Comments by "Chompy the Beast" (@chompythebeast) on "Why do \"foreigners\" speak English so well? (and why people think I'm white)" video.

  1. It's a fun fan theory, but beyond projecting Cold War propaganda about suburban American prosperity, undoubtedly it came down to justifying 1) A large house with multiple different sets for fun and distinct physical gags, and 2) His parents' actions, so that they can forget their own child without coming off like complete monsters, I guess
    12
  2. Is it being naive or overly-reductive to suggest that we do away with qualitative judgements like "good" or "bad" with regards to these things in the first place? The best of any language is the kind that is understood by your listener better, I guess, but that's a relative matter between each and every speaker, not a universal judgement. In any case, language's evolution in certain segments of the population is almost always met with disdain from speakers of that language outside that demographic or clique. There really isn't any material basis upon which we could say who is right, who speaks the "better" version of the language, beyond perhaps sheer intelligibility by different audiences. But even in that regard, different dialects could be compared to different types of hammers: They're all recognizably hammers, and you could probably drive a nail with any of them, but different heads (dialects) are better suited to different jobs (different audiences). Standardization as a means of creating the largest possible audience is a reasonable goal, but it can hardly be argued that prestige dialects and accents really reflect that kind of standardization perfectly, yet they maintain their power. So when it comes to how we evaluate "good" and "bad" in terms of dialects, it seems unlikely that sheer utilitarianism is the primary factor. And besides, without going into another tangent, diversity of language is fundamental to the arts, and represents itself not a thing to be stifled but the natural evolution of interpersonal communication. I know social and class weight comes to bear with prestige dialects and all that, but I think "as linguists" that is a thing to recognize as a social phenomenon that exists but isn't one we should engage in beyond eroding or destroying prejudice. Engaging in discussions of which is "wronger" than the other is to participate in a conversation that probably shouldn't really exist at scholarly tables in the first place. But perhaps I am misinterpreting something about what you said and I'm just going on a tangent, maybe this is just the analysis of a philologist rather than that of a linguist haha
    2