this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
326 points (98.8% liked)

Linguistics

550 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!

Everyone is welcome here: from laymen to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.

Rules:

  1. Stay on-topic. Specially for more divisive subjects.
  2. Post sources whenever reasonable to do so.
  3. Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
  4. Have fun!

Related communities:

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 

As W. Labov has passed away, I came across a comment reposting this screenshotted request, along with the paper in question:

https://betsysneller.github.io/pdfs/Labov1966-Rabbit.pdf

The paper is quite a rollercoaster, ranging from describing of disturbingly racist ideas about native Hawaiian and Black children that some scientists still pushed at the time (1970!*), to Labov's own disarmingly cute and humane solution to the issue of testing children's language abilities.

Edit: *1970 - according to the article itself, which is apparently based on Labov's 1970 talk; however, the URL suggests that the article was published in 1966, which is contradictory. I'll try to find out where and when this was actually published...

Edit 2: It looks like it is from 1970, from Working Papers in Communication, vol. 1 (Honolulu: Pacific Speech Association). It is surprising that a recently published book also claims that it's from 1966, probably the authors got the file from the same URL with the wrong year.

Edit 3: The original Twitter thread: https://xcancel.com/betsysneller/status/1516848959284678656

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago

I posted about his passing two days ago, but it gained less traction - https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/33628658 (idk if you can see it on Mastodon)

man probably kept running averages in his head. you come in, he considers your age, class, subculture and diet and is able to predict how you’ll call him

Funnily enough, I have a somewhat similarly problematic name (not in pronunciation, but in declension - it can take up either feminine or masculine endings). The choice is purely regional and predictable, but I'm still glad to hear new examples (and it's also fun to mention the whole issue and hear layman justifications for this or that option).

I wonder what my pronunciation /lə’bʌv/ says about my English, considering it's my second language. It seems like it would be the more common option because it's more likely to be deduced from the written form?