People Give Words Power

by Brittney Gerald

This week’s articles explore the process of linguistic appropriation, the phenomenon in which “speakers of the target language…adopt resources from the donor language, and then try to deny these to members of the donor language community” (Hill 158). This process demonstrates the ways in which language can be used to perpetuate racism and stereotypes. Interestingly enough, in this interview of Jay-Z in Oprah Winfrey’s magazine, the rapper asserts that Hip-Hop music has acted as a uniting force between races, particularly blacks and whites:

“You know, hip-hop has done so much for race relations, even with its ignorance…without directly taking on race, we’ve changed things just by being who we are. It’s difficult to teach racism in the home when your kid loves Jay-Z. It’s hard to say, ‘That guy is beneath you’ when your kid idolized that guy.”

Jay-Z argues that hip-hop—specifically rap—as a lyrical expression of language not only brings different races together, but also helps to prevent racism. Jay-Z is right in that whites have become prominent consumers of hip-hop music: “Sales figures for rap music among middle class white teenagers have sky-rocketed” (Cutler 434). Jay-Z argues further that this increasing white participation in hip-hop culture has helped improve race relations and offset racism. His logic is that parents will have trouble belittling their child’s idol, who might happen to be black. He therefore is arguing that hip-hop’s increasing popularity among white consumers serves to reconcile the dynamic of the “other”. In Kiesling’s article, “Stances of Whiteness and Hegemony in Fraternity Men’s Discourse”, he describes how fraternity men (as well as many others) mark the other. This “discursive metastrategy…situates the speaker as a member of a dominant, or central, White social group by creating a marginalized non-White category” (Kiesling 102). Jay-Z seems to be claiming that rap music challenges this process.

            However, Cutler’s article demonstrates how this matter becomes much more complicated than that. The situation goes beyond the idealistic concept that rap, as a linguistic phenomenon, acts to merely unite the races and repel racism. In fact, the articles show how the opposite effects can, and often do, take place. Cutler concedes that “at first glance one might conclude that young whites embracing hip-hop represents a cultureal rapprochement between blacks and whites and perhaps even the creation of a new multi-ethnic youth culture” (439). However, the article demonstrates how white appropriation of the black vernacular evident in many hip-hop lyrics is often very theatrical and artificial, and lacks a real connection and understanding between whites and blacks. In fact, “hip-hop is increasingly claimed to be a multi-cultural lifestyle rather than a symbol of ethnic group identity, particularly by white adolescents but also by others” (Cutler 435). Consequentially, it “seems to allow whites access to a commodified, ephemeral black experience at various moments or phases of their lives without requiring overt claims of black ethnicity” (Cutler 435). This means that whites are able to “borrow” or “appropriate” black cultural phenomena through hip-hop without laying claims to it. In short, through their appropriation of hip-hop, whites are able to participate in black culture while still maintaining their distance from blacks themselves.

            For example, Cutler describes the case of Mike, who appropriates what he believes to be hip-hop culture to his daily life. However, as he gets older, Mike shifts from an “active identification with African Americans”…to an expression of “resentment toward his African American peers” (435). Mike does not express a feeling of unity, but rather of isolation: “they ‘always hang together’ and ‘separate themselves’ ” (Cutler 435). In this case, and undoubtedly in many others, Mike’s appropriation of hip-hop culture does not ultimately result in unity and improved race relations. In fact, he viewed “himself in opposition to the black community” (Cutler 435). In this case, appropriation ironically acts to perpetuate racial divisions and tensions instead.

            In this video clip of Jay-Z interviewed on the Oprah Winfrey Show, he explains why he feels comfortable using the N-word in his rap lyrics: 

“People give words power…and for our generation, what we did is, we took the word and we took the power out of that word. We turned a word that was very ugly and hurtful into a term of endearment. There’s still intention behind what you say…because if we just start removing words from the dictionary, you can just make up another word the next day. So if we don’t address the problem…the problem is racism. That’s really the problem.”

In this clip, Jay-Z (possibly subconsciously) implies a number of linguistic ideologies. He presents the idea of taking a word and making it your own, similar to appropriation. However, in this case, he expresses the possibility of changing a word’s meaning. The article, “The Linguistic Facts of Life”, by Lippi-Green declares “all spoken language changes over time” (11). Since language changes over time, this proves that it is constructed and not natural or inevitable. Jay-Z argues that rappers “took the power out of that word”, claiming “people give words power”. This again emphasizes that language is constructed, since people give words meaning and power. However, which people have the authority (and, consequentially, the ability) to change words’ meanings? He does not directly address this question, but he seems to be aware that his role as a famous hip-hop artist, along with the others, gives him influential power and a certain level of linguistic authority. Hill asserts that “one of the implications of…linguistic appropriation is that it must involve elites, people with the wealth and power to enforce the reorganization of the linguistic universe” (Hill 159). Jay-Z declares that the real problem is not the N-word itself; it is the racist ideology behind the word. He argues that eliminating words from our vocabulary will not solve the problem of racism, because people can just create another racist word to take its place. Again, he exposes language as an ideological construction. To him, words are just words; what is really significant is the people who give them power. 

            However, Oprah adamantly disagrees with Jay-Z’s appropriation of the N-word. She admits that the word highly discomforts her, because it reminds her of the civil rights era and the blacks who were lynched by racist whites using that term in a derogatory way. Despite Jay-Z’s emphatic argument about people giving words power, Oprah still struggles to detach the word form the hateful ideology it held for many years past. She strongly resists attempts to change the word’s meaning, and promotes eliminating the word altogether. This demonstrates how strongly people hold onto the implications of language and shows how language change is often very gradual due to heated resistance. Their argument shows how words are so deeply embedded within our culture and history, and that change is rarely ever easy. In this case, Jay-Z and Oprah agree to disagree; however, these types of ideological debates continue to dominate linguistic discourse. 

Sticking With What You Know

By Ellen Walsh

In her article “Yorkville Crossing: White teens, hip hop and African American English” Cecilia A. Cutler focuses on Mike, a white 16-year-old boy from Manhattan’s upper east side who is an example of the term wigga.  A wigga is a white boy or girl who uses the African American Vernacular English and displays common practices of African American culture by listening to hip-hop, wearing the typical clothing like baggy jeans and designer sneakers, and backwards baseball cap.  In his everyday speech, Mike would talk “street” or in what is considered to be slang commonly used in hip-hop music and in African American Vernacular English.   Mike also participated in the stereotypical gang activities by adopting a tag name for graffiti, joining a gang and getting into fights and would get in trouble with the police frequently.  Since Mike had much access to the AAVE from living in an urban environment, it was easy for him to be able to pick up on AAVE elements to incorporate into his own speech (although AAVE is accessible through the popularized hip-hop culture seen on the television, internet, and heard on the radio as well as movies that glamorize the gang and ghetto lifestyle). 

Mike tried very hard to be authentic, but because of his background and race he was seen by many to be unauthentic.  The African American Vernacular English comes with a history behind it associated with individual survival as being a member of the lower class, and kids like Mike follow these practices as a lifestyle by choice.  Being born into an upper class lifestyle Mike searched for the gang culture and picked up on this lifestyle that is considered “unnatural” for him by many.  Mike and his friends even discuss that many people who are actually exposed to that culture in the Bronx and Harlem often ridicule many of the kids from the Upper East Side who have adopted the gang culture as their lifestyle.  While Mike believes himself to be authentic and unlike the rest of the Yorkville gang kids, he still experiences this divide because of his race and demographics.  

It is not uncommon for white youth to participate in black youth culture or pick up on stereotypical African American practices.  One of the most common examples of this is being able to hear anyone of any race on a daily basis using AAVE vocabulary by saying words like “yo,” “what up,” or “word.”  But Cutler quotes Tricia Rose in explaining the popularization and appeal of African American youth culture: “[whites are] fascinated by [black culture’s] differences, drawn in by mainstream social constructions [of black culture]…as a forbidden narrative, [and] a symbol of rebellion” (Cutler 428).   Just as with Mike’s case, being a “wigga” is appealing to many because it differs them from the rest of the typical standard of being white.  This difference in lifestyle is often represented in media through various forms.  Hip-hop music appeals to many people because of its association with being “cool.” 

Although many people have an appreciation for this type of music, it is often seen as unauthentic and humorous when someone who is not African American taking on a rapper identity.  When reading about Mike and comparing him to people I know or see in the media who are similar to him in regards to appreciating gang culture, I though of Kevin G and the mathlete rap from Mean Girls.

In this clip of Mean Girls Kevin Gnapoor performs a rap for his high school’s talent show.  Kevin is the head of the mathlete’s club, which is a club that is typically associated with nerdiness and kids who are un-cool.  Kevin adopts the rapper nickname “Kevin G” which is a typical rapper name because of the use abbreviations.  Furthermore, Kevin takes on his rapper identity by depicting himself in his rap as tough and cool, referring to himself as “James Bond III.”  He uses terms and expressions like “ain’t got nothin’ on me” and “can’t touch Kevin G” as well as using crude lyrics.  Kevin has created this persona because of the popular appeal of rap and because he thinks it makes him cool.  Mean Girls is a movie about images and the perceptions of others and oneself, and since Kevin is typically associated with being a nerd, he tries to gain respect by becoming a rapper.  But this scene is shows how humorous it is when someone takes on an identity that is so different from his or her own.  Just like Mike, Kevin tries to be cool but it comes off as rather humorous, just like the concept of being a “wigga” is often humorous as well.

            Another video that plays off of this idea of hip-hop and black culture being considered cool is Smirnoff’s promotional video released in 2006.

The clip is a fake music video by the “Prep Unit” performing a rap called “Tea Partay.”  The video is in the typical style of a rap video, glorifying the lifestyle of the performers, but instead of the typical “gangster” lifestyle, this ad depicts the lifestyle of the white upper class in New England.  With the rappers and trophy girls dressed in preppy attire rapping about sailing on their parents’ yachts, playing croquet, and rollerblading, this video creates another humorous juxtaposition of the preppy white men using rap—a predominantly African American type of music—to describe their extremely white lifestyle.  They use rap in an attempt to be cool, but given the context, it comes off as humorous and ridiculous.

            These examples show that it is not typically accepted in society to adapt or practice a culture that is very different from one’s own.  In the movie Beauty Shop, Alicia Silverstone’s character Lyn experiences this in many ways.  

As a white girl working in a predominantly African American barbershop, she tries to use certain expressions of the AAVE as her co-workers do, but gets shutdown.  As she says “ghetto,” her coworker stares at her in disbelief, and when she is surprised when a woman says the ‘n’ word on the radio, another coworker says that its okay for the radio dj to say it, but not for her.  The environment she works in distinguishes a clear difference between her and her coworkers.  In attempts to try and fit in she is often rejected and is seen as acting stupid and out of place.  This movie portrays Lyn as a wannabe girl and an embarrassment. 

All of these examples portray those who incorporate AAVE and African American youth culture in their life as amusing because of their inauthenticity.  They also depict this appropriation as silly and inappropriate.  But is this appropriation wrong?  Is identifying with a different lifestyle or culture appropriate?

It's a Hard Knock Life (for white males who speak African American Vernacular English)

By Michael Han

In my last entry, I discussed the complexities of Superstandard English, or nerd speak. For this post, I will be focusing on quite the opposite: young white males who “employ linguistic features”(428) of AAVE. A popular name for this group of people, as Cecilia Cutler writes in her case study, Yorkville Crossing: White teens, hip hop and African American English, is “wigga,” or a “white nigga” (429). Aside from typically being kind of annoying and frowned up in society, the “wigga” actually presents a very interesting topic of analysis, which serves as the purpose of this particular entry.

Part 1: Genesis of the Wigga

 Cutler’s case study is centered around an informant, Mike, a white teen who grew up on the affluent Park Avenue and attended private schools his entire life. What do we associate when we think of the words “gangster” or “thug?” Notions of impoverished living in the ghettoes often to come to mind, not fancy brownstones and private school uniforms. This paradox was personally very interesting for me—growing up in suburban, middle class Long Island, I am not unfamiliar with kids who were particularly fond of AAVE and African American culture. I have always been curious—rather, irritated, that they could tout themselves as being “thug” or “street,” returning home each night in their beamers to their mini-mansions.
            Anyways, Cutler opens her discussion by contrasting Mike’s case with another, that of Carla, a 13 year old white girl who also spoke a variation of AAVE. Unlike Mike, however, Carla grew up in a predominantly African American neighborhood in New Jersey. Her speech patterns were attributed to the environment in which she was based (428). How is Mike’s situation explained, then?
            Cutler present several interesting points. She states “Mike’s self-alignment with hip-hop drew on stereotyped conceptions of gangs and African American urban street culture,” a member of a growing “cohort of white, well-to-do teenagers referred to as prep school gangsters” (429). We all know from experience that our teenage years are angst-ridden; they are full of rage and rebellious thoughts towards authority. Living in an upper to middle class life and being schooled in a particularly rigid setting, like a private school with high educational standards and dull uniforms presents an easy construction for teens to rebel against. For one, by altering your persona—whether through adopting AAVE or a certain style of dress, these students are presented with a temporary escape from the dull monotony of easy and affluent upper-middle class life. This also addresses why Black culture is the culture of choice—everything about it, from language to way of dress, stands diametrically opposed to the conception of standard, American English and Culture (white, clean, middle class, etc.).
             Furthermore, perceptions of life on the street are misrepresented by mass media. Movies, like Do the Right Thing and Boyz ‘n the Hood, Cutler writes, served as a medium through which inner city life was broadcasted to those not living in inner-city ghettoes. In most cases this transmission was a glamorized version of what life in the inner city was actually like, which allowed “white teenagers [to] selectively choose to construct their stereotypes about African Americans and hip-hop culture” (434). In regards to music, MTV played a huge role in the dissemination of African American culture (Cutler cites ‘Yo! MTV Raps’ as an example) to many areas far, far away from the actual “streets.” Music videos, which grew in popularity in the late 80s/90s and spread even faster today as a result of websites like YouTube, further perpetuate misrepresentations of black culture—particularly glamorizing the life of someone who grew up on the inner streets:

             Puff Daddy’s Bad Boys for Life is a great example for this entry for several reasons. For one, it portrays the life of a rapper as glamorous and over the top—you get your own tour bus, an entire entourage with convertibles, what appears to be a wheelbarrow of presumably expensive champagne, and of course, an endless supply of buxom beauties (who have nowhere else to be but your Jacuzzi). Who wouldn’t want this life, right? In imitating the speech and dress patterns of rappers, young white males hope to attain the same lifestyles presented in music videos. This video specifically is interesting in that the concept (Puff Daddy moving into the ideal upper-middle class white suburb of Perfectown, USA) refers to the race dynamics I mentioned earlier. The residents (all white) are shocked at Puff Daddy’s presence in their pristine bubble—one woman faints. This acts as a signal to all the rebellious white boys in high school: by imitating the rap stars that they see in the media, these boys find a way to lash out against their oppressors—parents, school, their own socioeconomic statuses.

Part II Orientalism, Hegemony and the invasion of the White man

In all of these examples of misrepresentation and glamorization it becomes apparent that essentially, Black culture is commodified, turned into something commercial and acquirable. It is in this capacity that the  “wigga” phenomenon, if you may, reminded me of many concepts I have come across in my Social and Cultural Analysis classes here at NYU. Particularly, Edward Said’s idea of Orientalism and Antoni Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony (I can hear the groans already) come to mind. To present a very, very basic and watered down explanation of both (the idea of me even trying to delve into every intricacy is a funny one). Hegemony focuses on the dominance that one ruling class exerts over other subordinating classes. Orientalism builds off of this idea, referring to the often prejudiced, outsider Western (the Occident) interpretation of the East (the Orient).

Now, how on Earth did any of that remind me of rap and white boys? In a way, young white males, a group traditionally in power, have misinterpreted the culture of African Americans, a group traditionally being subjected to the power of Whites. AAVE and its speakers are often portrayed as cool and tough. White males want to adopt this persona, wanting to appear cool and tough as well, despite their often-affluent upbringings. In an effort to appear authentic “street,” Mike acted out in several ways—from adopting a graffiti tag to having his arms broken and getting kicked out of school. In relation to music videos, rap artists are portrayed in glamorous environments with extravagant and ridiculous things around them. This further inspires White male, who also want similar life styles, to adopt hip-hop slang and the AAVE. Cutler adds in a note at the end of the case study that online rap dictionaries “defeat the purpose of using hip-hop slang and that the role of rap is not to teach outsiders, but to communicate within their community” (440). It is important to point out that though this lifestyle provides “white access to a commodified, ephemeral black experience at various moments or phases of their lives without requiring overt claims of black ethnicity” (435), that at any time, these White males (the ones not living in impoverished areas, that is) can just as easily shed the “gangsta” persona—they can return (rather, they have never left) to their comfortable lives. They never truly understand the hardships that African Americans living in inner cities actually face daily. Instead, these African Americans merely represent a model that can be replicated, solely linguistically, without having to deal with any real life hardships.
             Furthermore, Mike and his friends were discussing how upset they were that the Black community was not as receptive of White people as the White people were receptive of them. Cutler writes “many young whites feel they have the right to appropriate the hip-hop look and language” (435), playing into the idea of cultural hegemony. Mike and his friends, who come off as victims, are not considering the situation from the other perspective—why do whites have to be included in black culture?  They are subconsciously playing into a cultural notion that whites are superior, and that they are entitled access to all other cultures. In actuality, it can be seen that blacks are truly the victims in this scenario, as their unique culture is being encroached on and invaded.

Part III Portrayal in Media

            Finally, it is very interesting to me to examine how the “wigga” is portrayed in media today, and how this affects our perception of them. To start, let’s look at the following images:

Now, how do you feel? Anger? Confusion? A sense of malaise? Perhaps it may be a combination of all of the above, but it is far more interesting to examine why we feel this way. After all, they are people too—people looking for some outlet of self-expression. Hmm. Well, then there’s this:

 

            A fantastic milestone in cinema history, Malibu’s Most Wanted is a physical manifestation of society’s opinion on the “wigga.” The intricacies of this filme are hard to explain, but the basic plot goes like this: the film’s protagonist, B-rad (His real name is Brad, clever, right?) is so over the top in his attempts to emulate black culture, which immediately places him at odds with both the black and white community. The son of an affluent politician, B-rad wears name brand track suits and drives an SUV, claiming to be a true “gangsta” from the mean streets of Compton. His father, who is up for re-election, is embarrassed and worried that B-rad’s antics will cost him precious votes, so he hires PJ and Sean James, two black Julliard trained actors to pose as thugs and kidnap B-rad, so as to “scare him white.” This plan backfires when real life gangsters kidnap B-rad, PJ and Sean James, disgusted by what they represent—B-rad, a rich, sheltered white kid trying so desperately to be a part of black culture, and PJ/Sean James, who have seemingly rejected black culture, opting to embrace a very white lifestyle by pursuing careers in acting and adopting near hyperstandard English.
            This movie is essentially harping on how white gangsters are often regarded in society—they are looked down upon by both whom they seek to imitate and who they truly are. Perhaps our distaste for this subculture arises from the fact that they represent a form of “otherness,” they are straying from what is regarded as the societal norms. Cutler describes how Mike’s AAVE-influenced speech patterns were “commented on negatively by family members who said he ‘sounded like a street kid or a hoodlum’” (429). Why do parents tell their kids to stop “talking” or “dressing” like a gangster? Again, because it is perceived as being improper—because it is black and not white, it does not ascribe to the dominant societal norm. This again plays into the ideas of cultural hegemony and Orientalism I described earlier. “Whiteness” is so prevalent in American society that it has become a point of reference—if it isn’t orderly, clean or White, it is seen as abnormal. Furthermore, the notion of adopting the persona of an out-group (the “Other”) is in itself an almost moral issue—why would someone from the dominant group (the Occident/West) want to ascribe the beliefs and behaviors of the strange, foreign, barbaric out-group (the Orient/East). Thus, the “wigga” has come to be regarded as a traitor to his own kind—rejected, often hated, by both white and black cultures, he becomes a lone wolf in an unforgiving wood.

As I finish this entry, one interesting question does arise. After examining different aspects and reasons of white males and their use of AAVE, we look back to Cutler’s description of Mike’s friend, a “linguistic role-model” (433), who actually lived in a poor area and served as a “contact with black culture make them a beacon for its promotion ‘amongst white youth’” (434). In comparing Mike and his friend (rich white male/poor white male, affluent neighborhood/poor neighborhood, minimal exposure to African American culture/high exposure to African American culture), is one more acceptable in society? That is to ask, both Mike and his friend speak a form of AAVE, but one has more exposure to black culture, more credibility. Is Mike’s friend less of a poser; is he less of a traitor to his people?

The Grammar Nazi

By Rebecca Kemp

What is the language nerd? How is the language nerd identified and positioned within society? What does it mean to use superstandard English? Mary Bucholtz investigates these questions in her article “The Whiteness of Nerds: Superstandard English and Racial Markedness”. Bucholtz recognizes nerds as “members of a stigmatized social category who are stereotypically cast as intellectual overachievers and social underachievers” (85) and names Bill Gates as an example. The nerd as a cultural category is prevalent within society; known mostly as white males, “the oppositional identity of the nerd becomes as salient for its racialized position as for its sub cultural orientation” (85).

Bucholtz continues in her studies at a Bay City High School where she notes the disruption that the nerd students cause. In “refusing to strive for coolness”, such as refusing to adopt certain African American traditions and speech (which become deracialized and unmarked), nerds “disrupted this ideological arrangement” by being entirely “too white” (86). The nerds speak in a superstandard English vernacular that is characterized by its “greater use of “supercorrect” linguistic variables: lexical formality, carefully articulated phonological forms, and prescriptively standard grammar” (88). Bucholtz additionally notes that the superstandard English employed by the white nerds of Bay City High School frequently goes above and beyond correct grammar into a level of hypercorrect forms. Superstandard English, Bucholtz claims, “is therefore a marked variety that may contrast ideologically both with the unmarked colloquial standard and with marked non-standard English” (88).  While the African American students at the school supposedly spoke non-standard English, the White students spoke colloquial Standard English, and the white nerds spoke an exaggerated form of colloquial Standard English or superstandard English.

Bucholtz noted several different factors in the nerd’s linguistic patterns that lead to the hyperstandard English aforementioned. Firstly, a “precisely enunciated speech style…akin to “reading style”” (92). This hyper form of correctness emphasizes the “secondary link between careful speech and intelligence, via the indexical association of advanced literacy, extensive education, and high intelligence” (92). Additionally, nerds reject slang—especially in the Bay City High School where Bucholtz studied, where “these practices could take on racialized meaning in the context of the ideological black-white dichotomy” (94). This racialized difference separates the nerdy white students and the black students where “nerds’ dismissal of black cultural practices often led them to discount the possibility of friendship with black students” (95). The dichotomy therefore widens considerably not only because of the nerd’s rejection of slang but additionally of cultural worth.

My greatest question after reading Bucholtz’s article was how the nerd is manifested in today’s day with the rise of technology. Gone are the days of letter writing or phone calls—by far the easiest way of communication is the Internet. Whether it’s facebook chat or emailing, technology has completely revolutionized our language and linguistic practices in such an enormous way. Therefore, while I acknowledge the truth and hard evidence in Bucholtz’s essay, linguistic practices have been transformed by the advancement in technology within the last decade.

Enter the Grammar Nazi. Known as an Internet troll, the Grammar Nazi is a person who takes it upon him/her self to correct the grammatical mistakes and faux pas. The Grammar Nazi is similar to the white nerd that Bucholtz describes in their obsession for hypercorrect English, often becoming annoyed when those around them use the incorrect forms.  The Grammar Nazi is a persona extremely familiar to me, and perhaps many other people. One of the most prevalent forms a Grammar Nazi can take is in its Internet trolling: which Encyclopedia Dramatica details as when a Grammar Nazi posts a comment after a lengthy blog post stating “grammatical errors: 5”. This, Encyclopedia Dramatica claims, “will induce abject hysteria as the author attempts to locate and justify the alleged errors. This will invariably bring the author’s Grammar Nazi friends and enemies into the fracas, and many long hours will be spent on overly grandiloquent name-calling and heated arguments about what’s merely a non-standard but acceptable usage and what [is not]."

How does the Grammar Nazi exemplify the revolutionized nerd? Firstly and most prominently it is in their refusal to deviate from the hyperstandard English form. The Grammar Nazi’s attempts to correct the mistakes of others are congruent to the nerd’s hyperstandard English vernacular. Watch the Grammar Nazi in his/her natural habitat:

“Did you really think I was so stupid I wouldn’t recognize a run-on sentence?” the Grammar Nazi officer says, speaking and correcting the other in a manner that can perhaps render him more socially isolated than using the standard colloquial form. The character in the video rejects any form of the English vernacular than the hyperstandard. The Grammar Nazi is reminiscent of the nerd that Bucholtz describes: as I mentioned earlier, the Grammar Nazi uses the same superstandard English that “contrasts linguistically with Standard English in its greater use of “supercorrect” linguistic variables” (88). Perhaps the Grammar Nazi is the new and improved white nerd as another racially and linguistically marked identity.

Mary Bucholtz provides the cultural identity of the nerd within her essay, describing not only their linguistic practices but also the contrasts the nerd draws as a racial identity. The Grammar Nazi embodies many of the qualities of the nerd that Bucholtz describes in their extremely similar language processes and identities. While the Grammar Nazi may not be a cultural identity to the extent that a nerd is (e.g. there are no actual people walking around in Nazi uniforms and calling themselves Nazis but there are certainly people who project a “nerd” identity), it is still an interesting concept to consider when addressing linguistic practices in the modern age of technology.  

Note: I do not endorse being anything related to a Nazi. Please don't.

The Cultural Value of Markedness

By. Kathryn Villaverde

 Acknowledging and confronting the difference between standard English (SE)/ “white talk” and AAVE/BEV/”black talk” is not just the job of linguistics scholars these days, it is everyone’s job.  From popular psedo-news comedy program “The Daily Show” (Daily Show - Blanguage) to classic stand up comedy jokes (Lamar De Sol) to a whole collection of online videos of young men and women pointing out how the distinction between “black talk” and “white talk” has become a problem of culture and identify in their lives (there are links to these later in the post).  These can be seen as cultural responses to the interaction of two linguistic ideologies about race and markedness, one pointed out by Labov and one pointed out by Bucholtz. 

        

In the Labov article Academic Ignorance and Black Intelligence there is a clear and unfortunate delineation between BEV and standard/white English. He bases his whole ideology on the difference and his observation that each has it’s own rules and distinct practice, history, set of meanings, etc. In contrast, most likely due to the large difference in time between the two articles and the cultural blending that has come with that time, Bucholtz writes that, today, “whiteness is separated from blackness in ideology but inextricable from it in practice” hinting at the “cool” standard she noticed at Bay City High School which incorporated many forms of spoken language previously associated only with AAVE but was spoken as a standard by the high schoolers despite race (95).  She points out how the standard form of English spoken by most students actually incorporates “deracialzed” words and phrases from AAVE.  For me this rings true in most of my experiences as a youth in urban America (outside of NYU because here I’ve barely met anyone who speaks anything less than “perfect English”).  The relationship between these two perspectives of white and black language, one of separation and distinction and one of the slow process of blending/blurring, plays interestingly into culture and how the everyday person perceives these processes and comes to mark language. 


From one perspective it’s refreshing to know that the racial borders between AAVE and SE are breaking down and what was once considered deficient and nonsensical dialect of English is now part of the youth standard and must be accepted in schools, at least at the spoken level. But where does this place “marked” and “unmarked” language if they show signs of blending?  How does this affect the racial identities of youth using these deracialized language practices?

           
It seems that now, instead of Labov’s classic racial binaries of language, there is more of a sliding scale so markedness only encompasses the extremes like the “hyperstandard” of the nerds or “advanced ebonix simplex two” identified in this ("Advance Ebonics") interesting and hilarious (not sure if it’s supposed to be funny) video about the distinction between the AAVE of the deep south versus more urban and diverse areas. Awareness of language difference and the weight it caries has moved most usage of AAVE or hyperstandard “from practice to performance” (Bucholtz, 94) such that deviation from the standard is something that is used and manipulated and markedness is the goal instead of unintentionally speaking outside of the standard and having the mark of that language practice be a bad thing.

 When considering the price of deracialized language or blurring racial boundaries between two forms of language that were once completely bipolar and the risks those processes may carry I realized that part of the value of AAVE/ebonics is, and may always have been, the separation it creates.  There seems to be a fear that losing racial iconization of language and henceforth ignoring the history and culture that comes with that iconization also dilutes the culture itself and takes something essential away from the identity of the speaker.  To me, this explained the need of the white nerds to assert their whiteness by using a “hyperstandard” and the need of the black basketball players in North Carolina to assert their blackness by using a form of AAVE even more divergent from SE than typically understood.  The blending of SE or "white talk" and AAVE or "black talk" comes as a threat to some who actually rely on the markedness of a certain way of speaking to form their identity. 

             
Jim Huber points out in a short article titled “An Ebonics Class – Why?” the sickness he felt when he heard about a class at a Louissiana University teaching Ebonics and how most of the students were white or Asian males.  He asks “can you really learn how to communicate with Black people from a class?” under the assumption that the reason the people in the class are not black is because they are people who want to "learn to communicate with and understand black people" (Jim Huber). When his informant tells Huber that she got a B in the class he comments “I guess it isn’t easy being Black or learning how to speak Black, either” in a way that suggests the intangible links between Black history and Black language which cannot necessarily be taught.  There’s not just a race that goes with AAVE but a history.  I thought of the word “nigga” (or other less acceptable variations) which can so easily be thrown into conversations between black AAVE speakers but GOD FORBID a white person uses it (Chris Rock - Can White people say nigger?), no matter what their typical language practices.  The same way we talked about One language – One nation – One people we could say One language – One culture – One people that is threatened by blurring boundaries and borders.


The prevalence of this concern can be seen in the various videos online concerned about the distinction between “black talk” and “white talk”.  For the most part it is young, black, females who point out that their peers hassle them often about “talking white” and, essentially, not staying true to their racial history which is largely defined through language.  Here are a few examples of this concern:

                  - Cut to about 1:30 - video #1

                  -  video #2

                  -   video #3

   -  video #4

  -  video #5


Consistent themes throughout the videos are anxiety about being called "white" because of the way they talk and the extreme importance of staying linguistically true to one's race in the black community.  It is interesting to notice that in all the videos, despite the fact that all of the speakers are black (there are no videos on youtube of any white people being called out for "talking black" and feeling the need to talk about it which is interesting in itself), "black talk" is still defined as something signifying "ignorance", "laziness" and being "uneducated" or not reading books while "white talk" is considered "proper", "clear" and "educated".  The video creators usually made it a point to say that they do not associate the way they or anyone else talks with their race but they do associate a certain way of talking with being more correct or educated but it is their peers who feel threatened by their "white talk".  All-in-all, the whole dynamic these videos present about the conflict of many black youth to speak properly or "correct" yet not be called out by their friends for sounding too white and therefore somehow ignoring or insulting their racial identity says a lot about the progression of markedness. In one situation, Bay City High School, the standard seemed to be a mix of AAVE and SE while the nerds who wanted to embrace their whiteness had to use a "hyperstandard" for of SE to stand-out and create an identity for themselves. In another situation, the clear distinction between AAVE as black and SE as white that Labov pointed out so long ago is still something that is being played with and stands in the back of everyone's mind.  However, this time, the culture and history that comes with AAVE is trying to stay pure and true to itself by sustaining it's markedness.  We can see this playing out in the need for youth to call out their peers when they aren't staying true to their racial language category. 

So, although “talking black” is associated ideologically and culturally with being “uneducated”, “ignorant” and “lazy” it still has value as a representation of a history, a culture and a way of life and if it were to just fade into the “standard” a lot could be lost in terms of identity. People still crave a "people" to identify with in terms of lanugage that does not just have to do with national borders.  However, maintaining the markedness of “black talk” or AAVE as something less-than SE also leads in a negative direction as Labov pointed out some 35 years ago. 

Who can be nerdy?

by Monica Burton

While reading “The Whiteness of Nerds: Superstandard English and Racial Markedness” by Mary Bucholtz and “Academic Ignorance and Black Intelligence” by William Labov, I became keenly aware of the connection between nonstandard language and race. This connection is, of course, obvious in the relationship between the African American children of South Central Harlem and African American Vernacular English in the study featured in the Labov piece. And while it is clear that there is a connection between the hyperstandard English spoken by nerds and whiteness, analyzing this connection further, and its presence in daily life, reveals additional interesting racial dynamics.

At  Bay City High School the nerds are white. Bucholtz says the nerd identity “is racially marked precisely because individuals refuse to engage in cultural practices that originate across racialized lines” and that nerds “instead construct their identities by cleaving closely to the symbolic resources of an extreme whiteness, especially the resources of language” (Bucholtz 2). They employ language to adopt a very specific social identity that works to enforce their racial identities. They do this consciously in deliberate attempts to distance themselves from the cool students and even further from the “hip hop crowd,” or black students. The appropriation of hyper correct English represents a rejection of the black elements in standard youth culture, such as hip hop music and slang.

The nerds in the study admit that they do not associate with the black students, who, if they speak anything close to the AAVE discussed in the Labov piece, must be the polar opposites of these nerds. The hyperstandard English spoken by nerds is marked by the use of what Bucholtz terms “supercorrect” linguistic variables. This includes formal vocabulary, carefully articulated phonological forms and strict adherence to standard grammar. In contrast, the AAVE examined in Labov’s piece is characterized by negative inversion, negative concord, the invariant “be,” and the the use of “it” instead of “there.” What’s more, the students interviewed in the study Labov discusses do not speak in complete sentences, when compared to standard English.

These two pieces present very different subjects whose linguistic identities are tied inextricably with their racial identities and there is no crossover. But because these two studies were presented in conjunction this week, I was reminded of the phenomenon of the black nerd. I say phenomenon, because regardless of the actual intelligence or nerdiness of certain members of the African American population, in popular culture, black nerds are presented as oddities.

The two “nerds” that immediately come to mind are Carlton Banks, from The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, and Steve Urkel from Family Matters. In both of these sitcoms featuring predominantly African American casts, the nerds are outsiders and outcasts. While this classification is due in part to some odd behavior (odd for anyone, nerd or no), with Carlton especially, much of the reason for the characters’ positions as outcasts stems from the way they comport themselves linguistically as well as their nerdy interests, interests shared by the nerds at Bay City High School.
                                                              
For example, in this clip from The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air we see Carlton singing and dancing to his favorite artist- Tom Jones. Carlton rejects African American and “cool” interests through his language and taste in music, just as the Bay City teen nerds do, but is embarrassed by his behavior in front of his cooler cousin, Will, who speaks a less standard form of English than Carlton does.  

The linguistic behavior of the nerd is further exemplified in the character of Steve Urkel. Like Carlton, his interests lie outside of those of the other characters on Family Matters (in this case, polka) and he speaks English differently. His speech is clearly marked, reinforcing his role as the outcast. Like the teenagers at Bay City High School, he uses slang, but it is old fashioned slang, not the cool slang derived from African American Culture. 

The representations of black nerds in these TV shows carry over into live outside of the television screen, namely in the idea that this type of person--the African American nerd-- is an anomaly, to be looked down upon.

I came across this video for an advertisement for a spirit day at a high school. Called “White and Nerdy,” it operates on a few different levels. First, the title implies that white and nerdy are two concepts that can relate to each other, while black and nerdy is not nearly such a natural fit. White is almost equated to nerdy when we see black students in the video dressed up as stereotypical nerds, enhancing their nerdiness, and thus whiteness with glasses, suspenders and button down shirts. To make the video appealing, however, the makers play on elements of African American, cool culture by using the rap song “Ridin’” by Chamillionaire (note that the dropping of the gerund in the song’s title adheres to standard AAVE). The simultaneous use of the cool elements of hip hop culture and the image of whiteness and nerdiness (used together) make the absurdity of the particular spirit theme more apparent. Though whiteness and hip hop culture  exist together in this video, the absurd dress and behavior exhibited by the students make it clear that these identities do not normally exist in real life.

The readings and my examination of the above aspects of cultural identities brought to mind the question of appropriation. When is it okay to adopt the linguistic behavior closely associated to another group? What does it mean when this occurs? And why is it that it is more acceptable for certain people to take on the linguistic characteristics of another group?

It seems that white students are able to appropriate aspects of African American language and culture to a certain extent without ridicule, black students who take on certain aspects of what is deemed “whiteness” may face some derision. Take for example the hypothetical subject of a teenager in South Central Harlem who speaks AAVE. If he were to take on the speech of the students from the Bucholtz study, his peers and family would likely accuse him of snobbishness among other negative traits. In this community (as in the African American communities presented on television) nerd has a negative connotation whereas it is a positive identity for the students at Bay City High School who try to mark themselves as separate from the general high school population through language.

African American English, however, exists in stark contrast to the language spoken by nerds. It is not associated with high levels of intelligence (as seen in the Labov piece), it is considered cool, and, it is acceptable for those outside the race to take on aspects of this version of English,  just enough to adopt the “cool” aspects of the identity associated with it.

Nerd Speak

by Emily Hacala

Standard English is that which is considered to be most correct, neutral, and unmarked. Although there is some debate as to whether this idealized "standard" is written or spoken (or even exists as more than the doctrine of linguistic prescriptivism), the notion that there is a right way and a wrong way to speak is prevalent amongst speakers of English. As a consequence of this idea, there stems a myriad of English varieties that are labeled "incorrect" because of the ways in which they deviate from the standard. Perhaps the most commonly recognized example of this is African American Vernacular English, which is considered by many to not even be a real language because of its supposed lack of grammar, citing copula deletion and use of double negation as a few of the reasons. However, many recognized "real" languages, such as Arabic, do not even contain a present tense copulative verb ("Ana taibana" = "I [am] tired") and in several Romance languages, such as French, it is ungrammatical to not use a double negative, as can be seen in the phrase "je ne sais pas," meaning "I do not know."

The linguistic features of varieties that are racially and culturally marked, such as AAVE, can then become decidedly marked as a result of these preexisting stigmatizations and stereotypes. In the article "Academic Ignorance and Black Intelligence," Labov points out "we are obviously dealing with the effects of the caste system of American society - essentially a "color-marking" system. Everyone recognizes this" (Labov 65). In effect, the linguistic features of the speech of the most prestigious social group (typically white middle-class male) become the most prestigious - usually the standard. Members of less prestigious social groups, then, are marked as being "non-standard," which in turn results in similar prejudices and stereotypes being mapped onto their speech patterns.

Typically, "white speech" is considered to remain unmarked because it reflects the "unmarked status of whiteness" (Bucholtz 84). However, as Bucholtz points out, there is not simply one cohesive group of "whiteness;" rather, there are varying degrees to which a person can be white and speak white, and those that do not adhere to the "correct" degree are racially and linguistically marked as well. For example, one intra-racially distinct white identity, the hillbilly, is "racially and culturally marked because their class orientation and cultural style separate them from the middle-class white norm... hillbillies display a "degraded form of whiteness" (Hartigan 1999:90)" (Bucholtz 85). In this way, many non-dominant white social groups become marked as well, although in my opinion not quite to the same degree at which non-white groups can become marked.

In Bucholtz's article, "The Whiteness of Nerds," she presents an example of "a white identity that is nonnormative, nonhegemonic, and highly marked in the local racial economy. This identity, the nerd, is racially marked precisely because individuals refuse to engage in cultural practices that originate across racialized lines..." (Bucholtz 85). In effect, the nerd is being characterized as "too white" because he rejects "cool" social and linguistic practices, such as styles of dress and slang words or abbreviations. This further contributes to a racial dichotomy because more often than not, the notions of "coolness" in the white culture in Bucholtz's study were taken from African American culture and deracialized. As a result, these deracialized trends become unmarked and available for white students to adopt without the risk of being seen as "racially problematic" (Bucholtz 86). However, the nerd by definition rejects all "trendy" practices, regardless of racial marking.

This video is an example of the "white nerd" as is portrayed in the television series The Big Bang Theory. Sheldon, the white male nerd, is presented as a "social underachiever" (Bucholtz 85); he admits that he is having "difficulty bonding with a colleague at work" and takes a scientific approach (a questionnaire) towards remedying this. Sheldon differs from Penny (his pretty, sociable foil) in his speech patterns with particular respect to lexicon. He makes statements such as "the social sciences are largely hokum" (note: the word "hokum" is typically used synonymously with "nonsense" or "rubbish") or "short of putting electrodes in your brain and monitoring your response to my companionship..." rather than communicating in a more easily understood or commonly used manner. Although Sheldon is not a student, as were the subjects of the white nerd study, this is consistent with Bucholtz's idea that "in rejecting coolness, students who consider themselves nerds signal their distance from the practices and the stances of trendier youth. Instead, they embrace the values of nerdiness, primarily intelligence" (Bucholtz 85). Sheldon, through his language and subject matter, is doing precisely that.

Bucholtz's article also briefly address the concept of the "black nerd." However, this individual is somewhat of a rarity in many situations because of the extreme marked-ness that comes of being a black nerd. While discussing an ethnographic study conducted by Signithia Fordham, Bucholtz comments that "some high-achieving African American students were accused by their black peers of "acting white" precisely because of their intellectual performance... the term brainiac refers to an African American whose display of intellectual ability indicates a capitulation to European American cultural values" (Bucholtz 95). The concept of an intellectual overachiever has become so closely identified with being "hyperwhite" that it is difficult for this identity to apply to non-white people, with the exception of "model minorities" such as Asians.

This article from "the Onion" presents an ironic call for more "black nerds" to be represented in the media, noting that Steve Urkel and Carl Banks from The Fresh Prince of Bel Air were the last that the current generation has seen. The article argues that we need "a new black nerd archetype that more accurately reflects the full spectrum of 21st century American dorkdom." Unfortunately, however, it seems unlikely that this will become a commonality until the nerd identity can be separated from the "hyperwhite" identity.