We’ll just have to disagree on that. I think if you use verbal pauses(like, umm, uhh) in your speech, most likely you either do it with everyone you talk to(kids, friends, coworkers, bank rep, police officer) or no one.
Oh, I agree with that, sure. I don’t think ums or uhhs have ever held anyone back in life, though. And if they have, that’s the fault of whoever judged them negatively for it, because that’s just a super weird and superficial thing to hold against someone. I do think “like” is held against people much more, though, probably because it was initially associated with young women and old people love tut-tutting young people and society has a pretty broad and intractable sexist streak, but I still think those who hold “likes” against people are just as weird and superficial.
The only folks I know who don’t code switch tend to have serious issues interacting socially and/or have serious issues getting taken seriously even if they restrict themselves to those of their own respective SES and racial/ethnic groups.
For instance, an upper-class kid who talks like a “professional” in a Cravath type corporate environment when socializing casually among friends/family of the same SES…especially after the stodgy 1950’s/early '60s tends to be regarded as a pompous priggish twit to be lampooned.
And if said individual’s dumb enough to continue using that speaking style outside of the professional/upper-class environments, s/he may find being socially ostracized or ridiculed is the least of his/her problems and have a harder time interacting with others in different social venues.
Also, this works in other societies as well. For instance, one’s SES class can be immediately determined by one’s accent in class-conscious Britain…especially in decades/centuries past. Same could be said for Germany and Austria…especially before WWII.
And don’t forget that those Cravath dudes used to be fratboys, whose native dialect is frequently peppered with “bros,” watered-down AAVE conventions, and out-of-date hip-hop slang.
“Most people aren’t able to flip a switch so their speech patterns sound like an Appalachian coal miner at 7am but a Cravath partner at 8am.”
I have heard Bill Clinton speak a few times and I always thought he was very good at that
“I don’t think ums or uhhs have ever held anyone back in life, though. And if they have, that’s the fault of whoever judged them negatively for it, because that’s just a super weird and superficial thing to hold against someone.”
Maybe not, in your experience. That’s possible. But to many listeners, these pauses diminish the authority of the speaker. It’s not some perfect egalitarian world, where we all get to “come as we are.” Not anarchy. In my youth, the example was “dees, dem, and doze.” Is it arbitrary and superficial to ask folks to pronounce them, “these, them, and those?”
I asked if some here would similarly accept faulty writing. Your kid should be able to write as he pleases, not be expected to use proper grammar and construction? How about table manners? Is it okay to chew with your mouth open because ‘lots of people do it?’
No, i’m not talking only about “the most traditional, stodgy, and image-based ‘professional context.’” Why use the word “stodgy,” it’s a qualitative or value judgment, the same sort you’re railing against. You don’t see that?
Of course!
No, I don’t see the similarity at all. If you think I’m rejecting value judgments, you’re sorely mistaken. I’m rejecting sexist, classist language policing of the sort we see in the OP and many of the comments that support the OP’s position.
I think you are making value judgments in how you point a finger at those you say make value judgments.
Why did you say, "the most traditional, stodgy, and image-based “professional context”? when you could have simply said traditional professional context?
I have been a lawyer for many years. There is no traditional professional context. If you are in the South it is probably stupid to not use y’all with your clients and a jury. I have seen other lawyers show up to depos in tee shirts and act ignorant for effect and sometimes it works. Does anyone think Katie Perry cares how her attorney speaks as long as they get the job done.
Error
- I am definitely making value judgments and I'm not at all opposed to doing so.
- There are many, many different professional contexts and "tradition" isn't a monolith. I've worked in food service, retail, manual labor, electrical utility supply, banking, software, dot-com, and education, and I'd be hard pressed to find any speech-related thread to unite those fields, even among the most "professional" people working in them. My contention is that only the stodgiest of "professional contexts" would care much about an errant "like" or uptalk.
And some of us contend it reaches down from there. It’s not just some extreme. (Just as what Bill Gates does or doesn’t do isn’t universally applicable.)
The point isn’t simply “workers.” I don’t care how that gal at the Gap talks. I’m fine with regionalisms. But there are many contexts in which we support or undermine our authority (the academic use of the word, which is different from power,) by how we communicate.
If it does, it’s dumb and self-defeating. If you’re turning away potentially awesome employees because of such superficial biases as “like” and uptalk, you’re a bad manager and employer. Great employees are hard to come by, and very, very few companies have the luxury of only hiring people who exhibit all the same social signifiers as they do.
And maybe more importantly, that contention is a far, far, far cry from the OP, so let me know when you’ve settled on a place to put the goalposts.
Substantively, some do:
https://www.hamilton.edu/academics/centers/oralcommunication
Communication plays a role in the workforce. Marvin, can’t you see the myriad ways our presentation matters, per he context? Communication skills are tools. One isn’t a bad manager for needing a rep who can speak directly (as needed) and accomplish his work goals. Think of all the jobs out there where impressions are made on clients, patients, constituents, and more.
Ever think of how hard it is to be forced to follow circuitous talk full of insertions? How the speaker is demanding the listener endure, focus, try to follow and find the real message?
And where do you draw the line? is aggression or aggressive talk ok because the person gets the job done? Does punctuality matter, if the guy is good at his job? Is it demeaning to expect someone to show upon time, that’s a bad manager?
@lookingforward - Fine with all of that, whatever. Those decisions are made on a case by case basis, but none of that has anything to do with the OP and is instead yet another shifting of goalposts. How do you go from “punish people who say ‘like’ to three years in prison” (the OP, paraphrased) to “Communication skills are tools” and “does punctuality matter”? It’s all beside the point.
Sarcasm is not always “opposite”…most of us are not stupid here.
Definition of sarcasm
1
: a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain
2
a : a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual
b : the use or language of sarcasm
Look, I’m a woman, and frankly, I’m not offended here. I’m tired of people pulling out the woman flag to defend silliness. My opinion. Take it or leave it, but stop trying to invalidate it.
I would like to point out that the word “like” may be perceived as overused because it is not used only as a filler word. I’m not talking about the dictionary usage but rather something like this:
I was talking to Carol the other day, and, like, she was being so annoying. I, like, walked over and she was like, “What are you wearing?” And I was like, “Um, my clothes, what does it look like?” And she was like, “Ugh, you look like a fire hydrant.” I swear I almost punched her, like what the heck?!
If I told my friends a story like that (I tried to be accurate to our casual speech patterns) then some of the “likes” would be filler, some would be used “correctly,” and many of them would be used in place of the word “said.” I think we do this because saying someone “was like, “blah blah blah”” instead of “said, “blah blah blah”” softens the declaration and leaves more room for doubt. “Said” suggests a direct quote, while “was like” suggests paraphrasing and directs blame away from the speaker if it turns out that they didn’t tell the story exactly right.
I guess my point is that the use of “like” is more complicated than has been assumed. It’s actually a rather intelligent and informative use of language, in my opinion.
Disclaimer: I haven’t studied this stuff or anything; this is only an observation based on my personal experience as a current teenager.
I agree that “like” has meaning and isn’t just an alternative to “um.” On the positive side, it indicates that you’re humble about your opinions and willing to change them. On the negative side, it indicates that you don’t want to own up to your own thoughts. It’s not really fair to single out “like,” though. I don’t say “like” very much, but I’m always saying that something is kind of, sort of, maybe, probably, essentially, along the lines of something else.
What a frustrating thread and so filled with ad hominem, the last vestige of someone out of ideas. I realize that today’s zeitgeist is that everyone is great and “I’m OK, you’re OK” but the reality is that professional success can hinge on your dress and the way you use language. Yes, some successful types wear jeans In the office, some mangle language. But my kids will understand that if you style a Mohawk and say “whatevz” every other sentence, you’re not getting the job, the contract, or the client. This has nothing to do with The Hamptons or snobbery or elitism. It is about the respect and integrity a professional has for his craft and clients. I’m bracing for the name-calling but I am confident that those in the real world can relate.