SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
U.S. President Donald Trump gestures as delivers his first State of the Union address in the House chamber of the U.S. Capitol to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday in Washington, as Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Paul Ryan applaud. (Win McNamee / AP)
Don't Equate Trump's Linguistic Mistakes With Stupidity
When smart shiny commentators ridicule Trump for not using their sophisticated language, for speaking and writing idiosyncratically and often ungrammatically, I bet that an awful lot of Trump supporters know, quite personally, what that ridicule feels like.
Feb 01, 2018
I don't know about you, but one of the ways I've been coping with the Trumpian horror-show to the south is watching late-night American comedy. A regular dose of the acerbic and principled witticisms of Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, and Samantha Bee helps release some of the terrifying tension doled out daily by President Trump & Co.
It doesn't matter how many times I hear different versions of the same jokes about pathetic crowd-size fixation, dangerous dictator-worship, or the entitled vapidity of Ivanka+Jared (Jarvanka?) -- I laugh because I need relief from the fear, anger, and bigotry spewing regularly from the highest levels of power.
But there's one recurring joke that adds to my tension instead of relieving it: linguistic mockery. You're probably familiar with the type: "Trump misspelled concession; can he even read?!" "Trump misused an apostrophe -- what an idiot."
Donald Trump may actually be an idiot -- I frankly can't tell. He is undeniably a deluded narcissist, a dangerous racist, an unapologetic bully, and an abuser of women.
One thing he is not is a bad orator or an inept user of words. Trump knows how to use language to great effect; I would even say that he is a master of it -- and my master's degree is literally in "English Language."
But the mockery doesn't bother me because of its inaccuracy or pettiness. It bothers me because as a student of language history I recognize it, and it's a type that does more harm than good.
Equating language errors with stupidity is so ingrained in most of us that we don't stop to think about whether or not it has any validity. If someone uses your instead of you're, the mistake -- whether made through haste or genuine grammatical confusion -- is often enough to dismiss the entire content of the message and the intelligence of the writer.
In online discussions, small errors in grammar or minor deviations from the standard language rarely fail to elicit at least one quasi-abusive ad hominem attack on the person who made the error, and even those of us who refrain from insulting people online may pass a silent judgment all the same. Whether or not the slip has obscured the writer's meaning seems to be entirely beside the point.
There is a demonstrated lack of connection between minor linguistic errors and intelligence, and a corresponding wealth of research demonstrating the role of grammar policing in suppressing non-standard dialects and maintaining class-based social hierarchies. As sociolinguist Deborah Cameron wrote in Verbal Hygiene, "linguistic bigotry is among the last publicly expressible prejudices left to the western intelligentsia."
So when Trump says, "I don't talk to him ... that's just a misnomer," or tweets about the "Mainstream Meadia," don't imply that the misspelling of media makes him stupid, or that the incorrect use of misnomer means that he doesn't know how to use words. He does know how to use words -- dangerously well.
Instead, let's look carefully at how he uses words successfully. Let's focus on critiquing, challenging, and mocking him for what he's using words to say and to do. Is it petty or venal or vain or ignorant? Then let's mock that directly, without the vaguely sanctimonious shelter of minor grammatical critiques.
Because -- and this is the crux of the matter -- when the average Trump enthusiast hears "can Donald Trump even read?! Ha! What an idiot" -- what they hear is you're stupid. You don't know how to read. You didn't go to a fancy school like I did.
The self-identification of poor uneducated whites with Donald Trump -- a born millionaire with an Ivy League education -- is often baffling to liberals, even those who account for the leading role of racism.
Well, when smart shiny commentators ridicule Trump for not using their sophisticated language, for speaking and writing idiosyncratically and often ungrammatically, I bet that an awful lot of Trump supporters know, quite personally, what that ridicule feels like.
It is a linguistic sneering with not-so-subtle class overtones, and one which has likely kept many an average Trump voter out of fancy rooms and high salaries. In Donald Trump, some of the verbally ostracized have a powerful, unapologetic champion -- finally their very own linguistic bully pulpit.
Unfortunately for us all, he is an entirely false champion. Perhaps the rest of us could try being real ones -- or, at least, stop deepening the linguistic divide.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 TheStar.com
Mandy Pipher
Mandy Pipher is a Toronto-based writer and teacher. She can be reached through her website at www.mandypipher.com.
I don't know about you, but one of the ways I've been coping with the Trumpian horror-show to the south is watching late-night American comedy. A regular dose of the acerbic and principled witticisms of Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, and Samantha Bee helps release some of the terrifying tension doled out daily by President Trump & Co.
It doesn't matter how many times I hear different versions of the same jokes about pathetic crowd-size fixation, dangerous dictator-worship, or the entitled vapidity of Ivanka+Jared (Jarvanka?) -- I laugh because I need relief from the fear, anger, and bigotry spewing regularly from the highest levels of power.
But there's one recurring joke that adds to my tension instead of relieving it: linguistic mockery. You're probably familiar with the type: "Trump misspelled concession; can he even read?!" "Trump misused an apostrophe -- what an idiot."
Donald Trump may actually be an idiot -- I frankly can't tell. He is undeniably a deluded narcissist, a dangerous racist, an unapologetic bully, and an abuser of women.
One thing he is not is a bad orator or an inept user of words. Trump knows how to use language to great effect; I would even say that he is a master of it -- and my master's degree is literally in "English Language."
But the mockery doesn't bother me because of its inaccuracy or pettiness. It bothers me because as a student of language history I recognize it, and it's a type that does more harm than good.
Equating language errors with stupidity is so ingrained in most of us that we don't stop to think about whether or not it has any validity. If someone uses your instead of you're, the mistake -- whether made through haste or genuine grammatical confusion -- is often enough to dismiss the entire content of the message and the intelligence of the writer.
In online discussions, small errors in grammar or minor deviations from the standard language rarely fail to elicit at least one quasi-abusive ad hominem attack on the person who made the error, and even those of us who refrain from insulting people online may pass a silent judgment all the same. Whether or not the slip has obscured the writer's meaning seems to be entirely beside the point.
There is a demonstrated lack of connection between minor linguistic errors and intelligence, and a corresponding wealth of research demonstrating the role of grammar policing in suppressing non-standard dialects and maintaining class-based social hierarchies. As sociolinguist Deborah Cameron wrote in Verbal Hygiene, "linguistic bigotry is among the last publicly expressible prejudices left to the western intelligentsia."
So when Trump says, "I don't talk to him ... that's just a misnomer," or tweets about the "Mainstream Meadia," don't imply that the misspelling of media makes him stupid, or that the incorrect use of misnomer means that he doesn't know how to use words. He does know how to use words -- dangerously well.
Instead, let's look carefully at how he uses words successfully. Let's focus on critiquing, challenging, and mocking him for what he's using words to say and to do. Is it petty or venal or vain or ignorant? Then let's mock that directly, without the vaguely sanctimonious shelter of minor grammatical critiques.
Because -- and this is the crux of the matter -- when the average Trump enthusiast hears "can Donald Trump even read?! Ha! What an idiot" -- what they hear is you're stupid. You don't know how to read. You didn't go to a fancy school like I did.
The self-identification of poor uneducated whites with Donald Trump -- a born millionaire with an Ivy League education -- is often baffling to liberals, even those who account for the leading role of racism.
Well, when smart shiny commentators ridicule Trump for not using their sophisticated language, for speaking and writing idiosyncratically and often ungrammatically, I bet that an awful lot of Trump supporters know, quite personally, what that ridicule feels like.
It is a linguistic sneering with not-so-subtle class overtones, and one which has likely kept many an average Trump voter out of fancy rooms and high salaries. In Donald Trump, some of the verbally ostracized have a powerful, unapologetic champion -- finally their very own linguistic bully pulpit.
Unfortunately for us all, he is an entirely false champion. Perhaps the rest of us could try being real ones -- or, at least, stop deepening the linguistic divide.
Mandy Pipher
Mandy Pipher is a Toronto-based writer and teacher. She can be reached through her website at www.mandypipher.com.
I don't know about you, but one of the ways I've been coping with the Trumpian horror-show to the south is watching late-night American comedy. A regular dose of the acerbic and principled witticisms of Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah, and Samantha Bee helps release some of the terrifying tension doled out daily by President Trump & Co.
It doesn't matter how many times I hear different versions of the same jokes about pathetic crowd-size fixation, dangerous dictator-worship, or the entitled vapidity of Ivanka+Jared (Jarvanka?) -- I laugh because I need relief from the fear, anger, and bigotry spewing regularly from the highest levels of power.
But there's one recurring joke that adds to my tension instead of relieving it: linguistic mockery. You're probably familiar with the type: "Trump misspelled concession; can he even read?!" "Trump misused an apostrophe -- what an idiot."
Donald Trump may actually be an idiot -- I frankly can't tell. He is undeniably a deluded narcissist, a dangerous racist, an unapologetic bully, and an abuser of women.
One thing he is not is a bad orator or an inept user of words. Trump knows how to use language to great effect; I would even say that he is a master of it -- and my master's degree is literally in "English Language."
But the mockery doesn't bother me because of its inaccuracy or pettiness. It bothers me because as a student of language history I recognize it, and it's a type that does more harm than good.
Equating language errors with stupidity is so ingrained in most of us that we don't stop to think about whether or not it has any validity. If someone uses your instead of you're, the mistake -- whether made through haste or genuine grammatical confusion -- is often enough to dismiss the entire content of the message and the intelligence of the writer.
In online discussions, small errors in grammar or minor deviations from the standard language rarely fail to elicit at least one quasi-abusive ad hominem attack on the person who made the error, and even those of us who refrain from insulting people online may pass a silent judgment all the same. Whether or not the slip has obscured the writer's meaning seems to be entirely beside the point.
There is a demonstrated lack of connection between minor linguistic errors and intelligence, and a corresponding wealth of research demonstrating the role of grammar policing in suppressing non-standard dialects and maintaining class-based social hierarchies. As sociolinguist Deborah Cameron wrote in Verbal Hygiene, "linguistic bigotry is among the last publicly expressible prejudices left to the western intelligentsia."
So when Trump says, "I don't talk to him ... that's just a misnomer," or tweets about the "Mainstream Meadia," don't imply that the misspelling of media makes him stupid, or that the incorrect use of misnomer means that he doesn't know how to use words. He does know how to use words -- dangerously well.
Instead, let's look carefully at how he uses words successfully. Let's focus on critiquing, challenging, and mocking him for what he's using words to say and to do. Is it petty or venal or vain or ignorant? Then let's mock that directly, without the vaguely sanctimonious shelter of minor grammatical critiques.
Because -- and this is the crux of the matter -- when the average Trump enthusiast hears "can Donald Trump even read?! Ha! What an idiot" -- what they hear is you're stupid. You don't know how to read. You didn't go to a fancy school like I did.
The self-identification of poor uneducated whites with Donald Trump -- a born millionaire with an Ivy League education -- is often baffling to liberals, even those who account for the leading role of racism.
Well, when smart shiny commentators ridicule Trump for not using their sophisticated language, for speaking and writing idiosyncratically and often ungrammatically, I bet that an awful lot of Trump supporters know, quite personally, what that ridicule feels like.
It is a linguistic sneering with not-so-subtle class overtones, and one which has likely kept many an average Trump voter out of fancy rooms and high salaries. In Donald Trump, some of the verbally ostracized have a powerful, unapologetic champion -- finally their very own linguistic bully pulpit.
Unfortunately for us all, he is an entirely false champion. Perhaps the rest of us could try being real ones -- or, at least, stop deepening the linguistic divide.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.