just semantics

Per a few requests, I’m publishing the text of the original thread which inspired my “Abolishing the Red Squiggle” article here. I hope you enjoy this slightly different take on the topic of destandardization.

Destandardization is a critical process for anarchist linguistics. Many incorrectly chalk it up to “Oh, so anyone can spell anything anyway they want?”, but in reality, destandardization works to reverse the co-optation of language by the State as an oppressive weapon.

This thread is a bit long... but its a complex idea that I think is worth engaging with!

Languages are inextricably linked to the cultures/communities of people where they are spoken. They demonstrate social perspectives, beliefs, environment, etc. Individual dialects of one “language” can show how context affects language development and maintenance.

Most modern standard languages* have been standardized by selecting one dialect or language variant and making it the language of the State. Sometimes a regulatory body is made to determine what is and isn't “correct” and public education is used to proliferate it.

However, when a language is standardized this way, it is decontextualized. Its connections to the once localized area where it was spoken are erased, and instead, the worldview/belief system of the State are mapped onto it in its place.

This makes the proliferation of the standard language in fact a vehicle for proliferating the ideology of the State that it is anchored to. This is seen saliently in colonial contexts, where colonial languages are purposefully forced onto a pop. to eradicate their language.

In some cases, even the creation of a new orthography can be used to introduce social division and subjugation under the state. This happened in several instances across east, west, and southern Africa across several centuries.

However it's not just in colonial contexts. Within a single state, the proliferation of a standard language usually serves to reinforce classist ideas – labeling speakers of different dialects or variants as unintelligent or inept. *glares in American Southerner*

In fact, languages standardized in this way contradict how language naturally works. Language changes and involves as cultures, contexts, and environments evolve. As new cultures interact or develop new tech, or move to a new place, language evolves with it.

(*Not ALL language standardization happens this way. Nicaraguan Sign Language developed out of a synthesised standardization, where deaf students brought together from across the country negotiated a standard signed language at their school in order to communicate.)

So, what is DEstandardization? Destandardization seeks to remove the control that an upper class/state/language regulator has over the use and perception of a language or languages, by acknowledging the validity of all forms of language use. What does that look like?

A core tenant of destandardization is that the key purpose of language is communication and the exchange of ideas. Language use isn't “right” or “wrong”, rather it is “successful” or “unsuccessful” to varying degrees. Here's an example...

When someone spells something in a non-standard way, the impulse under standardization is to point out that they spelled it “wrong”. But what do we gain by pointing out that they spelled it “wrong”?

By wrong, you mean, they didn't spell it the standard way... however... the only way you'd know that is if you understood what they were TRYING to communicate. By labeling the spelling “wrong”, you're really just wielding the standard language as a weapon to cut someone down.

This weapon is FREQUENTLY used against working class speakers, as well as POC who speak languages like AAVE, Hawaiʻi Creole English, or any variety of Spanglish. These speakers are not speaking WRONG just because they are not speaking LIKE YOU.

If the point was communicated, does it matter that the spelling wasn't standard? In fact, the spelling may reveal a nuance in their linguistic background. An additional cultural influence, for example. What is wrong about it? Words change spelling over time, all the time.

There are many reasons why different spellings arise. For example, the person may be transcribing how the word is pronounced in their accent or dialect. Destandardized language doesn't depend on power dynamics to employ language, it depends on communication and co-creation.

This doesn't just apply to spelling but also grammar. If a child says “Them's mine, I wants them back.” The point is communicated. Attempts to “correct” a learner’s spelling or grammar in cases where the point was still communicated are exercises in conformity and local erasure.

So what do you do when the point isn't communicated? You explain just that. “I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you meant. Could you help me understand by explaining it a different way?” “I'm not familiar with this spelling, what word were you trying to convey?“

Communication is hard, within a language and between them. It's also a negotiation. Standardized languages don't allow you to negotiate on an even playing field. We have to think critically about how we think of each other's language. Abolish the grammar n*zi in your head.

I'm happy to (try) and answer any questions about this. Also, Paulo Freire gets into a lot of it in his book “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” (including what purpose the State's “literacy” serves and why we should expand the meaning of “literacy”). If you made it here, thanks!

(I might even hold a space on this topic... I really love talking about it, especially from an educator's perspective.) (It would be literally impossible to cover it all here.)

((i also want to add that communicative negotiation is done within a community or culture and so ideas of “closed-culture” boundaries still apply.))

((for example, white English speakers don't have the right to interject in communicative negotiations concerning AAVE or HCE. that's literally still the same core concept as standardization.)) ((i felt like that's common sense but in case it isn't))

(((also also, a lot of advocacy is being done for models of learning Indigenous languages in ways that do not strip them from their context or commodify them. This article is a great place to start: link)))

Thank you for reading this thread!

Jon