Enlgish is racisit

All the shit that doesn't fit!
If it doesn't go into the other forums, stick it in here.
A general free for all
User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Enlgish is racisit

Post by Gob »

Students studying at the University of Hull will not be marked down for poor spelling, grammar and punctuation in exams because it would be 'elitist'.

It comes as lecturers have been told that insisting on good written English discriminates against ethnic minorities and those who went to "underperforming" schools.

The Office for Students wants to reduce the gap between the proportion of white and black students gaining good degrees and cut dropout rates among poorer students.

In response, some universities have been adopting so-called "inclusive assessment", a more flexible scheme first introduced to level the playing field for students with conditions such as dyslexia.

At the University of Hull, a new policy says the requirement for a high level of proficiency in written English can be seen as "homogenous, North European, white, male, and elite".

It adds that students with English as a second language or educated at poorly performing schools can be discouraged if high standards of written English are required.

Instead it plans to encourage students to develop a "more authentic academic voice… that celebrates, rather than obscures, their particular background or characteristics".

A spokesperson from the University of Hull said: “As a University, we are committed to removing barriers to learning, increasing social mobility and providing opportunities to students from all backgrounds.

“Inclusivity is one of our core values, and we firmly believe that everyone – regardless of their background – should have an opportunity to study and succeed.

“As a global institution, we take great pride in our diverse student and staff community, welcoming individuals from over 100 countries across the world.”

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hu ... ed-5297705
"A high level of proficiency in written English can be seen as 'homogenous, North European, white, male, and elite'"

Um.. isn't that a very racist thing to say?
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 5418
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

Gob wrote:
Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:13 pm

"A high level of proficiency in written English can be seen as 'homogenous, North European, white, male, and elite'"

Um.. isn't that a very racist thing to say?
I think so. There's one thing for making allowances for someone for whom English is not their first language but that general statement is both racist and sexist. I can think of any number of authors whose ability to express themselves in English is astonishing and who are not 'white, male and elite.' Michael Ondaatje, AS Byatt, the Bronte sisters, Jane Austen, Salman Rushdie, Arundhati Roy, The University of Hull's own Philip Larkin ("They fuck you up, your mum and dad. They may not mean to, but they do.") was hardly 'elite' by background, and many others. Daft.

Burning Petard
Posts: 4048
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Burning Petard »

Is it racist, or could it be anti-racist, to teach people how to talk and write like a nob?

My daughter, like me is completely WASPish in appearance. I speak like a mid-level educated mid-Western American. My daughter, for reasons I won't go in to, is very skilled at various American dialects and patois, including the mid-Atlantic version that sounds vaguely British and vaguely New England and pretty much passes for elitist in America. She can speak fluent Ebonic, just like a native speaker. It is amusing to watch the confused looks of both whites and blacks in a mixed group when she starts talking 'ghetto'. Surely it could only be an advantage for a a Brit colonial from the Caribbean who can speak aloud the Queen's English.

I think the statement from Hull University above is a textbook example of white-privilege guilt.

snailgate
Last edited by Burning Petard on Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Big RR »

Maybe it could when speaking, but likely not in written papers. I've never seen ebonics in writing, but like the dialect Uncle Remus wrote in, if people do write in the dialect, it probably has a fairly limited audience and utility. One would think a college graduate from an university in an English speaking country should be able to at least string a few sentences together with a modicum of clarity and with proper spelling and grammar. Personally, I think this sort of policy would be akin to telling science majors that you do not need to know "proper math".

FWIW, when I was an undergrad science major I had to take two foreign languages for my degree--one was a year of scientific German (which I have never used after college; but there was a time when German likely would have been more useful since many manuals and papers were published in German) and the second was a literature course in Spanish (the language I foreign language studied in high school which I have sued occasionally in my practice). It wasn't racist to require me to take these languages so far as I can see.

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 13923
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Joe Guy »

I can help. I speak Jive.

Jus' hang loose, blood. You gonna catch up on da rebound dey gonna let the spelling slide.

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Big RR »

Thank you Mrs. Cleaver.

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9014
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Suddenly the old joke about how "GHOTI" spells "fish" isn't nearly as funny any more.
'gh' as in 'tough' → ff
'o' as in 'women' → ih
and 'ti' as in 'motion' → shh
= ff-ih-shh
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Gob »

Isn't not giving stupid people PhDs "elitist"?
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Sue U »

Enlgish is racisit
I think you mean "English are racist," what with "wogs" at Calais, etc.
Gob wrote:
Wed Apr 21, 2021 6:37 am
Isn't not giving stupid people PhDs "elitist"?
"Poor" spelling is not indicative of stupidity. If a person is capable of conveying an intelligent thought, does it matter how it's spelt? Or how it's spelled? The very concept of a "correct" English spelling is a fairly recent invention, is still evolving (see, e.g., various publication style guides) and there's still no universal agreement on the spelling -- or even the meaning -- of many words among English-speaking peoples (see, e.g., this BBS).

To the extent music is a "universal language" that conveys sonic ideas, it has (and has had) numerous notation systems, tonal systems and styles over human history and across the globe. Which is correct? When you hear a piece, would you even know, let alone care-- how it was written down and scored, or whether it uses microtones as an alternative to the "standard" 12-tone "alphabet"?

Perhaps it is only your lack of imagination that insists there must be one orthography imposed on all.
GAH!

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Gob »

Tarring a nation with a saying made by one man is rather bad, should we consider the sayings of G W Bush or D Trump indicative of US thought?

Conflating music with spelling is rather daft. If someone cannot spell rite, how do you no what they meen?
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Sue U »

Gob wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:02 pm
Conflating music with spelling is rather daft. If someone cannot spell rite, how do you no what they meen?
Which notation is correct?

Image

(That's six different "spellings" of the same "word."
GAH!

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 13923
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Joe Guy »

They misspelled neumes.

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Big RR »

Also, while I am far from an expert on this, the neume/melismatic notation does not provide the same information as to pitch that the more modern western notation does. A competent musician singing or playing the western notation will always play it essentially the same way as any other competent musician, the other notation is far more open toward interpretation (although I have read some articles that dispute this). Both may convey similar messages, but the primary purpose of language is generally to convey the message clearly.
Last edited by Big RR on Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Gob »

What he said.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8542
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Sue U »

Joe Guy wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 7:20 pm
They misspelled neumes.
And yet you knew exactly what they meant. Or are they idiots whose writings must be rejected because of misspelling?
Big RR wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 7:40 pm
Also, while I am far from an expert on this, the neume/melismatic notation does not provide the same information as to pitch that the more modern western notation does. A competent musician singing or playing the western notation will always play it essentially the same way as any other competent musician, the other notation is far more open toward interpretation (although I have read some articles that dispute this). Both may convey similar messages, but the primary purpose of language is generally to convey the message clearly.
Of course music and language are not identical, but they have many overlapping features, and depending on the language, some of those features are more important than others for fundamental meaning (e.g., intonation in Chinese dialects) or affect perception and understanding of the speech (think of the variety of English language accents/dialects alone). If you play a tune in C or in G it's still the same tune, conveying the same musical idea, it's just in a different register. The notation examples I used above show six different ways to express the same idea. None is "misspelled," and for those who use these systems the meaning remains clear.
Gob wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 4:02 pm
If someone cannot spell rite, how do you no what they meen?
Proving my point. Have u read any txt msgs lately?

There is a tremendous distance between variant/"improper" spelling and unintelligibility. I'm not saying we should abandon a general consensus on spelling norms, but I wouldn't let them stand in the way of assessing the substance of the communication.
GAH!

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33642
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Gob »

Sue U wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 2:11 pm

Proving my point. Have u read any txt msgs lately?

There is a tremendous distance between variant/"improper" spelling and unintelligibility. I'm not saying we should abandon a general consensus on spelling norms, but I wouldn't let them stand in the way of assessing the substance of the communication.
I have read texts, and 50% of them are unintelligible gibberish. However we're not talking about texts, we're talking about people demonstrating a grasp of a subject to degree level or higher. People who cannot, ( or in some cases, will not,) use the correct spelling and grammar to get their points across, do not deserve the award of a degree.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Big RR »

Sue--
The notation examples I used above show six different ways to express the same idea. None is "misspelled," and for those who use these systems the meaning remains clear.
True, within the context of the system used, but not the same as a system based on notes and intervals. Is one "superior" to the other? Not really, but then they don't try to accomplish the same thing. And FWIW, changing the key does not always convey the same thing in the music; often, changing from a major to a minor key can change the entire feeling of the piece; that's part of the fun of music.

FWIW, I am not disputing that spelling is more important than the idea communicated, but it can be at times, and a misspelling can change the meaning. Clearly, universities are not and should not be "grammar schools", but when "proper English" matters, it should be used (just as when proper math matters, it should be used). I don't see this as elitist, just practical.

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 13923
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Joe Guy »

Joe Guy wrote:
Thu Apr 22, 2021 7:20 pm
They misspelled neumes.
Sue U wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 2:11 pm
And yet you knew exactly what they meant. Or are they idiots whose writings must be rejected because of misspelling?
Not rejected. Corrected.

Are they suggesting that all schools should not require "good written English" in English Grammar classes? The article is poorly written. I don't understand what they're trying to say. If they really are concerned about students who have learned English as a second language, why don't they teach classes in those student's first language?

Which types of studies were they penalizing students for who used improper written English? Quantum Physics? Chemical Engineering? Philosophy? Accounting?

Spelling?

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 20699
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

If a person is capable of conveying an intelligent thought, does it matter how it's spelt? Or how it's spelled?
Yes
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

Big RR
Posts: 14048
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Enlgish is racisit

Post by Big RR »

I don't know Joe Guy, the article describes the University policy as:
At the University of Hull, a new policy says the requirement for a high level of proficiency in written English can be seen as "homogenous, North European, white, male, and elite".

It adds that students with English as a second language or educated at poorly performing schools can be discouraged if high standards of written English are required.

Instead it plans to encourage students to develop a "more authentic academic voice… that celebrates, rather than obscures, their particular background or characteristics".


I read this as saying that because some people are educationally disadvantaged due to their coming from "poorly performing schools", they are no longer going to require a "a high level of proficiency in written English" for students, claiming that such a policy is problematic and obscures "more authentic" academic voices. Now there may be a place for such "voices" in some writing, but I still think it is silly to choose to lower the standards rather than bring the students up to an university acceptable level of writing. I don't see this as silencing their voices, but making their messages more accessible. By all means do not discourage the "authentic" voices in areas like poetry and creative prose, but let's not kid ourselves that lowering the standards makes everyone more equal.
Last edited by Big RR on Mon Apr 26, 2021 7:41 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Post Reply