porcelain enamel over steel, that said "CHARLES\MGH" and "HYNES\ICA". They were eventually replaced.
The millenium began on Jan. 1, 2000.
The millennium began on Jan. 1, 2001.
Good grief, I'd better stop! My apologies to all, and many thanks to Diane.
I wrote a spoken word piece about this very subject!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-khTLciCr-o
There are some folk, especially today's young people, who have become adept as code-switching...Juggling different ways of speaking, vernacular and language, depending on the company. It's a tight-rope. A balancing act. Personally speaking, I know there is a time and a place for everything--however--we shouldn't be breeding a ration of broadcasters where everyone sounds the same. Instead, we can speak different "languages."
The latest Victoria's Secret television commercial has a glaring example of the incorrect use of the contraction "there's" with a plural noun.
Shouldn't there be someone in charge of checking copy for advertisements?
Thank you, Diane, for covering a much-ignored topic. Frankly, I believe that the lazy aspect of our modern-day language casts a poor reflection on our society in general. Some viral examples are:
(1) the use of the words "and," "but," and "so" to begin sentences;
(2) the use of "how come" instead of the word "why;"
(3) the virtual disappearance of the word "are" when referring to plurals (i.e., "There's many reasons");
(4) the use of the word "hard" in lieu of the word "difficult;"
(5) the incessant and redundant insertion of the word "got" after the word "have" (i.e., "I've got a headache;" "You have got to be joking").
(Spoken with tongue in cheek:) So how come there's so many hard items that we've got to keep track of when we speak? Think about it.
That one drives me crazy as well. I hear it day in and day out on NPR. I guess it's one of those errors that is evidence of language evolution.
It's such a relief to see that I am not the only one really bothered by the less/fewer problem. It isn't that difficult!
My personal grammar peeve has to be people --- like the vast majority of the commenters here today --- who rather spectacularly fail to understand what Mr. Greene (and others of his ilk) are actually saying.
Language changes. All languages (qua socio-political constructs) and dialects --- standard or otherwise --- are perpetually in flux, and lamenting the loss of a perceived "Golden Age" when language was "purer" is merely reactionary and displays an ignorance of linguistic history (rest assured that your elders felt the same way when you were in grade school).
"It would seem Mr. Greene's thesis on language mirrors my linguistics professor as an undergraduate."
Touché and thank you for "getting it", teacherdude52. As for the rest of you, I can only recommended that you start (and hopefully continue!) reading The Language Log (search the archives for posts relating to language change), or pick up Bauer & Trudgill's Language Myths, or virtually anything recent by David Crystal.
Laypeople readily defer to physicists/chemists/etc. when physical/chemical/etc. issues are under discussion; why then do they not defer to linguists when matters of language are in question? Expert users of language are not language experts. A baseball pitcher is, in a sense, an expert user of ballistics, but I would never expect him/her to give me a competent explanation of the mechanics of ballistic flight. The same situation goes for language.
If you listen to a performance by a comedian, (for example), you may hear non-standard, "modern" language used artfully and effectively. Pick up a small-town newspaper, though, and you will see awkward, confusing, and contradictory use of 'standard' English. My local paper is full of this, and it's not confined to the op-Ed section. I will continue to correct my husband when he says, "Don't take it personal!" and I am sure he will continue to respond, "Language is fluid!"
Last year I took a position with a contractor for the Department of Homeland Security at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Arizona. I was apalled at the grammar of many of the managers and superiors in the facility, particularly double negatives and constructions such as, "I don't got no..." which offends me for a multitude of reasons. These are the people responsible for keeping our country safe? I could not stay there, being supervised by people my parenets would describe as "dese and dose kind of people." They raised a language snob.
I bought Mr. Greene's book, and I am thoroughly enjoying it. His point that grammar and puncutation serve a valid purpose, but should not overwhelm the message, is so true. The rules should not rule. They should serve as a framework.
Having said that, I do have a personal peeve: irregardless. I shudder every time I hear that word.
A while back, I was in bed one morning, listening to Morning Edition in a half-awake mode. All was good in my world. Someone was interviewing Bill Gates of MS fame, and in response to a question, Mr. Gates started his sentence: "Irregardless ..."
I sat bolt upright in the bed and bellowed, "No, he did NOT just say that!"
Silly of me, I know, but I've never felt quite the same way about ol' Bill ever since.
I get a little annoyed when people compare Americans to Europeans as far as language learning. Many countries in Europe are the size of one of our states. If Virginia, DC, and West Virginia all had different languages, I would certainly be able to speak a little of each since I live in Maryland. Mr. Greene noted that England also produces a low level of multilingual people. But I really believe it’s not because we are arrogant, but because we are geographically isolated. Not only that, but English is an international language, and most spots in touristy areas do have a few people who speak it.
As an American, I feel overwhelmed when it comes to languages that I can learn, even when I’m just picking from European languages. Even then, I don’t travel nearly enough to actually use them for any real purpose other than directions and menus nor am in situations where there is a benefit or need for any language other than my own. Yes, lots of people are lazy! But most Americans aren’t going to travel outside of the English speaking world or do business with non-English speakers, so why is it a shock that we don’t learn multiple languages? Not everyone is a man of the world like Mr. Greene. Despite our love of bragging about how America is a “melting pot”, there are people in this country who have never physically encountered someone that doesn’t their share race, religion, and culture. Does it make sense that these same people should be looked down upon for only speaking English?
Below is a sample of the kind of communication I have with my young adult children. It is a fight right down to the subject.
Daughter: "I'll tell you what my biggest complaint is, but maybe I shouldn't, after all who am I ? Do I know anything? Probably not, but who knows, maybe everyone is feeling this way now. I mean we all have a right to our own opinion, don't we? Do you know what I mean?"
Me: "Hell, how could I? You never got around to what pissed you off. I don't even know the subject."
Perhaps the communication of the future combines speaking with mind reading with each being dependent on the other.
I often hear people who use "myself" or "I" in a sentence instead of "me". For example, I recently heard my children's middle school principal announce: "If you have any questions, you can contact Mr. Smith or myself." Another time I actually heard one person say: "If you have any questions, you can contact Mr. Smith or I." People think they sound "proper" when they say "myself".
To illustrate this mistake, Mike Meyers used the following line in the movie Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery: "Allow myself to introduce myself."
You're so right about the word "irregardless". Here's another pet peeve of mine: supposebly.
Why is it, do you suppose, that there's no transcript available for this segment, Robert Lane Greene's "You Are What You Speak"? Am I the only radio listener who has no audio capability on my computer? Every other segment aired on this show has a transcript available.
I've been an enthusiastic reader and pretty good speller from a very early age. But I've always been disturbed that some people use language to shame and humiliate other people. To me, the world of language is like a beautiful garden with an infinite number of colors and fragrances. Today I had the privilege to listen to some young men who took turns reading aloud from the same book. A cruel person would put them down. I saw valiant character being displayed as they struggled to understand and pronounce each word correctly.
The arrogant people who go around correcting others are always convinced that their way is the "right" way. Never will they admit that perhaps there is more than one "correct" way to pronounce a word, just as many words have more than a single definition. It's an ego thing, giving them a very strong feeling of superiority which they quite obviously enjoy so much that they just can't keep it to themselves.
What cracks me up are the people who not only nurture, by many times embellish, the "foreign" accent that they supposedly picked up somewhere. They know, of course, that it makes them "exotic" and they play it for everything it's worth.
I find accents beautiful because I find people beautiful. I have no desire to change anyone because they're wonderful people just the way they are. And if a person really does read enough books, they will be taught by the greatest writers of all time that those lowly people who struggle with so many hardships are worthy of our respect, not our contempt.
I have to laugh--marylj is completely wrong. Joe and I is correct when used as the subject; Joe and me is correct when used as the object.
This is a picture of Joe and me.
This is a picture of Joe. This is a picture of me. (You wouldn't say "This is a picture of I.")
But, Joe and I had our picture taken. He brought the picture to Joe and me. He brought the picture for Joe and me to see.
I give up if people using bad grammar think it's good grammar!
I'm a technical writer--it is important that writing is clear and says what the writer wants it to say. I am amazed, when I edit others' writing, how many people think they have written something but they have written something different.
Dyslexic, The Child
With it being said, it is that are you being difficult.
Pay attention to the detail,
and which by the others by they it is learned.
Ashamed to raise my hand,
and to my teacher, If I had but one wish.
Losing my way and of reading.
How the words move like a line of ants upside down,
why don't they stop teacher please as I wait for hope in vain.
Wiring of writing and how my speech to immature,
I can not articulate my simple thought into your concepts.
Where did this nightmare spring forth from?
Problems you put and I read from right and being left handed.
Is not right and I confess to my self I'm confused.
Completely are they all normal it is said.
Pointed out and why do I bother to come?
They cannot mean, but they do,
and I cannot distinguish every color (it is larger is or, a little,)
As for what ever I gained by there losing I am losing.
With it once was said.
Letter blindness.
The others I think are to blind to see what I can.
However,
the eye it beholds her,
and I move into other worlds as I leave the rest behind.
Create Date : Saturday, May 14, 2011
Is It Poetry
Dyslexic, The Child
With it being said, it is that are you being difficult.
Pay attention to the detail,
and which by the others by they it is learned.
Ashamed to raise my hand,
and to my teacher, If I had but one wish.
Losing my way and of reading.
How the words move like a line of ants upside down,
why don't they stop teacher please as I wait for hope in vain.
Wiring of writing and how my speech to immature,
I can not articulate my simple thought into your concepts.
Where did this nightmare spring forth from?
Problems you put and I read from right and being left handed.
Is not right and I confess to my self I'm confused.
Completely are they all normal it is said.
Pointed out and why do I bother to come?
They cannot mean, but they do,
and I cannot distinguish every color (it is larger is or, a little,)
As for what ever I gained by there losing I am losing.
With it once was said.
Letter blindness.
The others I think are to blind to see what I can.
However,
the eye it beholds her,
and I move into other worlds as I leave the rest behind.
is it poetry
Dyslexia, Adult
After all the problems of surviving child hood.
Bullies and beatings and very strange nice teachers.
Greater the problem it seemed to grow like a weed.
Larger rather than smaller by the others perceived,
alone found the path was the way.
And there is this plural mutual misunderstanding,
concerning the symptoms of the adult whom they made.
Then time reached out thine majority.
People actual problems and being ashamed, not saying.
Foolish were they and of I.
And standing in the way you must conform each one thus said.
For that kind of conduct, the person loses self-confidence.
Those are refused, beginnings of the feeling which is isolated.
Dyslexic symptoms do not change the effect on creativity.
Dyslexic symptom only intensifies the need, do not change.
Dyslexic the wiring is wired for the best of our life.
Dyslexic the symptom makes the brain,
to work three times harder than yours to succeed.
Dyslexic, I will never give it up and I will myself to succeed.
Those have the vivid imaginations.
Considerable are these great strengths.
When it is given and not withheld to conform to misunderstanding.
Support and encouragement,
may you then reach your dreams and achieve your success.
Create Date : Friday, May 13, 2011
Update Date : Saturday, May 14, 2011
Is It Poetry