this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
325 points (98.8% liked)

Linguistics

550 readers
46 users here now

Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!

Everyone is welcome here: from laymen to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.

Rules:

  1. Stay on-topic. Specially for more divisive subjects.
  2. Post sources whenever reasonable to do so.
  3. Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
  4. Have fun!

Related communities:

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think you left out the word "not" at least twice?

[โ€“] Aeao@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I found the one time I left the word out. Where was the other? Edit: there it is. Like I said, ADHD, I tend to just skim read. It's lightning fast for me but it's hard to proof read that way