During the time we've been studying language change there have been some well-publicised controversies about the language and attitudes of media presenters. You can look up the examples of the Sky Sports presenters Grey and Keys or the Top Gear team. You should explore the ensuing debates about 'PC language' to find out the arguments which are being used to criticise and to defend the language used. You have probably expressed an opinion on this yourself!
You could look up previous examples of similar controversies - for example Carol Thatcher or Chris Moyles. If Politically Correct language is about choosing terms which do not insult, marginalise or ignore groups in society, why do some people see complaints about 'non-PC' language in use as a restriction of freedom of speech? Are there restrictions we should be prepared to accept for the sake of other people's freedoms?
'It's a history thing' is often offered as a way of explaining why there still is implicit sexism, racism, ableism in the lexis of English. The Reflecionist model can explain why we have so many negative slang terms for women or no positive slang terms for a lesbian. The Dominant and Muted group theory can illuminate why words which were accepted as 'neutral' in the past have now been challenged as negative or marginalising. The debate is more about whether people should be satisfied to use language which maintains social attitudes that we now consider outdated or unkind.
In your wider reading look for examples of vocabulary that carry value judgements about diferent groups in society. Can we continue to use these words without implying the old values that have become attached to them?
No comments:
Post a Comment