Saturday, 4 October 2014

What Is America's Ugliest Accent? - Why You Shouldn't Ask

quote [ "[...] of course, that's what linguistic discrimination is really about. Maybe it's not always about class, but it's never really about language. It's about the kind of people who speak it. Predictably, the kinds of accents and languages which get dumped on the most, and get branded the "ugliest," always wind up being spoken by socially disadvantaged people." ]

Included in sciences due to being social science/linguistics. Article contains many excellent links to other sources, which is the primary reason I am reposting it here. Be sure to check those out!

What's Wrong With "America's Ugliest Accent"
By Josef Fruehwald


Reveal
Gawker is running a competition, tournament style, to see which accent will be crowned "America's Ugliest." In the running are 16 cities in the US, and readers get to vote. As a linguist, I'm not so thrilled about it.

I'll get to the principled sociolinguistic reasons why I don't like it in a moment, but on a personal level I was upset to see that in the intro to the piece they'd linked to a column that referenced research I'd collaborated on about the Philadelphia dialect (they've since removed that link after I asked them to).

If you don't know much about how sociolinguistic research is done, many of us rely on the goodwill and generosity of strangers to invite us into their homes, and tell us a bit about their lives for an hour or so. What they tell us teaches us about the social landscape of language, and how they tell us teaches us about language use. This is all crucial knowledge that lies outside the walls of academia, and if people started refusing to speak to us, we'd be pretty screwed!

I don't want anyone who I might want to interview in the future to be confused about my purposes because they saw my name or my colleagues' names when they followed a link from "America's Ugliest Accent Tournament." I also feel an ethical obligation to them to provide a vigorous public defense if their communities and the way they speak are ridiculed on the back of the research I've done.

But what's the harm...?

Anticipating some reactions to this post, no, I'm not some grey humorless lump. But just because something is framed as a game doesn't make it fun, and it doesn't make it funny. For example, take Gawker's paragraph about New Orleans:

New Orleans is a steaming, fetid stew of aural bile, home to everything from the deep Cajun bayou accent to the Yat dialect, which derives from Irish, French, German, and even Italian into one completely incomprehensible mess. You need only watch this clip on the number of ways residents pronounce the city's name and neighborhoods and read this excellent article on the hodgepodge of New Orleans' accents to see how varied, and uniformly ugly, it all is.

Hilarious stuff. Even if there was some intrinsic humor to that paragraph, instead of just raw nastiness, it would be important to reflect on who we're making fun of, and why. And on that count, I think the fella who compiled the Yat dictionary summarizes it well:

It's a working class language, probably, is what it amounts to.

And of course, that's what linguistic discrimination is really about. Maybe it's not always about class, but it's never really about language. It's about the kind of people who speak it. Predictably, the kinds of accents and languages which get dumped on the most, and get branded the "ugliest," always wind up being spoken by socially disadvantaged people. What exactly did this woman in particular do to deserve having a candid video of her slapped up on Gawker as an example of just how "ugly" the Chicago accent is? She works in a warehouse supermarket, that's what.

Linguists call this general pattern "standard language ideology." It's the idea that somewhere out there, there's a perfect, unadulterated version of English, and what your everyday person speaks is a poor copy. I call it the kilogram model of language, because there is literally a physical object in France by which the unit kilogram is defined, and there are in fact multiple and worryingly imperfect copies of it around the world. But what linguists have discovered is that language is definitely not like the kilogram. The only place where English really exists is in the minds of its everyday speakers. To the extent that varies geographically and socially, so does English. There are no imperfect copies.

Standard language ideology isn't a consequence-less game either. "America's Ugliest Accent Tournament" just puts a laughing face on a serious problem of discrimination that has economic and personal consequences for real people. To choose one example I'm familiar with, Anita Henderson, linguistics PhD and Chief of Staff for the Deputy Dean of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, did a study where she surveyed hiring managers in Philadelphia, playing them tapes of potential job applicants, and asked them to rate them on their job suitability. The topline summary from the abstract says it all:

Those who sound Black are rated as less intelligent and ambitious and less favorably in job level.

In her textbook English with an Accent, Rosina Lippi-Green sums up my own opinion on the matter, but I've added some emphasis.

If as a nation we are agreed that it is not acceptable or good to discriminate on the grounds of skin color or ethnicity, gender or age, then by logical extension it is equally unacceptable to discriminate against language traits which are intimately linked to an individual's sense and expression of self.

The Fundamental Sociolinguistic Outlook

Real quick, let's contrast the overall tone of the America's Ugliest Accent Tournament with what I would call the fundamental sociolinguistic outlook on speakers. I think Bill Labov, the founder of contemporary sociolinguistics, summed it up nicely at the end of his 2009 Haskins Prize lecture.



Transcript: I am not playing the part of a doctor, introducing you to my patients, nor that of a lawyer introducing you to my clients. These are people I have learned from. They are a small sample of many thousands. I have chosen them because they each possess an uncommon eloquence?a mastery of the English language that allows them, each in his or her own way, to share with us their experience in life and their view of the world. Over the years, their words have had a profound effect on me. I do not know when it happened. I suppose that like most linguists, I was always in love with language. But somewhere in this business of listening to people I found that I had fallen in love with humanity. If this talk has succeeded, you will, to some small degree, have done so as well.

Gawker's take:

No matter who you are, you all sound disgusting.

But I Get It

One thing that every sociolinguist knows is that people (including ourselves) find accents and dialects endlessly fascinating. Just look at how the New York Times Dialect quiz became the most visited story of 2013. It makes sense that Gawker would want to cash in on that dialect goodness with an eight item long user engagement feature.


Josef Fruehwald finished his PhD in Sociolinguistics in 2013 at the University of Pennsylvania, where he studied pronunciation changes in the Philadelphia dialect. He's currently a Lecturer at the University of Edinburgh.
[SFW] [science & technology] [+6 Interesting]
[by bones@4:57amGMT]

Comments

GordonGuano said @ 6:15am GMT on 4th Oct [Score:1 Good]
There are people with Southern accents that can make everything they say sound like a killing insult. Effeminate Southern gays are even worse. If Lindsey Graham was a Socialist along with Bernie Sanders, my knuckles would still itch when I heard him talk.

But boy howdy, can Susan Sarandon make a drawl work.
Onix said @ 3:33pm GMT on 4th Oct [Score:1 Interesting]
That's true. I lived in Atlanta and there was a lady who sounded just like Droopy the Dog making a death threat every time she said "hello, how are you?". I got used after a while but for some time I felt like I lived in in a cartoon show.
SnappyNipples said @ 8:08am GMT on 4th Oct
mechavolt said @ 5:45pm GMT on 4th Oct [Score:1 Funsightful]
I HATE EVERYONE WHO DOESN'T SOUND LIKE ME
arrowhen said @ 4:09am GMT on 5th Oct [Score:1 Funny]
Here in Louisiana, I've overheard conversations where people with exactly the same accent have a hard time understanding each other's accent.
HoZay said @ 4:59am GMT on 5th Oct [Score:1 Funsightful]
The accent that was kind of cute and charming in Fargo just sounds dumb and hateful coming from Sarah Palin.
bones said @ 9:54am GMT on 5th Oct
I don't think it's the accent that makes her sound that way. ¬_¬
Kama-Kiri said @ 5:48am GMT on 5th Oct [Score:1 Underrated]
There are regional differences in dialect, which are probably fair game for a bit of light-hearted humor once in a while - Four Yorkshiremen skit anyone? - and then there's making fun of someone for being poor and uneducated.

Making a competition for the "ugliest" seems tactless ... at best. They could have searched for the "coolest" accent with much the same conclusion but considerably less ill-will.
HoZay said @ 3:02pm GMT on 4th Oct
+1 for the Gawker smackdown.
Resurrected Morris said @ 4:59pm GMT on 4th Oct
I find the New York and the New Jersey accents grating. I don't mind southern accents so much...Detroit get on my nerves too...
sanepride said @ 5:17pm GMT on 4th Oct
Pretty silly idea, considering how subjective this is, it all depends where you're from and what you're used to. My parents were born and raised in NYC, so I grew up listening to the accent and don't mind it at all. Can't stand the Texas accent because of the political affiliations- especially the swaggering affected G.W. Bush version. Also annoying to me- Baltimore, Philly, and most especially the SoCal 'Valley/surfer'. Not crazy about Chicago either.
ENZ said @ 10:48pm GMT on 4th Oct
I dunno, Rogue from the 90's X-men cartoon made southern accents hot for me.

Now a yooper accent? Can't imagine hearing that in bed without bursting out laughing.
biblebeltdrunk said @ 4:10am GMT on 5th Oct [Score:1 Underrated]
I always liked gambit from both that and the origins movie.
that evolution one dint have the same charm.
bones said @ 1:30am GMT on 5th Oct
Like this?

bones said @ 1:57am GMT on 5th Oct
Also...

ROGUE TRIBUTES! HOORAY!




ENZ said @ 2:31am GMT on 5th Oct
I didn't like Goth Rogue in X-Men Evolution. I mean, it made more sense that her power would make her an introverted sourpuss, but I guess chalk it up to be just being all finicky over one of my first childhood crushes.
bones said @ 2:55am GMT on 5th Oct
There was a lot wrong with Evolution. It did get pretty interesting in the last two seasons before it got cancelled and we got X-23 out of it (for better or worse). I don't regret the cancellation. It seems a bit inexcusable for a show to take four seasons to find its voice.

I don't know how X-23 turned out in the comics, but her two Evolution episodes were among the stronger material.

X-Men:TAS was a fun cartoon that offered unusual material no one else had at the time (at least not for children). It was really hindered by its adherence to the comic book look (the black inks in particular). X-Men came out a year after Batman: TAS (1993 and 1992 respectively), but the difference in quality is apparent. No doubt Batman had a higher budget to begin with, but if X-Men had been willing to streamline their characters designs, they would have had stronger animation.

Wolverine and the X-Men had strong animation and character design, and some interesting material, but at some point you just wonder when Logan and Charles are going to start making out already. Their relationship often felt like something out of a fanfic. I will give it points for deviating heavily from prior concepts instead of rehashing the same stories.
ENZ said @ 3:32am GMT on 5th Oct
Marvel has shit the bed an awful lot with their forays onto television. Either their shows are massive disappointments or they're abruptly canceled when you're really getting into them.

Yes, I'm still mad about Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes being canceled so they could make a cartoon that's tied into the MCU more. Though the first episode of the seconds season of Avengers Assemble looks more promising.
bones said @ 3:51am GMT on 5th Oct
How do you feel about animated Deadpool for children? He has Ron Stoppable's voice (who was also the voice of Terry on Batman Beyond, and the older brother on Boy Meets World).
ENZ said @ 4:15am GMT on 5th Oct
You mean that episode of Ultimate Spider-Man? It was alright. I never read that much Deadpool so I'm not too attached to the character. He's basically a snarky goofball like Spider-Man, only completely amoral. No reason why there can't be a "kid's friendly" version. Yeah, he can't gun down people on screen, but cartoons these days can have characters die violent deaths via explosions just so long as they cut away at the last frame. So he can at least amass a body count via gross negligence.



bones said @ 6:50am GMT on 5th Oct
Funny. I found him intolerably annoying. As much as I like Will Friedle, that voice, talking that fast, with that much nonsense is too much. I think it's cognitive dissonance; the voice is too kiddy for what should be an adult man at least in his 20s.
ENZ said @ 12:01pm GMT on 5th Oct [Score:1 Informative]
Oh, yeah, I didn't care for the voice either. I thought you were talking more in regards to his characterization.

Nolan North's Deadpool was pretty good. And I kind of dug how he spoke with a Newfoundland dialect in the X-Men: Ultimate Alliance games.
bones said @ 11:00pm GMT on 5th Oct
People really hated the movie version, but I liked him less mouthy, slightly more able to shut the fuck up and kill things. His high protein diet in an elevator joke was probably too subtle a fart joke for his average fan.

I know that being over the top and hyperactive is the gimmick, but it's not one which appeals to me. It becomes aggressively annoying after a while. Rather than wanting to change Deadpool, it's easier to admit I am clearly not his intended audience. If I want an ultraviolent parody, I prefer Lobo. Or I did pre New 52.
ENZ said @ 11:26pm GMT on 5th Oct
There's a difference between having him less mouthy and literally sewing his mouth shut.

As for Lobo, yeah, I don't care for the New 52 version either. But I get it. Or at least I think I do. Assuming he's still supposed to be a parody. Old Lobo was a product of the 90's. A jacked up biker dripping with testosterone with skulls and spikes everywhere. What the typical 12 year old thought was "hardcore" at the time. Antiheroes these days are more lithe and calculating than over the top machismo. The anime influence is really apparent.
bones said @ 8:45pm GMT on 6th Oct
The ending was messed up, but up until they turned him into a pink monstrosity, I thought he was pretty good.

I mention good ol Bo specifically because he was a parody of Wolverine and Deadpool was a parody of Lobo. At some point the circle jerk got so fervent a horse got involved and, well, you know the rest, my friend.
ENZ said @ 9:33pm GMT on 6th Oct [Score:1 Informative]
Actually Deadpool started off as a completely serious carbon-copy of DC's Deathstroke. Later writers were all "fuck it, I'm having some fun with this Liefeldian dreck!" Though at this point Deadppol has been pretty Flanderized.
bones said @ 3:42am GMT on 7th Oct
That's right! I forgot. It wasn't until later that he entered the ultra-violent, grimmer and grittier parody circle J. Ah those were the days.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.



Posts of Import
Karma
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings
ScoobySnacks
HoZay
Paracetamol
lilmookieesquire
Ankylosaur