Lesson Using Sources - …teachingwriting.qwriting.qc.cuny.edu/files/2018/07/Lesson-Using... ·...

UsingSources

Time:Oneclassperiod

RequiredMaterials

● EachstudentshouldhaveacopyofUsingSourcesguidelines(forreference;includedbelow)

● EachstudentshouldhaveacopyofUsingSourcesWorksheet(includedbelow)● 5-6copiesofeachofthearticles(includedbelow).

NOTE:ThearticlescomefromanissueofQCVoicesfocusedonBadWriting.Theyreflectthecoursetopic,butalsoreflectthequalityofwritingthatstudentscanreasonablybeexpectedtoemulate.Anyarticleswilldo,though.Ifpossible,makethearticlesavailabletostudentsaheadofclasssostudentswhomayreadmoreslowlyhavetimetofamiliarizethemselveswiththelanguageandideasinthearticles.Thearticlesareformattedroughlythewaystudentessaysshouldbe,withMLA-stylecitationsandWorksCitedpages.ThisismeantonlytoreinforceMLAstyleratherthanthestyleusedbyQCVoices.

DescriptionofActivity

Thisactivityfocusesstudentsonwaystousesourcesintheiressays,promptingthemtoconsiderthepurposesbehindemployingaspecificmethodincontext.

Thelessonbeginswiththeclassgoingoverthebrief,“UsingSources”referencesheet(15minutes).ThisintroducesthethreeconceptsofParaphrasing,Summarizing,andQuoting.

Afterorganizingintosmallgroups,studentspracticeidentifyingthesedifferentstrategiesinaprofessionalessay(15minutes).Byworkinginsmallgroups,studentscanshareideasandlessconfidentstudentshavesupport.Theinstructorcanvisitthegroupstoanswerquestions,measureprogress,andprovokefurtherdiscussion.

Next,thegroupsworktogethertocreateguidelinestohelpthemdecidehowtouseasource(15minutes).Forexample,ifyou’refocusingonaspecificwordorphrase,aquotewillhighlightthatthebest(obvious,butusefulforstudentstoidentify).Or,paraphrasingretainsyour“voice”andshowsoffyourunderstandingofacomplicatedsubjectinawaythatquotingdoesnot.

Theclassendswithaclassdiscussioninwhichalltheguidelinesareputinaclass-widedocument(worksbestinaclassroomwithacomputer/projector,butyoucanalwayswriteguidelinesontheboardandstudentscantakepicturesortheinstructorcanemailatranscribedcopylater)(remainingclasstime).

Assigningchapter2or3fromGraff’sTheySay,ISayafterwardworkswell.

UsingSources

Thereare(generally)threewaystomakeuseofsourcesinanessay:Quoting,ParaphrasingandSummarizing.Eachmethodhasstrengthsandshouldbeusedpurposefullytoemphasizethereasonyouareusingyoursource.

Belowaregeneralguidelinesregardlessofwhetheryouquote,paraphraseorsummarize:

● Sourcematerialcannotmakeyourargumentsforyou.Sourcematerialcanbackupyourpointsorprovidematerialforyoutoargueagainst;therefore,youwilltypicallyintroducesourcematerialandcommentonhowithelpsyouproveyourpoint.Sourcematerialisuselesswithoutcommentarytoprovidecontextandmeaning.

● Chooseimportantorsignificantinformationthateffectivelyrelatestoorsupportsyourpoints.

● Remainfaithfultothemeaningofthesourcematerialthatyouincludeinyourpaper.● Citeappropriately.

Quoting

Usinganauthor’slanguageword-for-word(verbatim).

● Usequotationmarksaroundtheauthor’swords.● Useasignaloridentifyingphrasearoundtheauthor’swords.● Addanin-text(parenthetical)citationattheendofthequotationandincludethesourceon

theWorksCitedpage.Paraphrasing

Puttinganauthor’sspecificideasinyourownwords.

● Useasignaloridentifyingphrasethattellswhoandwhatyouareparaphrasing● Useyourownwordswhenparaphrasing.Inmostcases,avoidusinganyofthesame

wordingthattheauthorusedunlessyouputakeyterminquotationmarks.● Addanin-text(parenthetical)citationattheendofthequotationandincludethesourceon

theWorksCitedpage.Summarizing

Condensinganauthor’sideastoamoresuccinctstatement.

● Useasignaloridentifyingphrasethattellswhoandwhatyouaresummarizing● Useaquickdescriptionofthemainpointsofthepassage● Useyourownwordsandphrasing.Inmostcases,avoidusinganyofthesamewording.● Addanin-text(parenthetical)citationattheendofthequotationandincludethesourceon

theWorksCitedpage.Name:___________________________Date:_______________Onyourown

1. SelectandreadoneoftheRevisionsarticles.Circleallthecitationsinthepiecesothatyouwillbeabletoquicklyrefertothem.

2. Foreachcitation,indicateinthemarginwhethertheauthorquoted,paraphrased,orsummarizedthesource.Ifsentence(s)blendmethods,indicateallthemethodsused.Remember,ifaquotationorparaphrasecontainstheinformationintheintroduction,itmaynotincludeacitation.

Inyourgroup

1. Discussthecitationsyouidentified.Cometoagroupconsensusregardingwhatstrategyisusedforeachcitation.

2. Identifythestrengthsofeachmethodofusingsources.Whatisemphasizedineachmethod?(itmayhelptodoboththisstepandthenextstepintandem).

3. Createguidelinesforwhenyoushouldquote,paraphrase,orsummarize.

Method Strengths Whentouse

Quoting

Paraphrasing

Summarizing

*Youmayusethethespacebelowforadditionalspace*

BreeZuckerman

Badvocacy:WhenAttemptstoChangetheWorldGoAwry

“SaveDarfur”…“OutofIraqandintoDarfur”…“BloodDiamonds”…“Conflict

Minerals.”

Theseareslogansandcatchphrasesfamiliartothoseofusconcernedwithhuman

rightsandsocialjustice,coinedbyadvocacyorganizationsthattrytoachievepolitical

changebyraisingpublicawarenessaboutandmotivatingconcreteactionsonparticular

issues.Duetothenatureoftheirproject—whichistoreachaswideanaudienceas

possible—thewritingtendstobehyperbolic,imbuedwithasenseofurgencyand

impendingdisaster,favoringtheuseofpithyrefrainsandsnappyphrasing.Afterall,the

catchierthemessage,themorelikelyitisthatpeoplewilltakenotice.Theproblemisthat

intryingtobecaptivating,theyoftenprivilegetaglinesoveranalysisandtendto

oversimplifycomplexandmessyissues.Suchstrategiesriskactuallymakingsituations

worseratherthanbetter,leadingtothemonikerbadvocacy,orbadadvocacy—thekind

thatmaybeginwithgoodintentionsbutcanleadtodamagingoutcomes.

AprimeexampleistheSaveDarfurCoalition,anetworkofreligiousorganizations

andothernon-profitsthattriestoraiseawarenessabouttheconflict(genocide,astheysee

it)inDarfur.Itfeaturesastoreonitswebsitewherevisitorscanpurchaseadvocacyattire

orotherparaphernalia,andithashelpedtoinspireacottageindustryofSaveDarfur

products,fromt-shirtsandbraceletstopet-fooddishesandanunfortunatethong.This

emphasisonraisingawarenesstendstoresultinafocusoneffortssuchasboycotts,

divestmentcampaigns,hungerstrikes,eventsoncollegecampuses,andralliesin

Washington,D.C.

TheNewYorkTimescolumnistNicholasKristof,thoughnotaffiliatedwithan

advocacyorganization,isnonethelessengagedinasimilarkindofawareness-raising

project.Hiscolumnstellstoriesofsufferingindividualsinfarawayplacesinordertostirup

compassionamongaudiencesathome;heviewsthisstrategyasthemostlikelywayto

propelpeopletoaction.InaninterviewwithOutsideMagazine,Kristofdiscussestheneed

forhumanrightsadvocatestoengageinbettermarketingtactics,arguingthat“women

havebeenrapedwhenitcouldhavebeenavoidedandchildrenhavediedofpneumonia

unnecessarily—becausethosestorieshaven’tresonatedwiththepublic”(Kristof,“Nicholas

Kristof’sAdvice”).Inacolumninwhichhelamentswhatheperceivestobeapublic

insufficientlymovedbytheconflictinDarfur,hesuggeststhatinfacttoomuchcontextmay

beharmfultotheadvocacyeffort.Hecitesanexperimentinwhichparticipantswereless

likelytodonatemoneytoastarvingchildinMaliwhenherplightwascontextualized

withinthelargerstructuralproblemofpovertyratherthanwhenherstorywastoldasan

individualtaleofsuffering(“SavetheDarfurPuppy”).Kristof’sparticularkindofwritingis

motivatedbyadrivetoraiseawarenessastheprimaryobjective—andatallcosts—which

heusesasajustificationforhyperboleandoversimplification.

Sowhatistheproblemwithbadvocacy?Howmuchharmcananti-genocide

underweardo?Inthebestcasescenario,notmuch.Examplessuchasthethongorthe

recentFastforDarfurcampaign,settobeginonEid—thedayonwhichMuslimsbreaktheir

Ramadanfast—mightrevealasurprisinglevelofinsensitivity,oratleastnaiveté,but

neitherarelikelytobringaboutanydirectpolicychange.However,atitsworse,badvocacy

canleadtoharmfulpolicyorunintendedconsequences,whichisacritiquethatcanbe

leveledatSaveDarfurandKristof’sefforts.Militaryinterventionwasakeydemandofthe

SaveDarfurmovementfromitsinception(hencetheslogan,“OutofIraqandintoDarfur”),

puttingthemovement’sorganizersatoddswithmanyofthehumanitarianorganizations

onthegroundinDarfur.AsDavidRieffpointsoutinaLosAngelesTimescolumn,the

establishmentofaNATO-enforcedno-flyzoneoverDarfur,advocatedbybothSaveDarfur

andKristof,wouldhaveendangeredtheoperationsoftheaidorganizationsthatflyfood,

personnel,andsuppliesaroundDarfur(whereroadsareoftenimpassable),usingplanes

thatcanappearnearlyidenticaltothoseusedbytheSudanesegovernment(“Goodvs.

Good”).Moreover,coerciveinterventionwouldhavelikelyintensifiedviolence,whichhad

alreadybeguntodeclineafteritspeakduring2003-2004,andwouldhaveseverely

restrictedthehumanitarianoperationthathasbeenvitaltothelivesofthousandsof

Darfuricivilians.

TheshrillcriesoftheSaveDarfurlobbypromptedtheUSHouseofRepresentatives

topassaresolutionstatingthatgenocidewasunderwayinDarfur,whiletheUN,after

carefulresearchbytheCommissionofInquiryonDarfur,concludedthattheSudanese

government“hasnotpursuedapolicyofgenocide.”Thisassessmentissupportedbya

numberofacademicswhohavearguedthat,ratherthangenocide,thewarinDarfurisbest

explainedasasetofconflictsoverlandtenurerelations,regionalpolitics,andlocal

governmentreformsthatdisenfranchisedsomegroupswhileprivilegingothers(seede

Waal,Mamdani,Marchal,andTubiana).Moreover,thecategoriesofArabandAfricandid

nothistoricallyexistinDarfuraspoliticallysalient,fixedracialidentities(deWaaland

Mamdani).Thedebateaboutgenocidealsohadunintendedandnegativeconsequences

withinSudan.AsoneseniorUNofficialtoldme,itgalvanizedhardlinersandsidelined

moderateswithintheSudanesegovernment,jeopardizingrelationshipsthatUNofficials

workinginKhartoumhadcarefullycultivatedovertime.

Inaddition,accordingtoSudanexpertAlexdeWaal,theurgencywithwhichthe

SaveDarfuradvocacymovementcalledforimmediateactionhamperedthesuccessofthe

2006peacenegotiations,ofwhichhewasanobserver.AsdeWaalrecountsinProspect

magazine:

AbdelWahidal-Nur,foundingchairmanofthelargest[rebel]group,theSudan

LiberationMovement,isapoliticalingenue,catapultedintotheinternationalspotlightand

flatteredbyhisinstantcelebritystatus….InthefinalsessionofthepeacetalksinMay2006,

AbdelWahiddemandedthattheUSprovideguarantees“likeinBosnia.”Hewantedan

interventionandwouldn’tsignwithoutone.Iwasthere,andmyheartsankasIrealised

thatinternationalDarfuractivistswerenotonlyrefusingtomakethecaseforthepeace

dealthatwasonthetable,butsomewereactuallyphoningtotellAbdelWahidandhis

colleaguesnottosign—becauseofthosemissing“guarantees.”Itwasanimperfect

agreement,butwithAbdelWahid’ssignatureitrepresentedthebeginningofasolution.

WhenAbdelWahidrefusedtosign,theagreementwasdoomedandtheconflictresumed.

(“WhyDarfur”)

AftertheconclusionoftheDarfurPeaceAgreement(DPA),theSaveDarfur

movementpushedfortheurgentdeploymentofUNpeacekeepersdespitethefactthat

therewasnoeffectivepeacetokeep.However,asdeWaalargues,thehurriedmission

actuallyledtoanunderpreparedforcethatdidnothaveanadequateunderstandingofthe

waysinwhichtheconflict,violence,andcharacterofthearmedgroupshadevolvedsince

thesigningoftheDPA(“DarfurandtheFailure”).

KristofhasreceivedcriticismforhisDarfurcoveragefordistillingacomplexsetof

conflictsoverland,resources,andpoliticalpowerintoanoversimplifiedmoralnarrativeof

goodversusevil.AsAfricanStudiesprofessorMahmoodMamdanirightlypointsoutinhis

scathingcritiqueofKristofintheLondonReviewofBooks,theeffectofjournalisticwriting

hasbeen“bothtoobscurethepoliticsoftheviolenceandpositionthereaderasavirtuous,

notjustaconcernedobserver…whereagroupofperpetratorsfaceagroupofvictims,but

whereneitherhistorynormotivationisthinkablebecausebothareoutsidehistoryand

context.”

ReturningtoKristof’sexampleofthehungrychildinMali,onemight(thoughKristof

doesnot)gofurthertosuggestthatthestoryofindividualsufferinginAfricaresonates

withWesternersbecausetheyhavebeenexposedmostlytorepresentationsofsuffering

andpovertyinAfricathataredisconnectedfromacriticalunderstandingofpovertyinthe

contextofglobaleconomicinequalitiesandthelegacyofcolonialexploitation;reproducing

stereotypesofsufferingAfricansallowsthemtofeelgoodabouttheirowncharity.Thus,by

feedingintothesestereotypes,badvocacymightbepreventingtheverykindsofsolutions

thatcouldbegintoaddressthestructuralcausesofconflictandpoverty.MakingDarfura

householdnameaccomplishesnothingifthenewfoundawarenesssimplyreproduces

narrativesthatportrayAfricansashelplessvictimsinneedofbeing“saved”bytheWest

ratherthanasagentscapableofpoliticalactionwithclearandcreativeideasabouthowto

solvesocialandpoliticalproblemsintheirowncountries.Theproblem,itseems,isnotone

ofawarenessintheheartsandmindsofcompassionateWesternpublics,butthechallenge

thathasbedeviledpoliticians,humanitarians,andacademicsalike:themessyandhighly

politicalquestionofhowtoendacivilwarandaddresstheoftenintensepost-warviolence

thatfollows.

Therearecountlessexamplesofhowwritingcanhelptoachievepositivesocialand

politicalchange.However,writingthattriestochangetheworldforthebettermight

actuallybedoingmoreharmthangoodif,inaquesttoraiseawarenessaboveallelse,

contextandcomplexityfallbythewayside.Inwritingtomarketorselltheircausethough

snappytaglinesthatobscuremessypowerrelationsandcomplicatedhistories,some

advocacyorganizationsare,ineffect,creatinguninformedconsumerswhomightthenpush

fordisastrous,orattheveryleastineffective,policies,sincecivilwarshaverarely,ifever,

successfullyendedthroughpolicymakinginWashington,D.C.Overlysimplistic

conceptualizationsofcomplexproblems,whiletheymaysellt-shirtsandmotivatepeople

toattendrallies,mayalsoleadtodetrimental“solutions.”

WorksCited

DeWaal,Alex.“WhyDarfurInterventionisaMistake.”BBCNews,May21,2008.

_________.“DarfurandtheFailureoftheResponsibilitytoProtect.”InternationalAffairs83,

no.6(2007).

Kristof,Nicholas.“NicholasKristof’sAdviceforSavingtheWorld.”OutsideMagazine,

December(2009).

_________.“SavetheDarfurPuppy.”NewYorkTimes,May10,2007.

Mamdani,Mahmood.“ThePoliticsofNaming:Genocide,CivilWar,Insurgency.”London

ReviewofBooks,March8,2007.

ReportoftheInternationalCommissionofInquiryonDarfurtotheUnitedNations

Secretary-General,January25,2005.

Rieff,David.“Goodvs.good.”LosAngelesTimes,June24,2007.

EvaM.Fernández

DidwritingpropelhumanstobecomethedominantspeciesonEarth?

Thinkingabout(beneficentormalevolent)humanplanetarydominationbringsto

mindtheanthropocentricdoctrineoftheancientGreeks.AchorusinAntigonedescribesit

memorably:“Wondersaremany,andnoneismorewonderfulthanman”(Sophocles)So

greatisanthropos,thechoruscontinues,thathe’sgotthepowertocrossthesea,toplow

theearth,andtotamethewildbeasts,amongotherthings.“Speech,andwind-swift

thought,andallthemoodsthatmouldastate”areidentifiedasimportantqualitiesdriving

greatness.(Writingisconspicuouslyabsentfromthatlist.)

Morerecently,philosopherDanielDennetthasdiscussedwhylanguageis“oneof

thegreatcranesofevolution”keytohumandominationoftheplanet.Dennettcitesan

incrediblestatistic:humans(plustheirlivestockandpets)takeupabout98%ofthetotal

vertebratebiomass—comparedto0.1%whenagriculturebegantodevelop,some10,000

yearsago(MacCready5).AccordingtoDennett,languageprovidesthebaseforour

spectacularsuccessinplanetarytake-over:languagepermits“thereliabletransmissionof

semiunderstoodformulas,recipes,admonitions,techniques.”Essentially,whatmakes

anthropossogreatisourphenomenalabilitytouselanguagetotransmitideasovervast

spansofspaceandtime,withunparalleledprecision.(Noteagaintheabsenceofwriting.)

Howdoesthistransmissionofideasactuallywork?SinceIalreadybroughtherup,

considerAntigone’sstory.Byburyingherdeadbrother,shechallengesadecreebyKing

Creon,butnotwithouttriggeringtragicconsequences(Sophocles).Creonsentences

Antigonetodeathbyentombmentinacave,whereshecommitssuicide;Antigone’ssuicide

drivesherboyfriendHaemontodeathbyhisownsword,andHaemon’ssuicideprovokes

Eurydice—Creon’swife,Haemon’smother—tokillherself.WecanlearnaboutAntigoneby

goingtoaperformance,readingtheplay,orwatchingthefilm,andthemessagesaboutcivil

disobedienceandtheconsequencesoftheabuseofpowercomeacrossascrisplynowas

theymighthaveduringSophocles’lifetime.Inthiscase,writingensuredthepersistenceof

thestorythroughtime.Butinformationtransmittedovertimeneednotbewrittenor

widelyknownorevenimportant:youmightknowagreatdealaboutthatrelativeyouhave

nevermetwhoplayeddrumsforanElvisimpersonatingband,oraboutthatfriendofyour

sister’swhomarriedrichandbecameayoungwidowundermysteriouscircumstances.

Informationuptake(frombooks,websites,liveexperts)alsoempowersordinarypersons

tolearnaboutextraordinarythings:photosynthesis,acousticphonetics,planetarytakeover

tactics.Theinvolvementofwriting,thoughfrequent(andhighlyadvisable,especiallyfor

themorecomplicatedtopics),issomewhatoptional.

Infact,transmittingknowledgeispossible(andswift,andhighlyefficient)because

ofthespecificityaffordedusbyourlinguisticcompetence.Thevisualartsandmusiccome

closetohelpingustransmitinformation,butworksofartinviteinterpretationsthatare

sometimesnottruetotheoriginalintent(soinformationuptakeisnotreliable),and

encodingthoughtsusingartormusicrequiresexpertisebeyondthecompetenceof

ordinarypeople.Admittedly,someworksofartconveyveryspecificnarratives.Oneofmy

favoritesisBotticelli’sdepictionofthestoryofNastagiodegliOnesti,fromthetalesofThe

Decameron.Gazingatthehair-raisingimagesonthethreepanelshanginginElPrado,I

havecomeupwithmanystoriesaboutthephantasmagoricalchase,storiesthatdon’tcome

closetoBoccaccio’sdelightfullygrotesquenarrative.Thesamelackofspecificityappliesto

musicalcompositions.Evenriffsevocativeofexactideasresistuniqueinterpretations,as,

forexample,thefirstfewbarsofBeethoven’sFifthSymphony,“da-da-da-dum,da-da-da-

dum”:“Deathisknockingatyourdoor”?“You’vegotanotherthingcoming”?“Vfor

Victory”?

Ihavehintedthatlanguage—andnotwriting—isbehindhumanplanetary

domination,butwhynotwriting?Becausewritingissubsumedunderlanguage;to

understandthis,weneedmorespecificityaboutwhatwemeanbywriting(andwhatwe

meanbylanguage).Writingturnsouttobeahighlyambiguousword;itcouldrefertoa

profession,artisticcomposition,writtenlettering,ortext.Forourpurposes,writingisthe

systematicrepresentationoflanguageusingvisualmarks;thereaderisencouragedto

ponderwhetheranyofthoseothersensesofwritingmakeforamorecompellingwayto

thinkaboutplanetarydomination(Coulmas115).

Andwhatislanguage?Languageistheabstractmentalsystemwehumansuseto

connectideaswithsignals.Assuch,languagefacilitatescommunication,eventhough

languageisnotcommunicationitself(thinkhowmanytimesyouhavesaidsomethingthat

failstogetyourmessageacross,orhowmanytimesyouhaveconveyedamessagewithout

utteringaword;thinkalsoBotticelliorBeethoven).Norislanguagethoughtitself(think

aboutcoffee,forexample,andyouwillinvokenon-linguisticthoughtsaboutitsaroma,

texture,andtaste),thoughlanguageisaterrificwaytogetone’sthoughtsexpressedinthe

realworld—andtomanipulatethoughtsconsciously.Twopartsofthisdefinitionof

languagemightbeunfamiliar:noticetheclaimofspecies-specificity(nootheranimalshave

alanguagequitelikeours),andnoticethatlanguageisdescribedasapropertyofthemind

(thebrain,really).

Givensuchawaytothinkaboutlanguage,writingisbutonetypeofsignalor

encodingmediumforlanguage;anothersuchsignalisspeech.Despitetheircommon

source,writingandspeakingdifferinsomeimportantrespects(Crystal5).Speechhas

temporallimitations,soitpermitslittleconsciousplanningorrevision;notsoforwriting,

whichcanbepremeditated,carefullycrafted,andheavilyedited.Speechprompts

spontaneousresponsesfromthehearer,whilewritingdoesnotallowthereader

comprehensionchecks,clarificationqueries,orexpressionsofdisbelief(notinanyway

thatthewriterwillnotice).Anotherdifferencebetweenspeechandwritingliesintheir

origins.Speech,thedefaultencodingmediumforlanguage,isdeterminedbyourspecies-

specificbiology(ourhighlyspecializedvocaltract),evidenceofwhichbeginstoappearin

thefossilrecordofarchaicHomosapiens,around500,000yearsago(Fitch789).Writing,

incomparison,hasexistedforonly5,000years,inventedbytheSumeriansforthevery

unexcitingpurposeofkeepingagriculturalrecords(Sampson,1985).Themechanicsof

speechhavenotchangedformillennia,andareidenticalforallspokenlanguages.Writing,

incontrast,hasundergonesignificanttransformationsasithasbeenrefinedbyscribes,and

variessubstantiallybetweenlanguages.

Bothspeechandwritingencodethoughtsvialanguage,buttheirphysicalproperties

bearlittleresemblancetoeitherthethoughtsorthelinguisticunitstheyrepresent.Let’s

illustratethiswithanexampleofasentence(anditsaccompanyingthought),writtenand

spoken:2

Creonhaditcoming.

Yourmentallanguageprocessingmechanismsdecodeeachsignalalmost

instantaneously,lettingyouinonwhatIthinkaboutCreon’sloss.Bothsignalscontain

enoughinformation(visualoracoustic-phonetic)tohelpyourecoverthelinguisticunits

thatmakeupmysentence:thecontentwords,thefunctionwords,theinflectional

morphology,andthesyntacticrelationsbetweenthem.

Bothsignalsarefar-removedfromthethoughttheycarry,andfromthelinguistic

unitstheybear.Thewritingconsistsof16letters(plusaperiod),takingupabout96square

millimetersofspaceonthepage.Thespeechconsistsofsome1280millisecondsof

continuousphonationinterruptedbysilenceorhigh-frequencynoiseinacoupleofplaces,

withafundamentalfrequencystartingoutat220Hzgraduallydecliningto85Hzatthe

creakyendoftheutterance.Bothsignalsindirectlyreflectthephonologicalformofthe

sentence,butonlythewrittensignalindicateswordboundaries,andneithersignalshows

syntacticrelations.(Andyetthesyntaxiscrucial:ComingithadCreonmakesnosense,

becauseyoucan’tcomputethesyntacticrelationsbetweenthewords.)

Thedigitalrevolutionpromises(orthreatens)advancedflexibilityforinformation

transmissionoverspaceandtime,comparedtoregularspeechorwriting.Innovationslike

videomashupsblurstandarddistinctionsbetweenwritingandspeech,andremindusthat

language(andnotjustspeech,ornotjustwriting)underliesourpowerfulabilitytoencode

anddecodethoughts,passonourexpertise,andcomfort—ordestroy—oneanother.Asfor

thepersonwhousesthisamazingskillforevilpurposes,thechorusinAntigonerightly

proclaims:“Nevermayhesharemyhearth,neverthinkmythoughts!”

WorksCited

Coulmas,F.,Writingsystems:anintroductiontotheirlinguisticanalysis(Cambridge,UK:

CambridgeUniversityPress,2003).

Crystal,D.,Speakingofwritingandwritingofspeaking.LongmanLanguageReview

(1995):5-8.

Dennett,Daniel.“Darwin’s‘strangeinversionofreasoning,’”ProceedingsoftheNational

AcademyofSciences106(2009):10063.

MacCready,P.B.“AnambivalentLudditeatatechnologicalfeast,”Designfax(August1999.)

Sophocles,Antigone,trans.R.C.Jebb,translator,ed.D.C.Stevenson.

W.T.Fitch,“Theevolutionoflanguage:acomparativeperspective.”InM.G.Gaskell,Ed.,

TheOxfordHandbookofPsycholinguistics(Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress

2005),787-804.

BreeZuckerman

YourDataIsNotYourOwn

I’msorrytosay,butnoneofthestatusupdatesorcommentsornotesorchatsor

emailsyou’veeverwrittenonFacebookareyours.Youmighthavetheabilitytodelete

themfromyourwallorinbox,butthatdoesn’tmeanthey’regone.Rather,Facebook—and

byextensionanynumberofthird-party“partners”—ownthem,foreternity,iftheyso

choose.There’sareasonwhyFacebook,acompanythatdoesnotturnaprofit,wasvalued

atamind-boggling50billiondollars.It’sworthisinitsnetwork,anditsnetworkis

comprisedofourinformation,whichisreallybitsofourlives.

ColumbiaUniversitylawprofessorandFreeSoftwareFoundationlawyerEben

Moglenexplainsatarecenttalk,“[Zuckerberg]hastoaremarkableextentsucceededwitha

verypoordeal:namely,IwillgiveyoufreewebhostingandsomePHPdoodadsandyouget

spyingforfree,allthetime….It’saterrariumforwhatitfeelsliketoliveinapanopticon

builtoutofwebparts”(“FreedomintheCloud”).Thesamegoesforotherfreeservices,

suchasGmail,Googlecalendar,oranyother“cloud”computingservice(thatis,thosein

whichusers’dataisstoredonserversandisaccessiblefromanycomputerwithanInternet

connection).AndasMoglenpointsout,theprivacyweshouldbeconcernedwithisnotjust

theoneortwothingsyoudon’twantotherpeopletofindout;itisthebitsandpiecesof

datacollectedfromfreeemailclients,socialnetworkingsites,Internetsearchengines,

wirelessservices,togetherwithourcreditordebitcardpurchases,whichwhencombined,

provideanunsettlinglydetailedpictureofourhabitsandlives.

Thedatathatisculledfromthesesourcesissoldtodatawarehouseswhereitis

aggregatedandthenresoldtoanyonewhowantstobuyit.Oftenthismeansmarketers,

whichresultsinmorejunkmail,inbothyourinboxandmailbox.Butifthisdoesn’t

concernyou,therearemoreseriousimplications,suchashowemployersandinsurersare

increasinglyusingthisdatatomakeimportantdecisionsaboutprospectiveandcurrent

employeesandcustomers.Employerscanpurchasedataaspartofabackgroundcheckand

insurancecompaniesareincreasinglyusingittoratecustomers’healthandlikelylongevity

inordertomakedecisionsaboutpolicycostsandoffers.

Inaddition,notonlydobanksselldata,buttheybuyit,too.Those“specialoffers”

thatfindtheirwaytopeopleinfinancialtroubledon’thittheirtargetsbyaccident;they’re

theproductofcarefuldataminingandcustomerprofilingtodeterminewhoismostlikely

totakeonnewdebt.CreditbureaussuchasEquifaxhavebeensellingpersonalfinancial

profilesthatincludename,address,socialsecuritynumber,education,maritalstatus,and

consumerhabitstobanksforyears.Manysub-primemortgageofferscamefrombanks

marketingtheseloanstopeoplewhowereprofiledthroughdataminingandthentargeted

forthepredatoryloans.

Whilepersonalprivacyandfreedomfromunwantedspyingisonesideofthisissue,

anotherispoliticalfreedom.ConsidertheroleofsocialmediaintherevolutionsinTunisia

andEgypt.Whetherornottheuprisingswouldhavehappenedwithoutsocialmedia,itis

nonethelessindisputablethattheywerewidelyusedbyprotestorganizers.However,

whileTwitterandFacebookwereusedasakindofvirtualpublicsquare,theyaremost

definitelynotpublicspaces,whichwouldrequirethattheirinfrastructureisnotownedand

controlledbyaprivatecompanythatalsoownsthecentralizedserversthatstoreallthe

information(Tufeki22).UniversityofMaryland,BaltimoreCountyprofessorandsocial

mediascholarZeynepTufekcilikensittoashoppingmall,wherethebuildingsand

walkwaysareownedbyaprivatecorporation.Eventhoughitmayfeellikeapublicspace,

itisinfactentirelyprivate,andasaresultfreespeechisonlyasfreeasthemallowner

decidesitis.Likewise,governmentscanblockInternetaccessbypressuringthe

corporationswhoprovideit,andactivistsmusthopetheironlinedataisnotbeingshared

bygovernmentswithmoresinistermotivesthanmarketing.AsMoglenputsit,“therearea

lotofEgyptianswhosefreedomnowdependsupontheirabilitytocommunicatewithone

anotherthroughadatabaseownedforprofitbyaguyinCaliforniawhoobeysordersfrom

governmentswhosendorderstodisclosetoFacebook.”(“WhyPoliticalLiberty”).So,

beyondtheprivacyimplicationsdiscussedearlier,therearequestionsnotjustabout

freedomofspeech,butabouthowthevastrepositoriesofinformationonsocialnetworking

servicesmightbeusefultoaninterestedgovernment.AndhereI’mnotjusttalkingabout

thegovernmentsofEgyptorTunisia,butourown.EvenastheObamaadministrationhas

praisedtheroleoftheInternetintheEgyptianuprisinginJanuaryofthisyear,theUnited

StatesDepartmentofJusticesubpoenaedTwitterforinformationonWikiLeaksfounder

JulianAssangeandfourotherindividuals,includingIcelandicMPBirgittaJónsdóttir.We

onlyknowaboutthiscasebecauseTwitternotifieditsusersofthesubpoena,whichimplies

thatothersocialmediasiteslikeFacebookcouldhavealsobeensubpoenaedbutsimply

chosenottonotifytheirusers.

OneofthemanythingsthatthisbacklashagainstWikiLeaksdemonstratesisthat

theInternetisinfactnotasfreeandopenasweoftenassume.Itdidnottakelongfor

corporationstorespondtotheoutrageoverWikiLeaksbydenyinghostingservices

(Amazon)andpayments(PayPal,Visa,andMasterCard)totheorganization.Whilethe

architectureoftheInternetnonethelessallowedWikiLeakstocontinueoperatingthrough

mirrorsitesandalternativepaymentarrangements,thisopennessissomethingthatwe

cannottakeforgrantedandneedtodefend.Thismeansclearlyunderstandingwhich

technologiesaregenuinelydesignedtoencouragecreativity,freedom,andcontroloverour

owninformationandwhichonesallowfortheirrestrictionbasedonthewhimsof

corporationsandgovernments.

WhileIarguedearlierthatwe,asindividuals,shouldbeconcernedaboutprivacy,

thesamemightbearguedregardingstates,whichwasindeedthewaytheuproarabout

WikiLeakswasframed.However,asTufekciandothershaveargued,democratic

governmentsdon’thavethesamerightstoapublicandprivateselfasindividualsdo,and

whentheyarelyingtothepeopletheyaresupposedtorepresent,itisthedutyofafreeand

independentpresstoshinealightintothesedarkcorners.Thisfundamentalfoundationof

democraticgovernmentislaidoutinthe1971SupremeCourtcaseupholdingtherightof

theNewYorkTimestopublishthePentagonPapers.Inhisopinion,JusticeStewarturged

thegovernmenttoavoidsecrecyforitsownsake:“Wheneverythingisclassified,then

nothingisclassified,andthesystembecomesonetobedisregardedbythecynicalorthe

careless,andtobemanipulatedbythoseintentonself-protectionorself-promotion.I

shouldsuppose,inshort,thatthehallmarkofatrulyeffectiveinternalsecuritysystem

wouldbethemaximumpossibledisclosure,recognizingthatsecrecycanbestbepreserved

onlywhencredibilityistrulymaintained.”Stewart’sopinionisworthquotingatlength,in

lightoftheextremerhetoricdemonizingWikiLeaksandcallingforAssange’shead.

Itisironicthatgovernmentsvigorouslydefendtheirprivacy—inmanycases

definedastherighttolietocitizens—whilewearegivingupoursforfree.Whatthis

meansisthatweneedtodefendanInternetwithadecentralizedarchitecturecontrolledby

usersandnotcorporationsorgovernments.SuchanInternetwillallowforanonymityand

privacy;itwillensurethatactivistswholeveragewebtechnologiesforthepurposesof

defendingtheirrights,holdinggovernmentsaccountabletotheirpeople,andstrugglingfor

bettersocietiesareabletodosototheirfullpotentialwithoutdependingonthegood

gracesofcorporationswhointurndependonthegoodgracesofgovernments.However,

evenforthosewhoarenotinterestedintheactivistpotentialoftheInternet,considerthat

weexpectprivacyinmanyaspectsofourlives,fromourintimaterelationshipstoour

consultationsindoctors’offices;whynotdemandthesameonline?

Therearesomealternativetechnologiesunderdevelopment,includinganopen

sourceversionofTwittercalledidenti.cathatdoesnotstoreusers’dataonacentralized

server,andDiaspora,whichisanalternativetoFacebook,currentlyinAlphaversion.

Finally,MoglenrecentlyannouncedtheFreedomBoxproject,whichaimstoleveragethe

originalpeer-to-peerarchitectureoftheInternetsothatinformationisnotstoredona

centralizedserverownedbyathirdparty.Rather,theFreedomBoxisa“plugserver,”or

smallpersonalserveronlyafewsquareinchesinsizethatrunsafree,opensource

operatingsystem.Itallowsforanonymityandprivacybecauseanydataisstoredonthe

user’sowncomputer,whichshecanstore,encrypt,ordeleteatherownchoosing.

IwanttoendbysayingthatI’mnotarguingfromthepositionofaprivacypurist.I

haveGmail,Facebook,Twitter,Dropbox,andEvernoteaccounts.Iuseappsonmysmart

phonethatIknowaregatheringdataaboutme,andwhileIoftenusethesearchengine

Scroogle,whichstripsawaytheidentifyinginformationthatGooglesaves,Isometimesget

lazyandusetheconvenientGooglesearchboxinmybrowser’stoolbar.However,themore

Ilearn,andthemoreIbegintoconsiderjusthowmuchvaluableinformationIamgiving

away,themoreIamslowlychangingmyhabits.AsMoglenpointsout,conveniencecomes

atacost—acostwhichIamincreasinglyunwillingtopay.

WorksCited

Moglen,Eben“FreedomintheCloud:SoftwareFreedom,PrivacyandSecurityforWeb2.0

andCloudComputing.”TalkgivenattheInternetSociety,NewYork,NewYork,

February5,2010.AccessedJanuary19,2011,

Moglen,Eben“WhyPoliticalLibertyDependsonSoftwareFreedomMoreThanEver.”Talk

givenatthe2011FOSDEMConference,Brussels,Belgium,February5,2011.

AccessedFebruary23,2011,

NewYorkTimesCo.v.UnitedStates,403U.S.713,44F.2d544.AccessedFebruary13,

2011,

Tufekci,Zeynep“WikileaksExposesInternet’sDissentTax,notNerdSupremacy,”The

Atlantic,22December,2010,(accessed19January,2011)

RaymondPun

TheRiseofCyberfeminism2.0inIran?

Asthedigitalrevolutionpervadestheworld,theexchangeoffeministthoughtand

genderpoliticsamongcultureshasincreasedexponentially.Thetermcyberfeminismis

ambiguousandoftendifficulttodefineasa“singletheoryorfeministmovement”butit

couldbeviewedasa“rangeoftheories,debates,andpracticesabouttherelationship

betweengenderanddigitalculture”(Daniels101).Here,IexaminehowtheInternethas

incubatedcyberfeministthoughtandinspiredinternalfeministmovementsinIran.Idraw

ontwocases—blogsandInternetdatingservicesites—toaddresshowthecyberworldis

emergingasanimportantvehicleforIranianwomentopursueamoreactiverolein

expressingtheirchoices,rights,andfreedoms.

Accordingtosome,therightsofIranianwomenarerestrictedinvariousaspectsof

thepublicsphere;manywomenfeelunabletopubliclychallengeandaddresssocial

barriersforfearofostracismorpunishmentbytheirgovernment.Aftertherevolutionof

1979,theIraniangovernmentreintroducedandreinforcedstricttheocraticlawsand

regulations.Althoughthegovernmentencouragesyoungwomenandmentoobtainhigher

education,somewomenstillfeelthattheircivicrightsareundermined(Raghavan).

However,withtheexpansionoftheInternetandsocialnetworkingtechnologies,

Iranianwomenincreasinglyuseonlinedevices,accessedintheprivatesphere,toexpress

theirfeelingsmoreopenlyandtochallengenotionsofpatriarchy.Inthisway,theInternet

couldbesaidtoallowparticipantstoexpresstheirconcernsmorefreely;the“absenceof

thephysicalbodyinelectronicspaceandtheanonymitythisoffershavealiberatingeffect

onrepressedsocialidentitiesas‘electronictechnology’becomes‘atoolfordesignoffreely

chosenidentities”(Nouraie-Simone61).ForFereshtehNouraie-Simone,theInternetcan

revealaglimpseoftheworldby“openinganewhorizonfordialogue,self-expression,and

dissidentvoices”forthosewhoareunabletoexpresstheirconcernsina“controlledsociety

undertheocraticrule”(62).Withtheadventofweb2.0technologies,morepeopleare

recreating,reinforcing,andsharingtheirsocialidentitiesandinterestswithothers,as“the

Internetisamediumofempowermentthatbypassestraditionallyimposedgenderidentity,

roles,andimagesofsubordination”(62).Asblogscontinuetogrowinnumber,some

womenusethisnewforumtodiscussdomesticaffairs,male-femalerelations,gender

boundaries,andother“taboo”topics(70).

WithintheIranianblogosphere—or“Weblogistan”asitissometimescalled—

womencanusepseudonymstowritesocial,political,cultural,andliterarycritiquesand

discoursesinFarsi.“Throughboldnarrationintheirblogs,[women]unveiled‘thehidden

woman,’suppressedbythetraditionsofIraniansociety,andrevealfirst-handinformation

aboutthemselveswhichhadneverbeentoldpublicly”(Amir-Ebrahimi91).Withthis

exchangeofideas,accordingtoNouraie-Simone,“agrowingnumberofyoungwomen[are]

choosingtheirownspousesratherthanacceptingtheirparents’choice.Morewomenare

notmarrying,andamajoritylooksatworkorcareerasthewaytofurtherindependence”

(Nouraie-Simone75).Someanonymousfemalebloggersalsoexpresstheirpersonal

discontentregardingtheirmarriagesanddresscodes(Nazila).Bloggingisacommon

activityamongmanysocietalgroupsandcontinuestoserveasamediumforself-

expressionandexchangeofresourcesandideasforwomen.

InternetdatingsitesmayalsocreateacomfortzoneforsomeIranianwomen.In

Iran,menandwomenarephysicallysegregated;interactionbetweenthesexessuchas

casualdatingishighlyrestricted.Withtheriseofcyberdatingservices,womencanmeet

menonline,overstepconstructedboundaries,andfindpotentialsuitors.Membersofthe

IslamicRepublicalsogivetheirapprovalforcyberdatingservicesbecauseitservesasa

matchmakingsite(Collins51)Theseservicesincludemuslimmatch.com,shaadi.com,and

salaamlove.comandsubscriptionssubstantiallyincreaseeachyearonthesesites(51).

AccordingtoCharlotteCollins,“[Internetagenciessuchascyberdatingservices]empower

Muslimwomentoputforwardcandidatesforparentalapprovalinsteadofrelyingwholly

ontheirfamiliestoselecttheirfuturehusbands”(51).

TheInternetcanhelpgenerateopportunitiesforIranianwomentoshareideason

socialbehaviorsandtheirexperiences.Somewomenusetheseopportunitiestoaddress

andcounteraspectsofgenderinequalityorsocialbarrierstheyfeelhaveobstructedtheir

rights.TheInternetandsocialmediatoolshavehadaprofoundimpactontheexchangeof

discoursesandideas,andthecyberworldmaycontinuetoinspireandgalvanizenewdigital

movementsforwomentoconfrontandaddressgenderboundaries.

WorksCited

Amir-Ebrahimi,Masserat“TransgressionintheNarration:TheLivesofIranianWomenin

Cyberspace.”JournalofMiddleEastWomen’sStudies.4,no.3(2008)91.

Collins,Charolette.“ModemLove:HowtheInternetHasRevolutionisedRomance.”Art&

Thought:FikurunWaFann.No.86(2007).51.

Daniels,Jesse.“RethinkingCyberfeminism(s):Race,GenderandEmbodiment.”Women’s

StudiesQuarterly.37,no.1/2(2009):101.

Nazila,Fathi.“TabooSurfing:ClickHereforIran…”TheNewYorkTimes.4Aug.2002,4.

Nouraie-Simone,Fereshteh.“WingsofFreedom:IranianWomen,IdentityandCyberspace.”

OnShiftingGround:MuslimWomenintheGlobalEra.Ed.FereshtehNouraie-Simone.

(NewYork:FeministPress,2005)61

Raghavan,Sudarsan.“RoleofWomeninIranProtestsKindlesHope;FemaleMuslims

AbroadSayTheyDrawInspirationforOwnStruggleAtHome.”WashingtonPost.28,

Jun.2009:A1.

CarolinaBarrera-Tobón

LanguageVariationandChange:WhyWeShouldn’tFeartheInevitable

Inthewell-knownCingularcommercialabout“myBFFJill”amothercomplainsto

hertween-agedaughteraboutherexcessivetexting.Thedaughterrespondstothemother

inwhatwecall“textspeak”whilesubtitles,correspondingtotheseriesofacronymsand

abbreviationsthedaughterisusing,appearatthebottomofthescreen.Wittyand

successful,thiscommercialrepresentshowmanypeopleperceivetheyoungergeneration

ofEnglishspeakers(andwriters)inthiscountryandpokesfunataveryrealfear:justhow

muchcantechnologyaffectthelanguagewespeakandwrite?Theseconcernsoften

manifestasintoleranceandrejectionofmodernlanguageforms.Peopleconcernedabout

theeffectoftechnologyonlanguageappealtoargumentsinvolvingmisspellingsandthe

lackofpropergrammar,andtheyadvocatetheprotectionoftheEnglishlanguagefrom

impuritiesthatwilltarnishitanddumbitdown.Theseargumentsusuallyreceivealotof

attentionandsupport,andstrangely,theseconcernstranscendanyandalleducational

boundaries.Manypeople,itseems,areconcernedaboutthemodernstateandfluctuation

oflanguage.Manypeople,thatis,exceptforlinguists(oratleastthislinguist).Those

whoseveryjobitistostudylanguagearenotlosingsleepoverthefateofEnglishandits

portendeddemise.Why?Becauselinguistsrecognizethatlanguagechangeiscompletely

normal.InmylastRevisionspieceIwrotethatRamónMenéndezPidal,afamousSpanish

philologist,describedlanguageasariverwhosecurrentweconstantlyattempttosuppress

(5).Inotherwords,languagechange,likeariver’scurrent,isnormalandunavoidable.

Thestandardizationofmodernlanguageshassuppressedalotoflanguagechange.

Ifwelookbackattextswrittenbeforethestandardizationofmodernlanguages(circa

1500)wefindhugedifferencesinthespelling,grammar,andlexiconofdifferentwritersof

thesameera.Regardlessoftheperceivedthreattotheintegrityoflanguage,thelinguistic

changesthatwearewitnessingarenodifferentfromthechangesthattheso-calledpure

Englishlanguagehasundergoneinthepast.Englishhasborrowedmanywordsand

expressionsfrommanylanguagesthroughouthistory;sometimeslargenumbersofwords

wereborrowedfromaspecificlanguageasaresultofperiodsofculturalcontactwith

speakersofotherlanguages.Forexample,theNormanConquestofEnglandin1066

broughtaninundationofNormanFrenchwordsandexpressions.Thisisjustoneofmany

historicalperiodsduringwhichtheEnglishlanguagewasshapedbytheculturalneedsof

itsspeakers.Infact,it’sironic,inmyopinion,tothinkthatwearetryingtopreservethe

“purity”oftheEnglishlanguagewhenitisbynomeanspuretobeginwith:theamountof

borrowedwordsinEnglishindicatethatitwashistoricallyalinguisticCasanova.

Thesemodificationsandadditions,however,arenotuniquetoEnglish;they

exemplifydiachronicandsynchroniclinguisticprocessesthatarecommonamongmanyof

theworld’slanguages.Thesechangeshavebeendocumentedforcenturies,andthey

representtheculturalandcommunicativeneedsofasociety.Itwouldbeunrealistic,then,

toexpectthatnewtechnologicaladvancesandtheneedtocommunicateaboutnew

technologywouldyielddifferentlinguisticresultstoday.Technologyhasalwaysinfluenced

language,andtoday’slanguageisricherbecauseofthisinfluence.Forexample,the

inventionoftheautomobilenotonlybroughtwithittheneedfornumerousnewlexical

entries,italsogaveusmanyidiomaticexpressionswestillusetodaysuchas“drivingme

crazy”and“aroundthebend.”

ManypeoplewhoadvocatefortheprotectionoftheEnglishlanguageappealtothe

factthattheincreasedrateandspeedoftechnologicaldevelopmentspresentsacompletely

differentlinguisticlandscapeandanunknownthreatthatwehavenothingtocompareto

historically.Indeed,thetechnologicalinnovationsandtheconsequentadditionoflexical

entriesaremuchmorenoticeabletodaythantheyeverhavebeen.AccordingtoWebster’s

NewWorldDictionary’slanguagemonitoringprogramthereareapproximately2,000

examplesamonthofnewwordsandphrasessuchasgoogle,friend(anewverbthathas

virtuallythesamesenseastheexisting,oldverbtobefriend,whichisn’tusedinthe

Facebookcontext,perhapsbecauseit’ssoold)andunfriend,whichwastheNewOxford

AmericanDictionary’s2009WordoftheYear.

Mostimportantly,puristargumentsfortheprotectionoflanguagefromthe

perceivedmassacrebytoday’syoutharemostlybasedonanecdotalevidenceandarenot

empiricallysound.Theyareoftenmotivatedbypersonalandbiasedintentionsandare

groundedinapuristmentalitythatisexclusionaryandhistoricallyinaccurate.Itdoesn’t

takelong,forexample,tofindthehundredsofblogswhereconcernedparentstryto

deciphertheirchildren’stextmessagesandcomplainabouttheimminentdecayofwritten

English.Butit’snotjustparents;it’salsoacademics.InItaly,scholarsattheUniversityof

BariwarnagainstthepossibilityofthedevelopmentofahybridSMSlanguagespokenby

today’syouth.Todate,Ihavenotfoundanypeer-reviewedlinguisticstudythat

demonstratesevidenceofanythinglikethishappeningsoon.Similarly,inFrance,

politiciansarguethat40,000studentsfailedtheirBaccalaureateexam(theexamtheyhave

topasstograduatefromhighschool)duetospellingerrorsattributedtoFrench“text

speak.”Iftheycoulddemonstratethattextingaffectsgrammar,thenmaybetheirargument

wouldcarrymoreweight,butinordertocometosuchconclusionsonewouldhavetoat

leastdoalongitudinalstudycomparingthepass-failratestodaytothosebefore1992when

thefirsttextmessagewassent.Theseissuesarealsonotuniquetotoday’syouth.Didthe

babyboomersforgetthattheytoohadalingo?Doesn’teverygenerationhaveitsjargon

andslang?

Oneofthefewempirically-soundlinguisticstudiesconductedontheeffectoftexting

andlanguageamongtoday’syouthsuggeststhatwehavenothingtobeworriedabout.At

the2006LinguisticsSocietyofCanadaandUnitedStatesAnnualMeeting,sociolinguistics

professorSaliTagliamontepresentedherfindingsfromastudyonthewritingof70

Canadianadolescents.Shearguesthattheadolescentsinherstudydemonstrateanability

tomanipulatedifferentregistersintheirwriting.Inotherwords,althoughthesekidsmay

writetextmessageslike“idkIwntd2gohmASAP,2CmyM8sagain,”theywouldn’tusethe

samewrittenlanguageinanessayoraclassassignment.Tagliamonte’sfindingremindsme

ofananalogyIonceheardduringatalkbyUniversityofCaliforniaSanDiego(andformer

Hunter)professorAnaCeliaZentella.ProfessorZentellaequatesregisterstoclothing.She

explainsthatwehavemanydifferenttypesofclothesformanydifferentsocialcontexts,

andourdecisionofwhichoutfittowearisdependentonthatcontext.Forexample,we

wouldn’twearaweddingdresstothebeachinthesamewaywewouldn’twearabikinitoa

wedding.Inasmuchasthereareappropriateandinappropriatesettingsforabikinianda

weddingdress,weusedifferentregistersinouroralandwrittenlanguagedependingona

varietyofsocialandcontextualfactors.Thecontext,includingthetopic,theinterlocutors,

thesetting,etc.,shapesthewaywespeakandwrite.Idon’tusethesamelanguagewhenI

writemyTwitterorFacebookupdatesaswhenIwritemydissertation.Inthesameway,

thewordchoiceandpunctuationinmytextmessagesdependsonmanyfactors:didI

alreadyreach160characters?TowhomamIwriting?WillthismessagebeambiguousifI

abbreviate?

Theabilitytomanipulateandeffectivelyusedifferentregistersisnotevidenceof

linguisticerosion;itisquitetheopposite.Alwaysspeakingorwritingasthoughonewere

inanacademicsettingallthetimeisjustasinfelicitousasspeakingorwritinginformallyin

formalcontexts.Havingcommandofdifferentregistersisevidenceofacomplexrepertoire

oflinguisticskills.Don’tgetmewrong—I’mnotadvocatinglinguisticanarchy.I’mallabout

compartmentalization,andIbelieveweshouldnotcondonethecategoricaluseofeither

formalorinformalregisters.

Why,youask,amIsoadamantaboutdefendingtheselinguisticimpuritiesandbad-

speak?IknewthemomentIsawthecallforpapersforRevisionsthattherewouldbea

handfulofsubmissions“uncriticallychampioning”theprotectionoflanguageand/or

“absolutelyrejecting”technologyduetoitspurportedlinguisticrepercussions.Asa

linguist,Ifeelthatitismydutytoprovideanotherperspectivetothisdebate.Iwas

especiallymotivatedbyFerdinanddeSaussure’sseminal(andposthumouslypublished)

bookongenerallinguistics.InhisCoursdeLinguistiqueGénéral,Saussure,consideredthe

fatherofmodernlinguistics,warnsthat“noothersubjecthasfosteredmoreabsurd

notions,moreprejudices,moreillusions,ormorefantasies”thanlinguistics,andthat“itis

theprimarytaskofthelinguisttodenouncethemandtoeradicatethemascompletelyas

possible”(15).

AsafunctionalistlinguistIbelievethatthesocial,cultural,andcommunicative

needsofthespeakersshapethelanguagetheyspeak.However,Ialsobelievethatinthe

samewaythatweshapelanguage,thelanguagewespeakshapesus;itisafundamental

partofouridentity.Asaresult,weneedtoacknowledge,accept,andmaybeevenembrace

thefactthatlanguagechanges.That’sthenorm.Tryingtostopitfromchangingisboth

futileandill-founded.

ThereisasmallcaveatthatIhavefailedtoaddressuptothispoint.AlthoughI’m

paintingasomewhatidealisticvisionoflanguagechange,therearelinguisticchangesthat

are,inmyopinion,unfortunate.Oftheworld’sapproximate6,000languages,everytwo

weeksoneoftheselanguagesvanishes(Kenneally101).Atthisratesomeoftheworld’s

languagesfaceagreaterriskofextinctionthananycurrentlyendangeredbirdormammal.

Theextinctionofalanguageisahugeloss;whenalanguageisnolongerspoken,the

culturalandlinguisticknowledgeencodedinthatlanguagearelostforever4.Languages

likeEnglish,however,arenotatallindangerofbecomingextinct.Infact,itisestimated

thattherearemorenon-nativespeakersthannativespeakersofEnglish,makingEnglish

thesecondmostwidelyspokenlanguageintheworld(behindMandarin).Ironically,

althoughmanyoftheconcernsaboutlanguagemaintenanceanddecayareaboutsomeof

themoststandardizedandcodifiedlanguagesintheworld(e.g.French,Spanish,English,

etc.),itisoftenattheexpenseoftheselanguagesthatmanyendangeredlanguageshave

beenlost.Inotherwords,itisbecauselanguageslikeEnglisharebecomingmoreandmore

widespreadthatlanguageslikeAka-Bo,Gaagudju,andEyak—lastspokeninAlaskain

2008—arelost.Theparadox,thus,isthatthelanguagesthatmanypeoplearemost

concernedaboutprotectingare,infact,thosethatneedtheleastprotection.

WorksCited

ChristineKenneally,TheFirstWord:TheSearchfortheOriginsofLanguage(NewYork:

Viking,2007).

deSaussure,Ferdinand.CourseInGeneralLinguistics(Chicago:OpenCourtPublishing,

reprint1998).

RamonMenéndezPidal,Orígenesdelespañol:EstadolingüísticodelaPenínsulaIbérica

hastaelsigloXI(Madrid:Espasa-Calpe,1950).

Tagliamont,Sali.“Presentationat2006LinguisticsSociety”.

Zaentella,Celia.“RoleofWomeninIranProtestsKindlesHope;FemaleMuslimsAbroadSay

TheyDrawInspirationforOwnStruggleAtHome.”WashingtonPost.28,Jun.2009:

A1.