EDITOR
Doug Kouma
OPINION
EDITOR
Anne Hjersman
EDITORIAL
BOARD
Doug Peters
Matt Waite
Paula Lavigne
Mitch Sherman
Anthony Nguyen
m
“Tom Osborne is God.”
— Tom Junod, writer for GQ magazine,
at the start of his nine-page profile of the
Nebraska head football coach
\
“Luck? We don’t need luck.”
—Husker quarterback Scott Frost, as he
ran onto the field before Nebraska’s 19-0 loss
to Arizona State
“Never pick a fight with someone who
buys ink by the barrel and paper by the
ton. They always get the last word.”
— Andy Abboud, executive director of
the Nebraska Republican Party, on the me
dia
“Now he has cooties.”
—Daily Nebraskan editorial, on 6-year
old Johnathan Prevette, who was suspended
from school activities because he kissed a
female classmate on the cheek
“That’s a little cocky, but I tend to like a
little cocky.”
— Nebraska Women’s Basketball
Coach Angela Beck, on Brooke Schwartz’s
show of confidence in icing the Huskers’ win
over Iowa
“We went from the penthouse to the out
house overnight.”
— Charlie McBride, NU defensive co
ordinator, on Nebraska’s loss to Texas
“If men could get pregnant, family plan
ning would be a sacrament.”
—Frances Kissling, president of Catho
lics for a Free Choice, in support of abortion
rights
“I feel really fired up about being a Chris
tian, but mostly when it’s convenient.”
— Geoff Moore, songwriter and musi
cian, on Christianity
“You can access the Unabomber’s 35,000
word anti-technology manifesto on the
World Wide Web.... Irony is a harsh mis
tress.”
— The Deep End, by cartoonist Chad
Straw derm an
“To be honest with you, I never wanted to
play football. I wanted to be a trash man.”
— Former NU running back Mike
Rozier, after a street shooting almost killed
him in his hometown of Camden, N.J.
“If I had known that my four offspring
would be spit on, their belongings de
stroyed — that they would be physically
and verbally abused because they had a
‘nigger-lover’ for a mother, I wouldn’t
have done the exercise.”
— Former Iowa elementary school
teacher Jane Elliot, on her decision to teach
her students a lesson in racism with her now
famous “blue eyes/brown eyes” experiment
“Teaching is the same thing as comedy, but
teachers have to do six shows a day, and
don’t get paid as well.”
— Comedian Kevin Mattran, on his de
cision to give up teaching high school to go
on the road
Editorial Policy
Unsigned editorials are the opinions of die
Fall 1996 Daily Nebraskan. They do not nec
essarily reflect the views of the University
of Nebraska-Lincoln, its employees, its stu
dent body or the University of Nebraska
Board of Regents. A column is soley the
opinion of its author. The Board of Regents
serves as publisher of die Daily Nebraskan;
policy is set by die Daily Nebraskan Edito
rial Board. The UNL Publications Board, es
tablished by die regents, supervises die pro
duction of the newspaper. According to
policy set by the regents, responsibility for
the editorial content of die newspaper lies
solely in the hands of its student employees.
Letter Policy
the Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief let
ters to the editor and guest columns, but
does not guarantee their publication. The
Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit
or reject any material submitted. Submit
ted material becomes the property of the
Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned.
Anonymous submissions will not be
published. Those who submit letters
must identify themselves by name, year
in school, major and/or group affilia
tion, if any. Submit material to: Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St,
Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448. E-mail:
lettm@unlinfo.unl.edu.
*
.
■
*
Slang is language, too
Editor's note: This guest column,
which appeared in The Badger
Herald at the University of
Wisconsin, was written by senior
education major John Lemke and
is reprinted here courtesy of U
Wire.
I’ve been spending the last few
weeks in front of a computer
monitor, probably raising my risk of
getting cancer exponentially. As I
was trying to properly cross all the
“t’s” for one particular paper, I came
upon a profound realization: By its
nature, standard English is elitist and
prejudiced; it is a form of intolerance
and hate.
Creating a prescribed norm for
language further stratifies socioeco
nomic divisions and widens cultural
gaps. Not only is the concept of
“proper language” ambiguous, but
also contradictory to reason.
Among the illegible comments,
my TA scratched across my last
paper was the suggestion that my
choice of words be more becoming
of a “professional” paper. The data
and ideas were fine, but my choice of
words apparently gave the impres
sion that I wasn’t a professional.
Lord knows we must demonstrate
awareness of the distinctions between
standard, substandard, colloquial,
slang and vulgar language before our
ideas can be considered. What is it
about word choice that makes ideas
good or bad? Creating a standard
form of language makes it neither
more expressive nor more logical
than any other dialect or lexicon.
This means that any linguistic
prescriptions are based solely on
social judgment, not reason or
science. To make my paper sound
• “more professional” would be to
deny my background to please a
group of so-called superiors. That
sounds like elitism to me. Ironically,
that was the topic of my paper.
The poor and the non-white have
been particularly damaged by such
language stratification. The correct
form of the American English
derives from the language used by_
political leaders and the upper
66
What is it about
word choice that
makes ideas good or
badr
socioeconomic classes.Latin
sounding words are deemed scien
tific and clean, while Anglo-Saxon
counterparts are dirty and vulgar.
When children of less-privileged
linguistic backgrounds enter school,
they are corrected when using
dialects different from these. Many
children are punished for using
particular four-letter words^which
have somehow been deemed intrinsi
cally evil. I’ve tasted the bitter flavor
of Palmolive for utterances made as a
child. There is no linguistic reason
why “genitalia” should be considered
acceptable while “dick” is forbidden.
It is no wonder why our society is so
silently prejudiced when our schools
brainwash kids into believing in a
moral value of our language.
Black English has probably
suffered the greatest amount of
prejudicial ignorance from language
purists. Critics of the dialect have
tried to equate Black English with
lesser intelligence and lazy articula
tion. Some have gone as far as to
claim Black English’s characteristics
are proof of genetic inferiority. The
truth is that a child will speak
whatever language he or she is
exposed to, regardless of genetic
makeup. There is also evidence that
Black English speech rhythms
originate from indigenous languages
of Africa. The idea that one’s
articulation is lazy is ridiculous,
because the “Queen’s English”
(probably the most pompous
prescription of language) has omitted
r’s from words since the 16th
century. In spite of ajl this evidence,
our society is subtly biased against
blacks who speak Black English
dialects because of our inherent
belief that there is a “correct” usage
of language.
The concept of making a national
language, let alone a national dialect,
reeks of stupidity. As far back as 200
B.C., societies have tried to correct
and standardize language usage.
Over 2,000 years ago, the Greek
grammarians at Alexandria tried to
restore their language to that used by
Homer centuries earlier. The Moslem
Arabs tried a similar “purification
process” 700 years later. Both *
miserably failed. The reason for this
is simple: language evolves in spite
of man. The original version of
“Beowulf’ was written in English. Of
course, no one would understand it
now as Old English has turned into
Middle English, which has turned
into our current language. Words that
were considered slang in the past are
considered standard now.
Examples include dwindle, blimp
and sandwich. In fact, the word
“slang” itself has evolved from a
French word meaning “to scold.”
Linguist Otto Jespersen best summed
up the idea of dialect superiority with
the following: “We set up as the best
language that which is bound in the
best writers, and count as the best
writers those that best write the
language. We are therefore no further
advanced than before.”
It is critical that Americans realize
the subtle prejudices they have been
conditioned to hold through the
concept of “Standard English.”
Language preference is just a form of
silent intolerance and propagates
racism just as much as the Ku Klux
Kian. We spend a lot of time
discussing the importance of cel
ebrating diversity in our lives, so why
not do so in our language? Stop
using those annoying Latin plural
endings on words, such as formulae,
cacti, and larvae. Use double
negatives and “incorrect” conjuga
tions in your next writing assignment
on purpose. Most importantly, reflect
on how you judge people based upon
the language they use.
Until we learn to tolerate differ
ences as simple as the language that
we use, our society remains silently
prejudiced. \ I