As W. Labov has passed away, I came across a comment reposting this screenshotted request, along with the paper in question:
https://betsysneller.github.io/pdfs/Labov1966-Rabbit.pdf
The paper is quite a rollercoaster, ranging from describing of disturbingly racist ideas about native Hawaiian and Black children that some scientists still pushed at the time (1970!*), to Labov’s own disarmingly cute and humane solution to the issue of testing children’s language abilities.
Edit: *1970 - according to the article itself, which is apparently based on Labov’s 1970 talk; however, the URL suggests that the article was published in 1966, which is contradictory. I’ll try to find out where and when this was actually published…
Edit 2: It looks like it is from 1970, from Working Papers in Communication, vol. 1 (Honolulu: Pacific Speech Association). It is surprising that a recently published book also claims that it’s from 1966, probably the authors got the file from the same URL with the wrong year.
Edit 3: The original Twitter thread: https://xcancel.com/betsysneller/status/1516848959284678656
This reminds me of my experience when I was entering kindergarten.
There was a basic test/interview to assess reading skills to determine whether a kid should be in the “this kid doesn’t even know the alphabet” group or the “this kid can at least read a tiny bit” group. I was already a fluent reader (of books aimed at 5-year-olds, of course), but they tried to put me in the group that didn’t even know the alphabet.
I was afraid to read because I found the test taker intimidating. Fortunately, my mother knew that I knew how to read and she insisted that I go into the other group.
because I found the test taker intimidating
Yeah honestly I’m pretty convinced that a large part of children’s “ability” depends solely on who’s testing them, and on how well they feel that day.
I had a similar sort of experience myself (probably lots of people did) when I was at a psychiatric hospital, I was a kid, 15 or 16 or so. I had to solve some exams for what I guess was like two hours, and I was going crazy by the end, exhausted and losing focus. And based on that crap they were supposed to rate my cognitive abilites and emotional state. Thankfully I simply didn’t return there, no consequences, but it’s terrifying to think that some kids’ futures and whole lives were determined by such bullshit, and even more, as the article shows, that it could act as quasiscientific legitimisation of racism.
I wonder at what point do people forget how they were as kids?
That’s insane. Who in there right mind could think anybody would perform well in that sort of stressful situation?
Genius outside the box thinking.
deleted by creator
disturbingly racist ideas about native Hawaiian and Black children that some scientists still pushed at the time (1970!*),
Until a couple years ago, one of the main training manuals for nurses had racist and sexist assumptions about pain resistance.
Thanks for sharing the full paper— that was interesting!
@antonim this post is how I learned that Labov died 🙇♀️
> a fun anecdote is that Labov didn’t correct people on the pronunciation of his last name (/lə’bʌv/ or /lə’boʊv/) because he liked to observe the variation.
man probably kept running averages in his head. you come in, he considers your age, class, subculture and diet and is able to predict how you’ll call him
Everybody is posting these elaborate eulogies and Peter Trudgill just says
> We owe him everything.
which I imagine must sound pretty trite to the casual onlooker, but if you’ve read both Labov and Trudgill you kinda feel the weight of this.
I posted about his passing two days ago, but it gained less traction - https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/33628658 (idk if you can see it on Mastodon)
man probably kept running averages in his head. you come in, he considers your age, class, subculture and diet and is able to predict how you’ll call him
Funnily enough, I have a somewhat similarly problematic name (not in pronunciation, but in declension - it can take up either feminine or masculine endings). The choice is purely regional and predictable, but I’m still glad to hear new examples (and it’s also fun to mention the whole issue and hear layman justifications for this or that option).
I wonder what my pronunciation /lə’bʌv/ says about my English, considering it’s my second language. It seems like it would be the more common option because it’s more likely to be deduced from the written form?
Something i’ve concluded about myself (i have autism) is that my ability to communicate pretty much perfectly reflects the ability of the person i’m trying to communicate with.
If they’re good at talking then i’m fairly easy to talk to, but if they mumble or don’t know the language well then it’s basically impossible, especially if they don’t take the initiative at all.
