Section B – Language and the self
Question 2
Read the following text, which was published on The Guardian website in 2016.
Discuss what you feel are the most important issues raised in the text relating to the ways in which
language can shape and reflect social identity. You should refer to specific details from the text as well
as to ideas and examples from your wider study of Language and the self.
There’s nowt wrong with dialects, nothing broke ass about slang
Policing children’s language encourages them to think nonstandard English is substandard. Linguistic
diversity should be celebrated, not banned.
Language use is one of the last places where prejudice remains socially acceptable. It can even have
official approval, as we see in attempts to suppress slang and dialects at school. Most recently, Ongar
Academy in Essex launched a project to discourage students from using words like ‘ain’t’, ‘geezer’,
‘whatever’, ‘like’, and ‘literally’.
Banning words is not a sound educational strategy. Research shows that gradual transition towards
standard English works better. But because dialect prejudice is so prevalent, this must be done in such a
way that children understand there’s nothing inherently wrong with their natural expression.
Ongar Academy says it’s not banning words, but “evolving” its pupils’ speech. The head teacher, David
Grant, says that students’ dialect “may not favourably reflect on them when they attend college and job
interviews”. This may seem a reasonable position, when even those who work in education are subject
to linguistic intolerance. But to assume that students who use slang – i.e., most of them – will do so in
interviews does them a disservice. Native speakers of English are generally at least bidialectal. We have
the dialect we grew up using, with its idiosyncrasies of vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation, and we
learn standard English at school and through media like books and radio. As with any social behaviour,
we pick up linguistic norms and learn to code-switch according to the context. Just as we may wear a T-
shirt and slippers at home, but a suit and shoes at work, so we adjust our language to ft the situation.
Standard English is a prestige dialect of huge social value. It's important that students learn it. But the
common belief that nonstandard means substandard is not just false but damaging, because it fosters
prejudice and hostility. Young people can be taught formal English, and understand its great cultural
utility, without being led to believe there's something inferior or shameful about other varieties.
Grant says that in Shakespeare's anniversary year we should "ensure the way the pupils talk gives a
positive impression". But Shakespeare's plays abound in slang and informal language. "Geezer" appears
in books by HG Wells, Graham Greene, and Anthony Burgess. Charlotte Bronte, Charles Dickens and
Vladimir Nabokov used non-literal 'literally'. Rather than spurning such words, we can teach students
when and why they are used. Learning different Englishes gives us command of different domains, a skill
we can then put to creative and appropriate use. Facility with slang is a real advantage in some jobs.
James Sledd once wrote: "To use slang is to deny allegiance to the existing order ... by refusing even the
words which represent convention and signal status. "That is, slang lends covert prestige — however
anathema to those in authority who prefer teenagers not to be teenagers. There's nowt wrong with
regional dialects, nothing broke ass about slang. They're part of our identities, connecting us to time,
place, community, and self-image. They needn't be displaced by formal English — we can have both. As
David Almond wrote, in a wonderful response to one school's linguistic crackdown: "Ye hav to knaa the
words the world thinks is rite and ye have to knaa how to spel them rite an speek them rite ... But ye
neva hav to put the otha words away."
