plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose… (The more things change, the more they stay the same.)
Really what you are complaining about is that people are less willing to do code switching except in a most minimal way. (I’m pretty sure even the most potty mouthed wouldn’t use the F-word at a job interview.) Here’s a hysterical video about code switching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzprLDmdRlc&feature=youtu.be
My sister-in-law has started saying “Gotcha” everytime you answer a question of hers. It’s driving me bananas.
I have caught myself saying like way more than I would like to. It’s very catching.
@marvin100 : Regarding that David Foster Wallace piece: Uhh, long doesn’t quite cover it. I’ll defer to you on its relevance, and perhaps digest it in time. Thanks.
Am I the only one who does not understand the reason why so many on TV are speaking so quickly that your brain cannot keep-up with what they are saying because they never use a period what could be so important that we need to hear 1000 words in one minute in a monotone voice I just don’t get it why there aren’t any punctuation marks or any up-talks since when did speaking become a race my point of view is so vital that you need to hear every word my feeble brain can produce as quickly as possible you need to to change your way of hearing if you do not get what I am saying because what I am say is exactly what is happening as we speak at the end of the day we can all be proud of this new English at the end of the day I like saying that again and again thanks for having me on
We don’t speak how we write and vice versa. That’s been true since writing was invented.
I transcribe oral interviews. I promise, every generation has its quirks. The reason the newest one is bothering so many people is because it’s new. In a generation, that’ll be normal speak and our brains won’t even register that it’s “odd.”
The idea is to adapt to the situation. If you have an important role and are working among Harvard MBAs, it just may not be wise to sound like a middle schooler or a beach dude. Not if you want to get ahead. The fact something is common among some sets doesn’t mean the wise, ambitious folks use it in all contexts. Otoh, if you’re running a bunch of surf shops, be my guest. Or if your clientele all mirror your own style.
Not all “younger” people are so beholden to their posse lingo that they think it can/should be used 24/7. This is a bit like appearance. If more people wear flipflops to work, that doesn’t mean it’s the new"right," in all situations.
@marvin100 You seem quite angry and have a penchant for turning a civilized discussions into a series of personal attacks. Moreover, as has been pointed out, these speech pattern afflict both men and women, This may surprise you, but most of us on this thread actually are concerned that intelligent, well educated and ambitious young people unnecessarily hurt themselves and come across as immature and overly casual in professional settings. The image one projects matters. Speech is right up there with breath and clothing …
@Chrchill I don’t think @marvin100 is like you portray him. I find his comments very pertinent and well thought out.
Maybe some of the young people by their speech are trying to look presidential. Having been a professional for many years it has been my experience that only thing people care about is what type of job you can do not your speech patterns. But then again I live in California
@Chrchill - I’ve made no personal attacks. The OP made the Barbie comment, which is clearly gendered, and there’s a large corpus of research clearly demonstrating that speech policing is also clearly gendered.
And I’m not angry at all–I’m having a great week and I love sharing what I’ve learned about this stuff. Like I said early on, I teach a unit on this sort of thing and have read extensively about it.
Good heavens, why are you all jumping on the OP for making a valid observation that many young (and not so young) people would benefit from learning to speak in a professional manner? (And what’s with the snarky coments about typos and a split post?). Is there really an argument to be made that when it comes to professional communication, anything goes? At SUNY schools, Oral Communication is a required general education component. I also teach in a business school and professional oral communication is a significant part of the curriculum. Am I missing something here? In an competitive employment environment, NOT teaching students to be able to communicate professionally and effectively would be irresponsible IMO.
Here’s what’s missing, @blprof : all the people who are standing up so righteously for speaking “in a professional manner” aren’t being circumspect and thinking about the reasons for these speech biases and the speech policing they spawn and are instead passionately defending a sexist status quo. The SQWs have a point that the world is full of sexist, biased people who judge a person’s intelligence and maturity by their uptalk or use of the world “like,” but if we don’t examine why that is, then we will never make progress towards what should be.
I just watched the first round of Jeopardy’s 2017 college tournament, and having read this thread, found myself listening carefully to the three students speak during their brief interviews with Alex Trebek. Both males used upspeak in every sentence, one started his spiel with “so”, and the other used the introductory “so” twice. However the female, an MIT student who won with ease, spoke with great precision and with neither a “so” nor a hint of upspeak.
I’ve come to realize that I use the introductory “so” a lot, in informal emails and texts as well as in speech. I’m sure it’s a fairly recent thing. I’ve been trying to figure out why I like it. In speech, it seems like a way to focus the listener on one’s upcoming words of wisdom, as in: “Oh hey, pay attention, I have something to say.” And I guess in written communication it brings a chatty tone to things, something like: “These are the words I’d use if I I were actually speaking to you.”
There are many ways we qualify our words, just as there are tools we use to assert we’re right. And then, daggers, because we can.
Speech policing? (Realize how many times this was phrased as policing, as though it’s some attempt to dominate, make others submit?) Or is it asking for some awareness and precision, at the right times? Asking for direct communication, rather than a wavy path full of meaningless insertions?
“Sexist status quo” is loaded. What’s so “open minded” about accepting sloppiness, trying to make it the de facto new “right?” (And blaming some male dominated hierarchy, if someone minds?) What’s wrong with knowing which forms to use in which circumstances?
I like slang, I think some casual-speak conveys more than formal can, because it’s come to have layered meaning of its own. But right times, right places.
Know when that is. I doubt some who protest would advise a kid to write her or his essay like a running faucet of whatever words came to mind, whatever phrasing works with same-age peers.
I’ve heard two ways people say “negotiate” or “controversial” on TV, on radio or on the ground. Which one is more professional, traditional or trendy? Obviously some learned the new pronunciation while an older person.
@marvin100 It would help it you approached things with a little humor. Moreover, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. This entire sexism analysis is off and not what my original comment was about. As I said numerous times, the problem applies to all genders, interim genders or non genders.
“Our most well educated college grads sound like insipid insecure Barbie dolls…”
You began a thread on criticizing speech patterns you dislike with a stereotype frequently used to criticize female appearance. That reads as sexist to me. You don’t give a stereotypical male example.
Then in post #19 you state it isn’t a gender issue.
It’s very catching.