Live data from Hacker News

Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

flashbak.com

21–30 of 63 posts

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#21
post #15

"Hoodlum lingo"... Reminds me a bit of something a random thought I had: How would you feel if you were constantly told your manner of speech was "wrong" and you constantly felt pressured not to use it? Would it be OK for Australian employees to be pressured to not speak Australian English, since it's indisputably in many ways different from "Standard English"? (whatever that is) Of course not, right? To the contrary…

Bad example. Here in Australia, I call my mate a cunt all the time. But if my mate and I worked as store cashiers in the US, we'd be expected to refrain from doing that. Or we would have to look for new jobs in short order. And that's fine.

Yeah nah mate, the example is good. Assume you're not dropping the c bomb all the time.

The point is, no one would say it's OK to pressure speakers to not speak Australian English.

And not only are they not stigmatized the way AAVE speakers are, in addition to that, it's kind of expected that people who work with Australians make an effort to get used to and understand the Australian variety of English.

That certainly isn't the expectation for AAVE - with AAVE, it's them who should make the effort to speak like everyone else, not anyone else making an effort to get used to and understand them.

Even those who speak perfectly grammatical Standard American English, but with an African American accent only, are still stigmatized. So it's not enough for speakers to speak grammatical Standard American English, they have to completely change they way they speak in order not to be stigmatized.

This is very revealing, because Standard American English, just with an African American pronunciation, is less foreign than Australian English, which has not only different pronunciation but different vocab etc as well.

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#22
post #15

"Hoodlum lingo"... Reminds me a bit of something a random thought I had: How would you feel if you were constantly told your manner of speech was "wrong" and you constantly felt pressured not to use it? Would it be OK for Australian employees to be pressured to not speak Australian English, since it's indisputably in many ways different from "Standard English"? (whatever that is) Of course not, right? To the contrary…

This is called relativism and it’s a natural position to take if you think there are no useful prescriptive standards, only descriptions of how people act.

I guess that might be appealing for some people, but for others the ideas of quality and correctness are important. Unfortunately this has been mixed up with discussions about race which makes it basically impossible to publicly support any sort of language standards.

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#23
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad example. Here in Australia, I call my mate a cunt all the time. But if my mate and I worked as store cashiers in the US, we'd be expected to refrain from doing that. Or we would have to look for new jobs in short order. And that's fine.

Yeah nah mate, the example is good. Assume you're not dropping the c bomb all the time. The point is, no one would say it's OK to pressure speakers to not speak Australian English. And not only are they not stigmatized the way AAVE speakers are, in addition to that, it's kind of expected that people who work with Australians make an effort to get used to and understand the Australian variety of English. That certainl…

Maybe because AAVE is just bad English and is intrinsically understood by people that going to a place and learning localisms is not the same as impersonating another individual. Furthermore, in the current social spectrum it would take no time for someone even trying to be accused of cultural appropriation... no thanks.

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#24
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah nah mate, the example is good. Assume you're not dropping the c bomb all the time. The point is, no one would say it's OK to pressure speakers to not speak Australian English. And not only are they not stigmatized the way AAVE speakers are, in addition to that, it's kind of expected that people who work with Australians make an effort to get used to and understand the Australian variety of English. That certainl…

Maybe because AAVE is just bad English and is intrinsically understood by people that going to a place and learning localisms is not the same as impersonating another individual. Furthermore, in the current social spectrum it would take no time for someone even trying to be accused of cultural appropriation... no thanks.

But that's the thing, AAVE is not "just bad English", or a localism. (unlike Australian English, which really is just bad English, and a localism)

You really ought to get off your high horse, watch the video. You might learn something.

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#25
post #15

"Hoodlum lingo"... Reminds me a bit of something a random thought I had: How would you feel if you were constantly told your manner of speech was "wrong" and you constantly felt pressured not to use it? Would it be OK for Australian employees to be pressured to not speak Australian English, since it's indisputably in many ways different from "Standard English"? (whatever that is) Of course not, right? To the contrary…

This is called relativism and it’s a natural position to take if you think there are no useful prescriptive standards, only descriptions of how people act. I guess that might be appealing for some people, but for others the ideas of quality and correctness are important. Unfortunately this has been mixed up with discussions about race which makes it basically impossible to publicly support any sort of language standa…

> ideas of quality and correctness are important

Quality and correctness are important! And AAVE does have and enforce both. If you answered a question like "where be the car?" with "it be on the road" or "it's on the road" when in fact it be in the garage, you would be grammatically incorrect. I bet you have no idea what habitual be even is or how it works. (I didn't)

And it all begs the question, why, in the US, is Standard American English (which is overwhelmingly native to white people, and usually the ones with the most privileged positions in society at that) more quality and correct than any other variety? Is there something magical about their speech that makes it quality and correct? Keep in mind English itself is a hodgepodge of butchered other languages.

Is Australian English not quality and correct?

How come grammatically standard English, just spoken with an African American accent, is still not quality and correct?

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#26
post #15

"Hoodlum lingo"... Reminds me a bit of something a random thought I had: How would you feel if you were constantly told your manner of speech was "wrong" and you constantly felt pressured not to use it? Would it be OK for Australian employees to be pressured to not speak Australian English, since it's indisputably in many ways different from "Standard English"? (whatever that is) Of course not, right? To the contrary…

I wonder if there’s any information on how the Australian dialect (if there was any) was accepted when it was still a penal colony?

Cockney would also be a great comparison as both it and AAVE can be seen as class signifiers while the Australian dialect currently isn’t.

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#27
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is called relativism and it’s a natural position to take if you think there are no useful prescriptive standards, only descriptions of how people act. I guess that might be appealing for some people, but for others the ideas of quality and correctness are important. Unfortunately this has been mixed up with discussions about race which makes it basically impossible to publicly support any sort of language standa…

> ideas of quality and correctness are important Quality and correctness are important! And AAVE does have and enforce both. If you answered a question like "where be the car?" with "it be on the road" or "it's on the road" when in fact it be in the garage, you would be grammatically incorrect. I bet you have no idea what habitual be even is or how it works. (I didn't) And it all begs the question, why, in the US, is…

It’s considered incorrect because the combined cultural output of the previous five centuries established an educated baseline as to what is considered proper. It’s not simply an arbitrary designation or a consequence of “privilege” and culture isn’t just an empty variable that is selected randomly.

The point about Australian English is irrelevant. Australian English is correct in Australia and incorrect in America, just as American spellings are incorrect in Britain. Language is culture-specific.

Again, if you have no interest in the idea that some things are correct and others are incorrect, this will not appeal to you. But that is a postmodern relativistic position and not one that everyone agrees with.

Even if none of that is appealing to you, the simple fact that is the overwhelming majority of the US agrees that a certain dialect is “proper” English. It’s unclear to me why a small percentage of the population would be justified in having their dialect be on equal terms with the society-wide one. This really has nothing to do with race inherently and the same situation applies to say, Appalachian dialects.

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#28
post #15

"Hoodlum lingo"... Reminds me a bit of something a random thought I had: How would you feel if you were constantly told your manner of speech was "wrong" and you constantly felt pressured not to use it? Would it be OK for Australian employees to be pressured to not speak Australian English, since it's indisputably in many ways different from "Standard English"? (whatever that is) Of course not, right? To the contrary…

This is called relativism and it’s a natural position to take if you think there are no useful prescriptive standards, only descriptions of how people act. I guess that might be appealing for some people, but for others the ideas of quality and correctness are important. Unfortunately this has been mixed up with discussions about race which makes it basically impossible to publicly support any sort of language standa…

It seems to be more or less uniquely an American issue? As far as I know, no-one is going around demanding that people from Yorkshire or Kerry or other places with significant language variation speak standard English.

> ideas of quality and correctness

What does this mean, for English? For instance, you say "I guess"; that's a neologism, and would probably upset really extreme prescriptivists. Where should the line be drawn?

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#29
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is called relativism and it’s a natural position to take if you think there are no useful prescriptive standards, only descriptions of how people act. I guess that might be appealing for some people, but for others the ideas of quality and correctness are important. Unfortunately this has been mixed up with discussions about race which makes it basically impossible to publicly support any sort of language standa…

> ideas of quality and correctness are important Quality and correctness are important! And AAVE does have and enforce both. If you answered a question like "where be the car?" with "it be on the road" or "it's on the road" when in fact it be in the garage, you would be grammatically incorrect. I bet you have no idea what habitual be even is or how it works. (I didn't) And it all begs the question, why, in the US, is…

> And it all begs the question

Does it beg or prompt the question? I ask because the meaning of the rest of the paragraph changes depending on which one you meant to use.

I am an immigrant in the U.S. I do my best to communicate with everyone else in a common language. It does not matter what the common dialect is at any given time. The benefits of using the common dialect are independent of how it came to be the common dialect.

Re: Raymond Chandler’s guide to street, hoodlum, and prison lingo

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is called relativism and it’s a natural position to take if you think there are no useful prescriptive standards, only descriptions of how people act. I guess that might be appealing for some people, but for others the ideas of quality and correctness are important. Unfortunately this has been mixed up with discussions about race which makes it basically impossible to publicly support any sort of language standa…

It seems to be more or less uniquely an American issue? As far as I know, no-one is going around demanding that people from Yorkshire or Kerry or other places with significant language variation speak standard English. > ideas of quality and correctness What does this mean, for English? For instance, you say "I guess"; that's a neologism, and would probably upset really extreme prescriptivists. Where should the line…

I don’t know enough about the UK to give you an educated answer. It’s my impression that variations are mostly in the accent and vocabulary, not the actual conjugation of verbs like “to be.” Is that correct?

The conflict would be if Kerry dialect speakers started insisting that the BBC write articles in their dialect and not in the society-wide one.

Post reply on HN