Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't care what Ph.D's say! That garbage is lazy speech! I've read Chomsky's work on linguistics, still don't care! I will place value on judgement on anything I deemed valuable or invaluable. That Black Baltimorean is valuable for only blacks in Baltimore!
Quote:
Originally Posted by westsideboy
I give you the truth as described by Ph.D. level Linguists like Bill Labov of UPenn and Noam Chomsky. Labov's work should interest you since he worked with inner-city kids from Philly. He found that their dialect was every bit as internally consistent with its rules for usage as any other dialect. Any value judgments on the dialect's "laziness" were unfounded and based on stereotypes of the people. I am really surprised you don't already know this, or care to learn since dialect is a great way for society to keep black people down and create a sense of inferiority in them because of how they talk.
Dialects are very much hardwired, as is language in general. You and I will never speak, say Ukrainian, or the dialect of Yorkshire, as well as native speakers, no matter how much we try, or how long we speak it. We will always speak with an accent and natives will know we aren't from there.
Not everyone in an area speaks the same dialect, or speaks it to the same degree. Take you for example, parents from somewhere else, likely a conscious effort on their part, and yours to NOT speak like the locals. You may have succeeded...........but don't be so sure. I wish I had a dollar for every person who said they didn't have their local dialect......then gasped in horror when I described a word usage, or vowel quality that they have that pegs them to the ear of anyone paying attention.
Same with me, do you know how hard it is to make it through a job interview without saying the word "goal" because I have the Pittsburgh dialect trait that collapses the vowel to sound just like "ghoul?" I can't change it. I can't hear the difference when others speak, let alone produce the same sound that others do. It doesn't make me stupid, or lazy, or unable to learn, or inferior.......it just means I have a different set of vowels than most English speakers. Seriously, read up and counter your OWN ignorance. I know you hate seeing it in others, so don't ignore the splinter in your own eye on this topic.
*Man, what are you saying that has already been said. That is your personal people! Black Baltimore speaks ignorantly.
I don't care what Ph.D's say! That garbage is lazy speech! I've read Chomsky's work on linguistics, still don't care! I will place value on judgement on anything I deemed valuable or invaluable. That Black Baltimorean is valuable for only blacks in Baltimore!
*Man, what are you saying that has already been said. That is your personal people! Black Baltimore speaks ignorantly.
Whatever man, like I said before, every one of your threads and posts has only one ultimate purpose, to diss Baltimore. This one was poorly played on your part. Your comments are ignorant and foolish and the only support you are offering is your personal opinion, backed up by no research or facts.
Whatever man, like I said before, every one of your threads and posts has only one ultimate purpose, to diss Baltimore. This one was poorly played on your part. Your comments are ignorant and foolish and the only support your offering is our opinion, backed up by no research or facts.
^ This. Read this whole thread and this has been the best comment so far. You win.
Whatever man, like I said before, every one of your threads and posts has only one ultimate purpose, to diss Baltimore. This one was poorly played on your part. Your comments are ignorant and foolish and the only support you are offering is your personal opinion, backed up by no research or facts.
Does Infinite_heights77 ever have a purposeful, useful, non race baiting/bashing thread? This poster is the board troll.
Henry Kissinger, Dr. M L King, and President Jimmy Carter all had thick accents. No thoughtful person ever accused any of them of being or sounding like they were ignorant. But it's hard to imagine Kissinger saying something like "she be gots to do what I say she be gots to do." In other words, the aforementioned trio all constructed well formed sentences with correct grammar and proper usage, despite their accents.
In contrast, the "she be gots to do" crowd is immediately marked by their speech as being ignorant and intellectually lazy. This not only limits their gravitas, but also precludes them from -- for example -- practicing transactional law, writing the literature of ordinary business operations, preparing technical or scientific reports, and any other endeavor wherein words actually mean something particular. It makes no difference -- in real life -- whether the "she be gots" language is internally consistent or not, if the goal is to function effectively in society.
Regarding the distinctions of language as a way to "hold people back," consider again the case of Henry Kissinger. And then look at how many foreign-born scientists, doctors, professors, and so forth have prospered despite their accents. No, I could never pass for a native speaker in Ukraine, but I certainly could learn the grammar, vocabulary, and correct usage of the language . . .
Does Infinite_heights77 ever have a purposeful, useful, non race baiting/bashing thread? This poster is the board troll.
Actually I think his comments are occasionally humourous, and he has no real problem spreading around his bashing. He is an equal opportunity critic.
This is just a case of being VERY wrong on the science behind the gripe. Labov, Chomsky, and everyone who has ever taken a Linguistics 101 level class not only learns that no dialect is objectively better, or more logical, than any other, but this principle is demonstrated by showing how dialectal traits that are frequently considered crude and low class, like a-prefixing among some Appalachian Americans, or the conjugation of the verb "to be" in BEV follow consistent usage patterns and rules that are followed by its native speakers.
In situations like this, I don't think it is right to sit back and say nothing just because IH77 is off trolling again. At some point the facts have to be brought out to show that agenda, not sincerity, is the reason for the comments.
Henry Kissinger, Dr. M L King, and President Jimmy Carter all had thick accents. No thoughtful person ever accused any of them of being or sounding like they were ignorant. But it's hard to imagine Kissinger saying something like "she be gots to do what I say she be gots to do." In other words, the aforementioned trio all constructed well formed sentences with correct grammar and proper usage, despite their accents.
In contrast, the "she be gots to do" crowd is immediately marked by their speech as being ignorant and intellectually lazy. This not only limits their gravitas, but also precludes them from -- for example -- practicing transactional law, writing the literature of ordinary business operations, preparing technical or scientific reports, and any other endeavor wherein words actually mean something particular. It makes no difference -- in real life -- whether the "she be gots" language is internally consistent or not, if the goal is to function effectively in society.
Regarding the distinctions of language as a way to "hold people back," consider again the case of Henry Kissinger. And then look at how many foreign-born scientists, doctors, professors, and so forth have prospered despite their accents. No, I could never pass for a native speaker in Ukraine, but I sure as heck could learn the grammar, vocabulary, and correct usage of the language . . .
I couldn't have said it better myself. The thick dialects of people like Jimmy Carter and Kissinger are overlooked because you have already judged them as "smart" and "capable." The equally thick dialects of native BEV speakers in the North East are skewered by you because..................well, you have already concluded what they say are not "well formed sentences with correct grammar and proper usage."
Newsflash! There is no "correct grammar" nor "proper usage" in any objective sense. Each dialect has its own correct grammar and proper usage based on its own set of rules. It is only your value judgment that is determining which dialects you feel are "correct" and which are "ignorant and lazy."
I will say it again, comments like that only show how you feel about the people who use the dialect, not the dialect itself.
The only cogent point you make is that it is hard to get ahead in the world when others, like you, judge people's intelligence and competence based on their ability to conform to "standard" dialect, which is chosen by the prestige group already in power.
If you think it is so easy to conform and change your dialect, I have to point out you completely butchered your attempt to imitate the conjugation patterns of "to be" and the inflections on the end of 3rd person singular verbs forms in BEV. In a world where that dialect is "standard" and you are attempting to learn it to conform and gain acceptance, you would have failed miserably and been deemed ignorant and laughed at behind your back. Nice way to view dialect and its importance in the world, huh?
I think that you are missing the point -- in fact, whether theoreticians like it or not, there is indeed a correct grammar, a correct vocabulary, and a correct usage if the goal is to function in an advanced civilization in real life.
To illustrate the point by using an extreme example, consider writing a set of patent claims. Every single word in a claim has a precise meaning that has been determined through litigation to be standard usage with a precise meaning. An ignoramus who speaks and writes with his own linguistic twist simply cannot write patent claims -- a trial judge will give him no quarter during litigation regardless of the consistency of the language used by the ignoramus.
Further about real life: in fact there is a very strong correlation between ignorance and the improper use of language. The improper use of language is a strong indicator that the speaker does not have much education. To return to the peculiarities of Baltimore, its inner-city dwellers with seemingly ignorant speech patters are in fact quite ignorant as a group, and perhaps one of the most ignorant subcultures in the United States.
Moreover, I believe that it is completely wrong to insinuate that all cultures are equally good. Consider, for example, the choice between living in Norway versus living in Sudan. Norwegian culture is clearly far superior to Sudanese, and only a donkey would be unable to recognize this. One of the great plagues of modern American culture is the indoctrination of young people to disrespect advance Western culture, and their failure to make distinctions of virtue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westsideboy
The thick dialects of people like Jimmy Carter and Kissinger are overlooked because you have already judged them as "smart" and "capable." . . . It is only your value judgment that is determining which dialects you feel are "correct" and which are "ignorant and lazy."
I will say it again, comments like that only show how you feel about the people who use the dialect, not the dialect itself.
The only cogent point you make is that it is hard to get ahead in the world when others, like you, judge people's intelligence and competence based on their ability to conform to "standard" dialect, which is chosen by the prestige group already in power.
Pish posh. This is a good example. You cannot make a plausible claim that Kissinger, King, and Carter functioned at the same level of ignorance as the typical inner-city Baltimorean. Rather than read some silly academic's work on linguistics, perhaps you should read Aristotle's Ethics.
Please note that I have not said anything at all about intelligence here; the discussion is about ignorance.
Last edited by Hamish Forbes; 10-21-2014 at 03:46 PM..
I think that you are missing the point -- in fact, whether theoreticians like it or not, there is indeed a correct grammar, a correct vocabulary, and a correct usage if the goal is to function in an advanced civilization in real life.
To illustrate the point by using an extreme example, consider writing a set of patent claims. Every single word in a claim has a precise meaning that has been determined through litigation to be standard usage with a precise meaning. An ignoramus who speaks and writes with his own linguistic twist simply cannot write patent claims -- a trial judge will give him no quarter during litigation regardless of the consistency of the language used by the ignoramus.
Further about real life: in fact there is a very strong correlation between ignorance and the improper use of language. The improper use of language is a strong indicator that the speaker does not have much education. To return to the peculiarities of Baltimore, its inner-city dwellers with seemingly ignorant speech patters are in fact quite ignorant as a group, and perhaps one of the most ignorant subcultures in the United States.
Moreover, I believe that it is completely wrong to insinuate that all cultures are equally good. Consider, for example, the choice between living in Norway versus living in Sudan. Norwegian culture is clearly far superior to Sudanese, and only a donkey would be unable to recognize this. One of the great plagues of modern American culture is the indoctrination of young people to disrespect advance Western culture, and their failure to make distinctions of virtue.
Pass judgment on culture all you want, don't pass value judgments on language variation among different dialectal groups, it is scientifically incorrect. Again, read Dr. Labov's work if you are undereducated on this.
In technical fields, univocal definitions and technical writing are absolutely necessary. Most jobs don't require this level of precision. In most jobs, being able to get your point across, act civilly with co-workers and customers, showing up for your shift, and solving problems are the most important job functions. A person's dialect has minimal impact on their ability to complete these task, but it has a huge impact on how people like yourself would judge the candidate's competence based on how they have learned to conjugate verbs.
Attitudes like yours are the problem. Can we call that problem "reality?" Sure we can. It doesn't make it right, it just means most people are like you, and can't look past the superficial differences between people's dialect to find commonality and judge competence.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've read Chomsky's work on linguistics, still don't care! I will place value on judgement on anything I deemed valuable or invaluable. That Black Baltimorean is valuable for only blacks in Baltimore! 
I can't hear the difference when others speak, let alone produce the same sound that others do. It doesn't make me stupid, or lazy, or unable to learn, or inferior.......it just means I have a different set of vowels than most English speakers. Seriously, read up and counter your OWN ignorance. I know you hate seeing it in others, so don't ignore the splinter in your own eye on this topic. 
