Accent, Standard Language Ideology, and Discriminatory Pretext in the Courts Author(S): Rosina Lippi-Green Source: Language in Society, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Accent, Standard Language Ideology, and Discriminatory Pretext in the Courts Author(s): Rosina Lippi-Green Source: Language in Society, Vol. 23, No. 2 (Jun., 1994), pp. 163-198 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4168513 Accessed: 06/10/2009 10:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language in Society. http://www.jstor.org Language in Society 23, 163-198. Printed in the United States of America Accent, standardlanguage ideology, and discriminatorypretext in the courts ROSINA LIPPI-GREEN Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1275 ABSTRACT Title VII of the U.S. CivilRights Act clearlyforbids an employerto dis- criminateagainst persons of color for reasonsof personalor customer preference.Similarly, a qualifiedjob applicantmay not be rejectedon the basisof linguistictraits linked to nationalorigin. In contrastto racial discrimination,however, an employerhas considerablelatitude in mat- ters of language,provided in part by a judicialsystem which recognizes in theory the link betweenlanguage and social identity, but in practice is often confoundedby blindadherence to a standardlanguage ideology. The natureand repercussionsof this type of linguisticdiscrimination are hereexplored. (Language and law, accent,discrimination, standard lan- guage ideology, criticallanguage studies)* "The stranger within my gate, He may be true or kind, But he does not talk my talk - I cannot feel his mind. I see the face and the eye and the mouth, But not the soul behind. The men of my own stock, They may do ill or well, But they tell the lies I am wonted to, They are used to the lies I tell; And we do not need interpreters When we go to buy and sell." Rudyard Kipling In 1965, at the age of 29, SulochanaMandhare left her home in Maharash- tra, India, and came to the United States. At that point in her life, Ms. ? 1994 Cambridge University Press 0047-4045/94 $5.00 + .00 163 ROSINA LIPPI-GREEN Mandhare- a native speakerof Marathi- had been studyingEnglish for almost 20 years. Ms. Mandhareis soft-spoken;she speaksan Englishwhich is character- ized by full vowels in unstressedsyllables, distinctiveintonation patterns, aspiratedfricatives, and a lack of distinctionbetween initial /v/ and /w/. She is an intelligentand articulatewoman, and she tells her story in a clearand completelycomprehensible language. After some time in the U.S., Ms. Mandharerelates, she decidedto con- tinue her education.She had arrivedwith undergraduatedegrees in both lib- eral arts and education;but she returnedto school, and in 1972completed a master'sdegree in educationat New Orleans'sLoyola University.In 1979 she was certifiedas a school librarianafter completinga programat Nich- ols State University.After working for one year as an elementaryschool librarian,Ms. Mandhareapplied for and was given a job as a librarianat a school servingkindergarten through second gradein the Lafargue,Louisi- ana, school district, for the 1980-81 school year. Ms. Mandharespeaks of that year as a happy and successfulone. Her responsibilitieswere to overseethe smalllibrary, read stories to the children, and introducethem to usingthe resources;she enjoyedthis work. Therefore, when in April 1981 she was told that her contractwould not be renewed becauseof her "heavyaccent, speech patterns, and grammarproblems" - in spite of her excellentskills as a librarian(Mandhare 1985:240-41) - she was stunnedand angry.' She investigatedher options; and becauseshe under- stood that the U.S. CivilRights Act prohibitsdiscrimination by nationalori- gin in the workplace,she filed suit. This civil action was decided in Ms. Mandhare'sfavor, but the decisionwas reversedby the U.S. Court of Ap- peals in favor of the school board.2 Ms. Mandhare'scase, and otherslike hers,are importantbecause they pro- vide real-lifeexamples of many phenomenawhich have long been of inter- est to linguists. There is a body of work on the processesinvolved when listenersevaluate speakers(Lambert et al. 1960, Carranza& Ryan 1975, Rickford 1985), on social stereotypingbased on language(Lambert 1967, Giles& Ryan 1982),on the psychologicalprocesses involved in speechaccom- modation (Giles 1984, Giles & Coupland1991), on the cognitiveprocesses whichstructure collaboration in discourse(Clark & Wilkes-Gibbs1986), and on language-focuseddiscrimination (Labov 1969,Giles 1971,Kalin & Rayko 1978, Milroy & Milroy 1985, Rickford& Traugott 1985). More recently, there has developeda body of work on the relationshipamong institution- alized power constructs,ideology, and language (Thompson 1984, Kress 1985, Fairclough1989). But in spite of such extensiveinquiry, many areas remainunexplored. One such area is the range of ways in which accent is defined, and how it is put to use. Accent is used by phoneticiansto discuss pitch or stress, or by orthog- 164 Language in Society 23(2) ACCENT AND DISCRIMINATORY PRETEXT IN THE COURTS raphersto refer to specific diacritics.More generally,however, the term is used as a loosely definedreference to sets of distinctivedifferences over geo- graphicor social space, most usuallyphonological and intonationfeatures. In the case of second languagelearning, accent may refer to the carryover of native languagephonology and intonationinto a target language. One of the first, and sometimesmost difficult, lessons for a linguist in training is the abandonmentof subjectiveevaluations. In the pursuit of knowledgeabout the structureand functionof language,heavily influenced by scientificmethod, belief has no place;it can serveonly to obscurethe pro- cess of discovery. Linguistsproceed on the assumptionthat all naturally occurringlanguages, whether or not they have a literatetradition, are equally functionaland have the same potentialto develop furtherfunctions as nec- essary;there has been no evidencein the many years of inquiryto disprove this basicthesis. Linguistsfurther differentiate language from speech,speech from communication,and fluency from communicativecompetence. (Like accent,fluency is a generalterm without technicaldefinition.) The crucial concept of communicativecompetence is defined as the ability to use and interpretlanguage in a stylisticallyand culturallyappropriate manner. This moves far beyondthe set of phonologicaland intonationfeatures which bun- dled togethermay be markedas accent. The generalpublic, however,does not make such distinctions.For most people, accent is a dustbincategory: it includesall the technicalmeanings, and a more generaland subjectiveone: accentis how the other speaks. It is the first diagnosticfor identificationof geographicor social outsiders.For a native of the north side of Chicago - a cab driver, elementaryschool teacher,or districtjudge - all the following "havean accent":people from southernIndiana, Georgia, Brooklyn, England, or South Africa; the native speakerof African AmericanEnglish Vernacular who lives down the street or west of the Loop;the co-workerfrom Jamaica;and the man sellingpapers on the cornerwhose Guatemalanphonology and intonation shine through into his English.No distinctionis madebetween pidgin or creole, sociallyor geographicallybased variation, native or nonnativelanguage: they are all just accents, which may be describedas adenoidal,barbarous, broad, cute, dis- tinct, educated, flat, foreign, funny, guttural,harsh, heavy, lilting, nasal, posh, provincial,quaint, rough, rustic, sing-song, strong, and uneducated (McArthur1992:10). The subjectivenature of these qualifiersis clear. Much of linguisticvariation is structuredaround social identity.Linguists know this, but nonlinguistsknow it too, and act on it: accentbecomes both mannerand means for exclusion. The fact is, however, that when people reject an accent, they also rejectthe identityof the person speaking:his or her race, ethnic heritage,national origin, regionalaffiliation, or economic class.3Thus the concept of accent, so all-encompassingin the mind of the public, is a powerful one which needs to be investigated. Language in Society 23(2) 165 ROSINA LIPPI-GREEN In the remainderof this article,my goal is to illustratethe natureand some of the repercussionsof accentdiscrimination. In the process,I hope to dem- onstratethat accent- particularlywhen associated with racial,ethnic, or cul- tural minorities- is most likelyto pose a barrierto effectivecommunication