Got me through another fab'lous linguistic earbook: Wordslut: A Feminist Guide to Taking Back the English Language Hardcover [illustrated 2019] by Amanda Montell [buy]. Maybe books about language, in contrast to books about maps or oil-paintings, are okay about losing the illustrations: because they can win on the phonics. I've had my gripes about the quality of pronunciation on some ear-books in the past. But here voice-actor [and B.A. Harvard Linguistics] Laurence Bouvard is excellent.
Sometime in 2o2o, I signed up with MetaFilter after lurking there since before the Birth of Blob. I joined so that I could join in the robust to-fro in the comments. Very early on, I inadvertently rose someone's hackles and got called out. It was shocking to realise they <sob> don't like me, but a) it was a lesson that not everyone will like each one of my opinions b) I was thereafter more cautious about shooting from the lip.
That sorry anecdote is relevant to current Blob . . .
In response to to a post about a multi-author scientific paper I had said something like "these lads would be more credible if they got their stats right" and Hackles asked " . . . and how do you know all the authors are male?". Now I could have got all fighty and answered "because all their first names code Male" or "in my culture "lads" is a sex-neutral or sex-irrelevant generic collective noun for, like, people". But I wisely buttoned my comeback because I twigged that a de-rail inquisition about how come, Bob, in your culture "lads" is accepted as a collective even if all members are women was going to leave me with a red face and be massive fail as a representative of my culture. Because it is hard to imagine, let alone recall, a case where a female-coded term would be used for a collective including some of both [or indeed all] sexes: "hey girls, who's for skulling pints tonight" . . . I don't think so!
Montell's book is full of that sort of thing. Getting on a righteous charger to do battle with the systemic sexism which runs through, even under-pins, our language. Weak, diminutive, submissive, hedging, terms get attached to women. In the 13thC "gyrle" was any child or small-small creature; but over the next 200 years 'girl' became inappropriate for rough-tough boys and also extended its range to encompass any unmarried young women; and later sweetheart. And while we're about it, be careful whom you address as Sweetie.
There is a whole chapter on vocal-fry, up-talk and hedging. These speech patterns are only noticed when mobilised by women, and hoo-boy does it rile up the blokes who notice. The thing about language is that we use it every day, and some every day normal words are used heedless of their meaning or etymology. We may consider some people are gormless, but nobody in standard English nowadays has pots of gaum [canny understanding] about them.
NORM, Non-mobile older rural male
SOFA, Sedentary ould fella anthropoid
No comments:
Post a Comment