Hyperwhites

[lolwhites]

Does that mean we can't discuss the phenomenon?

If you can't discuss without misquoting people and taking their views to extremes in order to shoot them down, it's best not to bother. Saying stuff like "What nonsense" and just leaving it at that isn't discussing, it's pontificating.

[fluffyhamster]

Well, I'd hardly call pausing then adding a 'd' the (my) initial or natural choice, but maybe learning concepts such as 'finite/tensed' rather than the good ol' prescrippy rules really ain't doin' me no feivaz.

[JuanTwoThree]

If there is a tendency towards a "superstandard" might any of these have something to do with it? *

1 TEFL teachers are an ageing population. The fairly cool people from the boom in TEFL (in Europe at least) are now in their late 40's, or even more For some people getting on a bit involves less and less openmindedness and more and more seeing things in black and white. Politics, music, clothes, religion, the English they teach etc

2 Things used to be clearer. It's all relative nowadays. Now you have to think about "Impeding errors" and "Non-impeding errors" while before "wrong was wrong" . Cambridge allows text-speak for heaven's sake. People react by being more dogmatic than ever.

3 We used to sell ourselves as BANA NES's and that's what the punters wanted. Now there are loads of Englishes around and our role is questioned. Indian English? Whatever next? Let's raise the bar a bit or we'll be out of a job.

4 There's so much sloppiness around what with people in English speaking countries confusing their "there" with "their" and so on. Cambridge allows text-speak for heaven's sake. We are the keepers of the flame.

5 The much vaunted Native Intuition is being replaced by corpora. We block our ears and go "LA LA LA LA, We know better".

6 There have always been nutters around. People used to say that Q-tags were vulgar. The internet gives them and their like a voice but there are no more of them than before.


* N very B that I don't ( necessarily) go along with any of these but they might explain the phenomenenenonemonemonom.

[fluffyhamster]

Yes, young teachers nowadays, not pressing the words for or indeed the sexy garments themselves upon their nubile - ahem nubile linguistically speaking - young charges. Tsk tsk. When I was a hot-blooded new teacher and not the old git that I am now, ooh I'd give them what for, what! etc

[metal56]

Does that mean we can't discuss the phenomenon?

If you can't discuss without misquoting people and taking their views to extremes in order to shoot them down, it's best not to bother. Saying stuff like "What nonsense" and just leaving it at that isn't discussing, it's pontificating.

You should check your own posts:

With respect, that is bollocks.

Calling a person a berk might also not be the right way forward.

[metal56]

1 TEFL teachers are an ageing population. The fairly cool people from the boom in TEFL (in Europe at least) are now in their late 40's, or even more For some people getting on a bit involves less and less openmindedness and more and more seeing things in black and white. Politics, music, clothes, religion, the English they teach etc.

So you think it's the oldies who are leading the way to a supestandard, do you?

Now you have to think about "Impeding errors" and "Non-impeding errors" while before "wrong was wrong" .

For whom?

Cambridge allows text-speak for heaven's sake.

And why shouldn't they?

Now there are loads of Englishes around and our role is questioned. Indian English? Whatever next? Let's raise the bar a bit or we'll be out of a job.

Or let's just prop up the bar and get drunk.

We are the keepers of the flame.

You're winning me over. Can I also carry the torch?

5 The much vaunted Native Intuition is being replaced by corpora.

Replaced? I thought it was more a situation of mutual support.

People used to say that Q-tags were vulgar. The internet gives them and their like a voice but there are no more of them than before.

No more question tags than before?

* N very B that I don't ( necessarily) go along with any of these but they might explain the phenomenenenonemonemonom.


Or it could be that we don't want to sound black or nonnative or working class or poorly educated or cool or...

[lolwhites]

You should check your own posts:

With respect, that is bollocks.

Partially quoting again, Metal. You might have noticed that With respect, that is bollocks was followed up with the reasons as to why what you'd said was bollocks, whereas your What nonsense was not. My beef wasn't that you said What nonsense, it was that you said what nonsense and left it hanging there with no supporting argument, which is akin to saying "I am so much cleverer than you that I don't even need to justify what I say."

OK, I really am going to let the thread drop now, I promise. It it comes back to the top with Metal56 as the last poster, I'll resist the temptation to even read; I suggest others do likewise.

[metal56]

With respect, that is bollocks was followed up with the reasons as to why what you'd said was bollocks,

No matter, you still need to control your responses.

akin to saying "I am so much cleverer than you that I don't even need to justify what I say."

Hopefully, it's more a case of "what you said needs no more than the reponse I gave as the whole world would likely see it as nonsense". I could be wrong though.

I suggest others do likewise.

Tut, tut! Such schoolyard tactics.

[JuanTwoThree]

Metal56, I'm not even sure that anybody is setting a superstandard but I can see why it might be some oldies that are doing it. People do often get set in their ways.

"Wrong was wrong" for those people who thought that a piece of student's work with more red ink all over it was worse than one with less. Nowadays they (are supposed to) have to think about it.

This could make some people stricter: I remember a comment from Cambridge on "If we go to Edinburgh by car we'll have to find parks" , which I thought was an impeccably non-impeding error, that said "It might cause confusion to the reader". Well, it might to a complete idiot. I suspect that this commentator's response to having to distinguish between types of errors was to find as many "impeders" as possible.

I haven't got a problem with text speak myself but it might make some people recoil and get even stricter.

I'm fairly sure that many tefl teachers think that the barbarians are at the gate. Or well inside it. You can carry the torch if you like. You're not too keen on the AmE lack of present perfect, are you? But there's F all you or the saddos like me that think enormity doesn't mean enormousness in modern English can do about it

Corpora should help intuition. But I remember that my reaction to the truth of "Further/farther" was ungenerous to say the least. I'm sure that I'm not the only person to have thought "Oh so a lot of people say X: Well a lot of people are wrong"

Do you think that there are more pedants/super-standard setters/language reactionaries around than before or that their voices can be heard more easily?

Seriously, I remember hearing about a teacher who was so shocked by "arent I?" that she wouldn't teach Qtags.

Remember, each of my numbered explanations was a different possibility, trying to get into the head of a particular person not present a coherent argument ( as if I could).

[metal56]

"Wrong was wrong" for those people who thought that a piece of student's work with more red ink all over it was worse than one with less. Nowadays they (are supposed to) have to think about it.

Is that such a bad move?

Well, it might to a complete idiot. I suspect that this commentator's response to having to distinguish between types of errors was to find as many "impeders" as possible.

I see.

I haven't got a problem with text speak myself but it might make some people recoil and get even stricter.

That seems to be the case with American youth slang of coolness and nerds. The Nerds are actually rejecting such language and using, as a result, a kind of superstandard. But, are hey doing it intentinally?

Some think not:

http://www.metafilter.com/63368/Homo-Sa ... us#1782512

Nah, the article's crap, too. The author suggests that nerds deliberately use superstandard english to distance themselves socially from their "cooler" peers, which implies a level of social perception that just does not fit within the nerd rubric. In order to "reject locally dominant social norms" you have to be aware of them, and the stereotypical nerd just ain't.

I think on some level that's true, though. At least from the snippets she presents, the kids do have some self-awareness and pride in their identity. That said, the way she couches that point - especially on the level of intentionality - is overly simplistic. I'm surprised she didn't delve further into the fact that part of the reasons why nerds speak "superstandard" English - as well as why they are many times outside the mainstream - is because they don't relate to their "cooler" young peers, so they wind up speaking like the adults around them, from whom they receive support and encouragement.

I see the same reaction all over the Internet and coming form all kinds of native and nonative speakers, of all ages and backgrounds. Many who react to suggestions that even in Standard English, we link words when speaking fairly rapidly. Many forumites who insist on about "careful speech" being the correct way to speak in all contexts.

That's just one example.

Do you think that there are more pedants/super-standard setters/language reactionaries around than before or that their voices can be heard more easily?

It seems like a resurgence of such types is on the way. Many of those people seem to have reached a point where the idea of having many englishes is something they cannot deal with or face up to. Maybe they feel that their variant will disappear or become so minimal that they will have to "learn" a new variant in order to keep up or to remain employed and "important". I say, maybe.

[JuanTwoThree]

You ask if that is such a bad move. Far from it. The days of weighing a piece before and after brandishing the red pen should be over. But it takes longer and the corrector has to think, so not everybody is enamoured of this. I've also seen a comment like "While there are no impeding errors the sheer number of non-impeding errors affects the credibility of the writer". This may be true but it's at odds with the stated philosophy and very "Yeah but no but".

This nerd thing. The fact that at the moment "youth" is following a trend that is originally Black American is largely irrelevant, not just because many if not most of the kids who consider themselves cool (as well as those who choose to be nerdy) are blissfully unaware of how much their ways of dressing, speaking etc are (not) informed by Black American culture.*

When we were all (me and my mates) camping around in eye-liner and feather boas a la T-Rex, Mott and Bowie, the sort of people who had been squares before but were straights at that time but would later be called nerds were dressing and sounding just like their dads and our teachers. You can make a case for hippy culture having its beat roots (though not beetroots) in Black jazz but you can't say that about 70s androgynity or about punk, except by a long and tortuous musical route in punk's case. There have always been nerds and they have wanted to be seen and heard as squares, straights, nerds, geeks whatever.

So "hyper-white" doesn't appear to me to be a helpful term, except to describe a very temporary phenomenon. If it becomes cool to dress and talk like an English gent ("I say Eminem, what a spiffing deer-stalker") what then?

* Not unlike gum-chewing basketball-playing rap-singing jean-wearing underpant-showing Simpson-loving Spanish kids who "don't like America".

[metal56]

So "hyper-white" doesn't appear to me to be a helpful term, except to describe a very temporary phenomenon.

Then it isn't a term for you or your needs. It seems to be a useful term for some others though. I can see its application being useful in certain social circles.

And what about whites who are marked as not being white enough - as mentioned in the article? Do you think that there are ways of speaking that are seen as not being white enough by some whites?

* Not unlike gum-chewing basketball-playing rap-singing jean-wearing underpant-showing Simpson-loving Spanish kids who "don't like America".

Why would they need to like America in order to imitate the original "gum-chewing basketball-playing rap-singing jean-wearing underpant-showing Simpson-loving Spanish kids"? Most of the originals don't think much of America.

[metal56]

Superstandard in court:

The use of “superstandard” English was identified by the panel as a frequentlyreoccurring problem. “Superstandard” English refers to vocabulary or sentence structure which is unnecessarily convoluted, complex, or tricky. The basing of a single question on half-page descriptions of fact situations; “double-barrelled” answer choices; undue reliance on the roman numeral format; and the use of double-negatives, are all examples of “superstandard” English contained in Florida’s Bar exam.

http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/ ... eNAACP.pdf

[metal56]

The "superstandard" rears its ugly head in SAT test.

Form: Selected Annotated Bibliography on The SAT: Bias and Misuse

Hoover, M. R., Politzer, R. L., & Taylor, O. Bias in Reading Tests for Black Language Speakers: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. In A. G. Hillard III (Ed.), Testing African American Students: Special Re-Issue of The Negro Educational Review. Morristown, NJ: Aaron Press, 1991.

"Addresses biases in language and reading tests for speakers of Black English and members of other socioeconomic, cultural and ethnic groups. Biases include use of an elaborate, stylized “superstandard” English, rather than simple, basic language in questions and instructions, and
“lexical” bias which disadvantages students unfamiliar with certain words because of class, geographical or interpretation differences from the norm expected by the test. Both types of bias cause a student’s abilities to be measured inaccurately."

[revel]

Hey all.

I was fortunate to attend high school hell (HSH) in a school district that invested a lot of budgeted money in the creativity of its English teachers. There were at least (I don’t remember exactly how many) eight teachers in the English department, offering quarterly courses in Greek Tragedy, Body Language, Radio and Video, Forensic competition (debate and interpretation of texts), Drama, Advanced Placement, Poetry, Short Story, American and English literature, Vocabulary building, Term paper writing, etc. My HSH also offered Spanish (which no one in my particular group of friends studied) German and French as second languages for college applications that required such.

In my group of friends (the majority of us nerds, though there were three cheerleaders, two debaters, two dramatic interpreters, two or three math whizzes and all members of the Drama Club,) we began an internal movement that set us apart from the rest, based on our use of language. Instead of saying “car” we used the word “auto”. Instead of using our real names, we used our names with an “a” stuck on the end (due to a typo in my own name made by a rose−bush catalogue in sending me adverts), we played with the many eye verbs (gaze, stare, look at) and we used a phrase from Medea’s last speech on throwing her children from the precipice to greet one another, like a secret code or password. We consciously used this language as a marker that we as a group were different from the “jocks” as a group or from the “cheerleaders” as a group, or the “smokers” as a group. However, our Advanced Placement teacher did not allow us to use such linguistic peculiarities in our work towards university, correctly letting us know that outside of our little world such “norms” would not apply, would not be understood and thus would probably be considered as “substandard” or, at worst, wrong. One of the reasons given to me for not getting more than a 3 out of 5 on the AP exam was that I had used Tennessee William’s “Auto−da−fe” as a basis for my essay instead of one of his more universally accepted works like “Streetcar Named Desire”. Oh well.

Were we hyper whites? In a school district where there was only one black student (but a lot of Hispanic students), being extra−white did not seem to be the issue. The issue was more finding our own identities, socializing with others of our kind, even excluding those who did not follow our lead. We knew the standard rules and thus could laugh at them, look for exceptions in the literature, even convince our teachers that maybe what we were saying or communicating was just a valid as the standard, accepted interpretations. I was so lucky.

peace,
revel.