Dennis Baron has a post (link) about a policy at a Wichita (Kansas) private school that forbids students from speaking Spanish while in school. Some students were expelled after their parents refused to sign off on the policy, and a court case ensued. All interesting, but I had to agree with the first commenter when he wrote:

quote:

The core issue in most of these posts seems to be education of the public in social linguistic concepts, or at least deference to expertise. There seem to be many reasons why people don't defer to linguistic experts like they do to biologists or physicists: one is that everybody sees themselves as an expert on language, since they're fluent in at least one, so it's a natural viewpoint; another is the popularity of newspaper grammar columnists who give the public the perception that prescriptivism is what linguistics is "about" - look at the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk if you want to see what even educated people ask linguists given the chance; finally, there's the lack of pop science publication by linguists themselves, or the poor public communication skills in linguistic publications.

[Sorry about that. Added missing link, and another one to an update. It's been upheld in court (link).]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: zmježd,

Excellent. I probably, before Wordcraft, was one of "those" people.

z, could we have the link? I'd love to read about this issue.

Interestingly, just today I read this in Saussure: "Since the linguist's voice often goes unheeded, the written form almost inevitably emerges victorious, because any solution based on writing is an easier solution."

Things haven't change much in a century.

I think I need more context, and perhaps the original, to evaluate that sentence. I hope he isn't saying that linguists are ignored because they only give speeches.

I think he was just saying (though z might correct me) that linguists aren't listened to. Saussure was saying that, too. People listen to grammarians like Lynn Truss or Strunk and White, but it's the linguists who have the comprehensive background about the spoken word, and not just about societal rules for writing.

I wonder, though, how many linguists there are. Also, what are the educational requirements to be called one? Perhaps (and this is merely a theory!) someone who takes a course in linguistics can legitimately sell him/herself as "linguist," and that of course doesn't create respect. I know in health care, for example, there isn't a prescribed course of study for nutritionists so you see people using that title freely. Yet, a dietitian has a prescribed course of study, and that specialty is highly respected.