In America, there are no small eggs.

We do something illogical with in American culture regarding our language used to describe sizes. An Ivy League educated linguist I worked for in Taiwan used to ponder about this, and ask me, "Why, in America, don't you have small eggs? Some recipes call for one or two small eggs, but the grocery stores only carry medium, large, extra large and jumbo. What happened to the small eggs?"

She wasn't a native English speaker - but she was a citizen and she lived in the states about 20 years, raised a couple native English speakers, and held advanced degrees (including a PhD) in English language and linguistics. This issue seriously intrigued her and has been on my mind for well over a decade.

The issue may be fairly recent. My grandparents (both born before the 1920's here in the US) insisted on buying small minnows for crappie fishing because even larger fish may prefer a small bait. I remember buying small minnows. I defy you to go into any bait store today and find small minnows.

I just ordered a small chicken noodle soup for my toddler at a chain restaurant. The clerk was so concerned, "Oh my. I'm sorry. We only have medium and large." His concern touched me, but isn't medium half-way between to extremes - small and large. How is it logically possible to have only two sizes and one of them is medium?

The descriptive linguist in me speculates that these words have become homonyms of themselves - in effect a sort of headless noun. Medium is a proper name for a choice - not a description of a size. So I said, "Oh, you mean "Medium" with a capital 'M', I meant small with a lower-case 's'"... which caused him to just stop talking and give me the soup - which btw came in a cup not much bigger than a thimble.

Or is it a popular/cultural fetish that equates large with good and small with inferior? This isn't always so. Small vegetables often have a better texture and flavor - and fine restaurants prefer them. btw - I grew up eating baseball bat sized zuccini - but they should be picked at 6-8 inches or smaller. I worked on a commercial vegetable farm that supplied some of the finest cafe's on the plaza and had the chance to talk with some chefs.

If anyone has insight - or similar experiences - or an opinion re: my linguistic theory, please weigh in.

And yes, I know Pinker uses "headless nouns" almost exclusively to discuss idiosyncratic pluralization - but that doesn't mean the phenomena is restricted to that context. If you have an equally viable explanation share. A comedian could have fun with this coming at it from a cultural perspective.

word

Students Right to their Own Language

Perennial old-school curricular curmudgeon Stanley Fish has recently published a series of blog posts on composition instruction (see also part 2, part 3). He speaks directly to a writing prompt I've given one of my classes. As something of a coup de grace of rhetorical flourish he concludes,

First, you must clear your mind of the orthodoxies that have taken hold in the composition world. The main orthodoxy is nicely encapsulated in this resolution adopted in 1974 by the Conference on College Composition and Communication: “We affirm the students’ right to their own patterns and varieties of language — the dialects of their nurture or whatever dialects in which they find their own identity and style”[hotlinks mine].

His post is a fairly lengthy response to my prompt; he just didn't know it. Personally I feel about his ideas the way I feel about my grandma's rendered pork cracklings: way salty, good with beer, and satisfying, despite the fact that you can feel your arteries hardening. We're talking a serious fat and cholesterol cocktail of epic proportions. Everything has consequences.

His comment, on the advisability of dialogue with students re: linguistic systems and democratic values, gives me pause for thought. Have we not done that in class? Has it been successful?

Acceptable Language revisited

Twice this semester I've heard the phrase, "that's so gay." I've made it clear I don't like it and haven't heard it since. At the big to-do on campus last friday I saw these posters, and they made me think.

At first blush they seemed cleverly ironic and effective. So I went looking for the images online and found them at the think before you speak campaign website.

The looking around and found an opinion that profiled the typical user of this phrase. Their idea was that people didn't use the phrase by accident, but because they want to be mean. They criticized the campaign because it seemed to endorse snarky or demeaning behavior but found fault with specific words. Banning words, they argued, won't work because people will find new words.

This made me think of what neuroscience has said about the brain development of the adolescent.

I'm pretty sure many people mature later than that, if at all. Is it words or behavior we should be addressing?

Acceptable language

From the age of 10 until I started teaching English as a Second Language (ESL) I swore like a drunken muleskinner (the coarseness of muleskinner invective can make a sailor blush). College classes in general and English classes in particular are tolerant of crude or graphic language, but some understanding and agreement early on is warranted.

I will cede to the will of the class with 2 codicils: blasphemy and hate speech/ labels - blasphemy because it is for many the ultimate show of contempt, and also because it tends to end dialogue. "But how," you might ask. "can you get away with the picture in this post?" I'll argue context. I might also admit to irony. I like irony. Sarcasm, however, bores me.

Hate speech can be tricky. Used to be being in or of a referenced group provided immunity - but Perez Hilton suffered physically and in public opinion since he called Will.I.Am a "f***** NOTE: in blogging there is a practice of disemvoweling text that often works. But sometimes, as in the n word, even that wouldn't be adequate.)

Does the law recognize "fighting words"?

My sentiment - avoid labels. To paraphrase Nietzsche, when you label someone, you negate them. Being negated bites. Labels of race, gender, and/or sexuality carry mondo baggage; however, we live in an imperfect world and this is a learning environment. Mistakes are inevitable, so be tolerant and open-minded. When someone slips up be calm in bringing it to their attention, but don't avoid helping someone learn something useful. For fun and a discussion point, go to this wiki page.

PS. Can anyone tell me where I took this picture?