Discrimination is a major challenge that affects globalization and modern human interactions. As the world becomes a small village, people from different backgrounds interact more often, and some face discrimination. The trend is mainly promoted by people who need more cultural competency or are too ignorant to acknowledge its importance. Such populations use “underlying stereotypes” or “assumptions,” also prevalent in linguistics. Two articles provide opposing views on the manifestation and implications of prejudice linguistics. In “Ask or aks? How linguistic prejudice perpetuates inequality,” Cole et al. (2022) show an alternate occurrence of prejudice in linguistics by treating some dialect pronunciations as deviations. Fridland (2020), in her article, “The Sound of racial profiling: When Language Leads to Discrimination,” argues that linguistic profiling affects housing, perception, and stereotyping, the criminal justice system, education and employment, the intersectionality of discrimination, and the challenge of adopting standard dialects. While many people may be unaware, linguistic prejudice occurs when people criticize pronunciations, accents, and dialect judgments and causes discrimination that adversely affects people’s quality of life, hence the need to acknowledge how it occurs and the implications.
Context: Looking at Prejudice in Linguistics from a Larger Perspective
Prejudice in linguistics is a highly prevalent problem that occurs when people judge individuals based on how they speak. However, many people, including leaders, need to acknowledge some of the ways how the problem occurs and the magnitude of its implications. For instance, some educators promote linguistic prejudice in teaching practice, where they presume students’ performance may be due to the use or lack of use of the standard language in speech while in school (Martins et al., 2018). Additionally, Deutschmann and Steinvall (2020) assert that constant media exposure of leaders such as Trump creates a gradual normalization of prejudice through reinforcing stereotypes. The authors show that a major factor contributing to the high prevalence of prejudice in linguistics is understating its causes and implications. Therefore, it is important to look at the problem from a larger perspective to address it adequately.
Causes of Prejudice in Linguistics that are Considered Insignificant
Many people fail to acknowledge how prejudice in linguistics occurs, which promotes its occurrence. Linguistic prejudice occurs through disapproval of pronunciation, accent, or dialect, leading, to biased treatment and has negative societal implications. For example, many people believe that “ask” pronunciation as “aks” or “ax” is wrong, lazy, or ignorant, a statement that Cole et al. (2022) disproves. He argues that “aks” is not a mispronunciation of ‘ask’ but an alternative pronunciation. Further, Cole et al. (2022) argue that linguistic bias, coined as linguicism by Tove Skutnabb-Kangas, goes beyond mere pronunciation to include accents and dialects, which promotes discrimination based on language. Fridland (2020) supports the assertions by adding that sociolinguists’ study of language profiling shows that prejudice is related to the use of language. The authors’ assertions break down the fallacious theory that regards such language variants as signs of ineptitude. Their arguments highlight how prejudice in linguistics occurs and causes bias, which compounds pre-existing socio-economic and racial injustices. People who disapprove of the use of “aks” in African American English and Multicultural London English show that linguistic prejudice is entangled with racial biases and that representation oppresses marginalized communities. The scholars’ arguments demonstrate overlooked ways in which prejudice in linguisticsoccurs and that using standard English attracts prejudice based on ethnic stereotypes.
Understated Implications of Prejudice in Linguistics
Prejudice in linguistics causes discrimination that severely affects people’s lives. However, many citizens and leaders fail to acknowledge these implications. For example, Friedland (2020) refers to a study that showed how linguistic profiling prevented people from gaining access to housing. People using the non-standard accent were more prone to facing discrimination when searching for a place to rent. Additionally, people from different ethnicities can unknowingly relate certain linguistic attributes to stereotyped associations. Sometimes, even acute phonetic cues like the very particular pronunciation of vowels can immediately reveal someone’s ethnicity (Fridland, 2020). Further, the linguistic discrimination of non-native instructors may lead to lower teaching evaluations and low educational achievement expectations for African-American children (Fridland, 2020). Fridland (2020) also highlights that linguistic discrimination can lead to serious issues in criminal justice administration. Research on police body camera footage has demonstrated that police officers use less respectful language during a routine traffic stop when the driver is Black. In the court, language prejudice can influence the credibility and intelligibility of witnesses, and hence, it may affect the judicial rulings and juror assessments. Moreover, African-American vernacular and non-native speakers experience various forms of institutional discrimination in the labor market. Finally, Fridland (2020) posits that linguistic bias occurs against even standard dialects because it is more against speakers of non-standard varieties and how they talk. The author shows that discrimination based on language can occur simultaneously with other forms of prejudice, resulting in more complicated problems for people not just experiencing one type of discrimination. The articles single out linguistic prejudice as widespread and its far-reaching effects. Through the investigation of the pronunciation judgment and linguistic profiling, they present strong evidence that linguistic biases evoke discrimination, which inflicts the members of society differently, for example, in the field of education, labor market, and encounters with law enforcement. Such an emphasis highlights the need to address social, historical, and linguistic factors, which are the key drivers of prejudice, and eradicate linguistic bias.
Opposing View: The Critics of Varying Pronunciations, Accent, and Dialect are Defending their Originality
Some individuals who criticize alternate pronunciations, accents, and dialects might argue that they champion the originality of the English language. For example, Cole et al. (2022) acknowledge that some individuals believe various versions of the pronunciation, accents, and dialects are incorrect and inferior. Such people assert that different versions of pronunciation from standard English show a lack of intelligence or an inability to speak properly.
Thus, they could claim that their critique is geared toward ensuring proper pronunciation and preserving the English language’s purity. Nonetheless, evidence proves their criticism is insincere and rooted in prejudice and bias. For example, in studies on English pronunciations, people have negative attitudes toward the speakers of the dialects and not the speech itself (Fridland, 2020). Hence, the results indicate that linguistic discrimination concerning other pronunciations, accents, and dialects is based on cultural prejudices rather than the true love of the English language. Also, modifications like “ax” for “ask” are alternative pronunciations, which are not pronunciation mistakes. Cole et al. (2022) justify their historical validity by citing that “ax” was used in formal written English by speakers over a millennium ago in some parts of England and North America. The authors also claim that metathesis is the process of interchange of sounds like “s” and “k” in “aks” and “ask,” which is a common linguistic process. Thus, the critics are induced and perpetuated by cultural prejudice, which includes language in linguistics.
Conclusion
The articles reveal the issue of linguistic discrimination and the effects it brings. Cole, et al. (2022) and Fridland (2020) point out the existence of discrimination based on alternative pronunciations, accents, and dialects, and challenge the assumption behind such critiques. Many studies have demonstrated that linguistic prejudice leads to discrimination in numerous modes of life, such as housing, education, employment, and dealing with the criminal justice system. The arguments expose the fact that language bias occurs based on culture and race and adds to discrimination and injustice. However, some people may argue that their criticism of pronunciations is based on valid issues of language preservation. Yet, reality reveals that such claims are based on hypocrisy since historical evidence and the metathesis process prove otherwise. Furthermore, the analysis of the critic’s attitudes reveals that they dislike some speakers rather than their methods of expression. These arguments prompt people to reconsider the origin and influence of prejudice in linguistics and the diversity of language as a tool of human communication; therefore, they come to a solution instead of taking a discriminating standpoint.
References
Cole, A., Jeffries, E., & Patrick, P. L. (2022, March 11).Ask or aks? How linguistic prejudice perpetuates inequality. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/ask-or-aks-how-linguistic-prejudice-perpetuates-inequality-175839
Deutschmann, M., & Steinvall, A. (2020). Language, Prejudice, Awareness, and Resistance. Open Linguistics, 6(1), 708-712.https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2020-0043
Fridland, V. (2020, June 16). The sound of racial profiling: When language leads to discrimination. Nevada Today.https://www.unr.edu/nevada-today/blogs/2020/the-sound-of-racial-profiling
Martins, R. L., de Moura Pinto, C., Carlesso, R., Spindler, A. S. M., dos Santos, J. L. B., & Möller, I. R. (2018). Linguistic Prejudice in Teaching Practice. Revista Conhecimento Online, 1, 128-136.https://doi.org/10.25112/rco.v1i0.1314.
write