Verbal Hygiene by D Cameron
Verbal Hygiene by D Cameron
Verbal Hygiene by D Cameron
Verbal Hygiene
D Cameron, Institute of Education, London, UK
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
This article is reproduced from the Concise Encyclopedia of
Sociolinguistics, pp. 688690, 2001, Elsevier Ltd.
It is a truism that linguistics is descriptive not prescriptive concerned to describe the structure and
use of natural languages, and not to make valuejudgements on them. Verbal hygiene was the title of
a book that prompted debate among sociolinguists,
by challenging the view that value judgements are of
no relevance for linguistics (Cameron, 1995). It argued that competent language users routinely make
value judgements on language; ideas about what is
good and bad in language are central to their understanding of it, and ought therefore to be of interest
to linguists who study language use as a form of social
behavior.
The importance language users accord to value judgements is seen with particular clarity in practices of
verbal hygiene, i.e., active attempts to improve or
clean up language. These practices are many and
varied. Examples include not only efforts to impose
a standard dialect, pronunciation, or spelling, but
also cases like plain-language movements or feminist
campaigns to eliminate sexist language, language
planning, and fringe movements advocating wholesale spelling reform, the abolition of copular verbs, or
the adoption of artificial languages. What these
instances have in common is not any single view of
what is desirable in language use the traditional
grammarian and the feminist, for instance, will disagree on many points of detail. But they do share the
more fundamental assumption that one way of using
language may reasonably be preferred to another.
From this point of view, it makes no sense to condemn linguistic normativity as such. Further, when
one considers the full range of normative practices
language users are engaged in, it becomes difficult to
argue that they all exemplify ignorance (cf. language
planning, a scientific enterprise) and/or prejudice
(cf. campaigns against sexist and racist language,
which embody resistance to certain forms of prejudice). While verbal hygiene practices are never valuefree, correctness is not the only value that informs
them. Others include esthetics (as in discussions of
why one local accent is preferable to another); utility
(as in arguments for official documents to be written
in plain language rather than obfuscatory jargon);
and morality (as in debates on sexism and racism in
language).
Bibliography
Some linguists (e.g., Kalogjera, 2000) have criticized verbal hygiene as a revisionist concept that
rehabilitates reactionary forms of prescriptivism,
undermines the objectivity of scholarship, and
encourages sociolinguists to politicize discussions of
language attitudes and linguistic change. In Verbal
hygiene (Cameron, 1995: xi) it is noted that linguists
See also: Description and Prescription; Language Attitudes; Language Ideology; Standardization.
Verbs
A Viberg, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden
Lexicalization Patterns
(1) Kab an an ap
yap pk-e-k
pag-p ok.
stone glass come fall it-having- it-has- that
hit-DS
broken
A stone broke the glass.
Kalam is a good example of a verb serializing language (see Serial Verb Constructions). Serial verbs
exist marginally in English, in sequences such as Go
get the book. Serial verbs are, however, characteristic
of Southeast Asian, West African, Papuan, and Oceanic languages (Crowley, 2002). Verb serialization is
defined as a combination within the same simple
clause of lexical verbs that can function independently as verbs and that must be interpreted as having the
same values for tense-aspect-mood even if those
values are not necessarily overtly marked on all of
the verbs in the series. Auxiliaries (or helping verbs)