A scholar who finds the good in ‘bad’ English

In her book, “Like, Literally, Dude: Arguing for the Good in Bad English," Valerie Fridland argues that many maligned verbal tics play useful roles.

|
Staff

How do you, like, react when people use “like” a lot? Do you sometimes find yourself saying “I’m walkin’ to the store,” or do you always enunciate the full “ing”? Do certain adverbial intensifiers literally make your skin crawl? 

I spoke with sociolinguist Valerie Fridland about her wonderful book, “Like, Literally, Dude: Arguing for the Good in Bad English.” In it, she explains that many of our most maligned verbal tics play useful roles in communication today. She also reminds us that “the difference between the features we embrace and those we can’t tolerate is really just one of power and perspective.”

Vocal fry is a case in point. Fry happens when a person trails off at the end of a sentence, dropping the pitch of their voice and letting it creak like an old door. To older listeners, it can give the impression that the speaker is weary, bored, or put out. Vocal fry can evoke strong negative reactions – a journalist called it the “verbal tic of doom” and the Institute for Public Speaking warns that “it is the sonic equivalent ... to nails on a chalkboard.”

You might think that vocal fry is an inherently awful noise, but our attitude has more to do with our perceptions of the people who use it than with the sound itself. In the United States, we associate it with young, female speakers, and consider it a fault, something that makes women seem “less attractive and intelligent,” as the New York Post warned. A few decades ago in Britain, however, vocal fry was a mark of high status, with upper-class, older men employing it the most – think lounging earl, not Valley girl. 

One of the book’s most surprising chapters, for me, was the one about um and uh. We’ve all been taught that using these verbal fillers makes us sound ineloquent. Recently, though, researchers have studied the ways they function as tools for communication. They signal that a speaker is about to say something that requires increased cognitive effort, such as bringing up a new topic or choosing among word options. 

Um is more than a sign that a speaker is thinking hard – it cues listeners to “expect the unexpected.” Experiments have shown that when people hear a sentence such as “Everyone’s got bad habits and mine is biting my ____,” they expect the next word to be “nails.” But if the speaker adds an “um,” for example, “mine is biting my, um,____,” listeners are primed to expect something other than the usual answer, perhaps “tongue” or “pencil.” 

Um and uh also serve as “turn transition cues.” If you simply pause while you are talking, your conversational partner may think you’re done, and jump in. If you say “um” and then pause, they know you haven’t yielded the floor. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to A scholar who finds the good in ‘bad’ English
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/In-a-Word/2023/0508/A-scholar-who-finds-the-good-in-bad-English
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe