Slashdot Mirror


Accent Monitoring: Innovation Or Rights Violation?

theodp writes "After almost a decade of sending monitors to classrooms across the state to check on teachers' articulation, the NY Times' Marc Lacey reports that a federal investigation of possible civil rights violations has prompted Arizona to call off its accent police. The teachers who were found to have strong accents were not fired, but their school districts were required to work with them to improve their speech. Interestingly, one person's civil rights violation is another's 'wonderful little phenomenon', which is how PBS described the accent neutralization classes attended by Bangalore call center workers who worked for the likes of IBM and Microsoft. On its website, IBM Daksh notes that 'To make sure that customers all over the world can understand the way our people speak, every new hire is trained in what we call voice and accent neutralization.' So, is accent monitoring and neutralization a civil right violation, as the U.S. Depts. of Justice and Education suggest, or is it an 'innovation', as IBM argues?"

330 of 448 comments (clear)

  1. Civil rights violation to be asked to speak clear? by backslashdot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    WTF .. is this real? Wait, how about the language itself .. As a Vulcan, why shouldn't I have the right to teach an English Literature class in Vulcan ? .. And why should I be forced to teach English Literature if I don't know it .. so how about I teach physics in my English literature class, in Vulcan?

    And to the DOE and DOJ, I ask how about coming up with ideas that make sense? My civil right to mental clarity and logic is being violated.

  2. Murikah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As a foreigner, i completely support that. If you have that strong of an accent such that people cannot understand you, you have a problem. Independent of whether you're a foreigner or not, I can't understand ~10% of the people I meet on a daily basis. In rome, do the romans!

    1. Re:Murikah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In rome, do the romans!

      I find this statement completely hilarious.

    2. Re:Murikah by digitig · · Score: 1

      Remind me not to go to Rome until I get rid of these moobs.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    3. Re:Murikah by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      In rome, do the romans!

      I tried, but I seem to be unable to find a proper pure-blooded Roman here. When you start asking, they're all Vandals or Goths.

    4. Re:Murikah by tonique · · Score: 1

      The Capitoline Wolf wouldn't be safe then with at least eight teats.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:She-wolf_suckles_Romulus_and_Remus.jpg

  3. LOL by masternerdguy · · Score: 1

    "Sorry, but you sound kind of funny, go take this class and we'll try again"

    --
    To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    1. Re:LOL by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Sorry, but you sound kind of funny, go take this class and we'll try again"

      What's wrong with that? There is a serious problem understanding some accents, to the point where it impairs understanding and become a block to learning.

      I personally have a very difficult time understanding the sing song English speech of people from India. And I'm not alone.
      If I were trying to learn anything, such as taking a class, I would be at a huge disadvantage.

      If every kid in the class is giving each other the "Whaddie Say" head twist you aren't getting your money's worth.
      The kids are getting cheated, as well as the tax payer.

      A slight accent that does not impair understanding isn't what these monitors were looking for.
      The ability to communicate is paramount for a teacher. They were there to make sure the kids weren't
      being taught improper english, and that they were able to understand the lesson.

      Lemmy AXE you dis?
      Where would YOU draw the line?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:LOL by bipbop · · Score: 1

      One time, my company brought over coworkers from an Australian office. I was supposed to help them, but I couldn't understand them half the time! Less than 24 hours later, the accent clicked for me mentally, and suddenly I couldn't imagine how I failed to understand them before.

      Let me ask you a hypothetical question: let's say you're from an English-speaking country other than Australia, you have trouble understanding an Australian accent, and your boss sends you to Australia for a week. Let's also say, for some reason, the company doesn't want to give you six months' advance notice, a vocal coach, and listening comprehension classes. Would you seriously tell your boss you can't do the job? Or would you adapt?

      Personally, I doubt many people are incapable of adapting. I think it's more likely to be either laziness or bigotry speaking, when someone protests an accent. If you worked with Indians for any length of time, I doubt you'd have any problem understanding them, unless you have a cognitive deficit of some sort.

    3. Re:LOL by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Where would YOU draw the line?

      Probably at two Utes.

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    4. Re:LOL by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      I speak from some experience when I say that Indian style English generally takes more than 24 hours to get used to. In my previous experience it took me a couple of months before the Indians with whom I was working could speak at full speed in Indian accented English without the risk of losing me somewhere in the middle of their rapid cadence. Australians have less accent and are less likely to be uptight fast talkers as many Indians seem to be.

    5. Re:LOL by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Informative

      From My Cousin Vinny

      Vinny Gambini: It is possible that the two yutes...

      Judge Chamberlain Haller: ...Ah, the two what? Uh... uh, what was that word?

      Vinny Gambini: Uh... what word?

      Judge Chamberlain Haller: Two what?

      Vinny Gambini: What?

      Judge Chamberlain Haller: Uh... did you say 'yutes'?

      Vinny Gambini: Yeah, two yutes.

      Judge Chamberlain Haller: What is a yute?

      Vinny Gambini: [beat] Oh, excuse me, your honor...

      [exaggerated]

      Vinny Gambini: Two YOUTHS.

    6. Re:LOL by gilleain · · Score: 1

      Where would YOU draw the line?

      Probably at two Utes.

      Heh. "Oh, I'm sorry, your honour. Two YOUTHS..."

    7. Re:LOL by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Typically employers that need foreign born applicants to be able to communicate in cases like this will require a TOEFL score and these days there is a verbal component. Between that and an interview you'll probably figure it out pretty quickly.

      FWIW, accent is hardly the only factor, I've had instructors from Canada that were educated in the UK saying things like anti-parallel and using terms like four fold that aren't in standard American English. Those folks should be of equal concern if this is about something other than pressuring racial minorities out.

    8. Re:LOL by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      I've had teachers where half the class couldn't understand them, even at the end of the semester.

    9. Re:LOL by Savantissimo · · Score: 1

      I don't think Utes are the kind of Indians we're talking about here.

      There is a line, I' not sure where exactly it should be drawn, but certainly this is well on the other side:

      Ladle Rat Rotten Hut

      Wants pawn term dare worsted ladle gull hoe lift wetter murder inner ladle cordage honor itch offer lodge, dock, florist. Disk ladle gull orphan worry putty ladle rat cluck wetter ladle rat hut, an fur disk raisin pimple colder Ladle Rat Rotten Hut.

      Wan moaning Ladle Rat Rotten Hut's murder colder inset.

      "Ladle Rat Rotten Hut, heresy ladle basking winsome burden barter an shirker cockles. Tick disk ladle basking tutor cordage offer groin-murder hoe lifts honor udder site offer florist. Shaker lake! Dun stopper laundry wrote! Dun stopper peck floors! Dun daily-doily inner florist, an yonder nor sorghum-stenches, dun stopper torque wet strainers!"

      "Hoe-cake, murder," resplendent Ladle Rat Rotten Hut, an tickle ladle basking an stuttered oft.

      Honor wrote tutor cordage offer groin-murder, Ladle Rat Rotten Hut mitten anomalous woof.

      "Wail, wail, wail!" set disk wicket woof, "Evanescent Ladle Rat Rotten Hut! Wares are putty ladle gull goring wizard ladle basking?"

      "Armor goring tumor groin-murder's," reprisal ladle gull. "Grammar's seeking bet. Armor ticking arson burden barter an shirker cockles."[the rest of the story is at the link]

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
    10. Re:LOL by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You were listening to an accent that's not particularly foreign to most English speakers, and you were presumably in contact with them fairly constantly.

      I had several professors (who I saw for a few hours a week) with very strong accents far more foreign to an English speaker than Australian (which I usually have no problem understanding). Figuring out what they were saying in a large lecture hall was not simple.

      If your job is communicating to an English speaking class it's not bigotry asking that you be able to do it effectively. It's certainly not bigotry if the school is offering to pay for a class to improve the accent.

    11. Re:LOL by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      School teaches more than just the subject matter.

      Sure. But in my Multi-variable Calculus class that I need to pass to get into grad school, which one do you think I give a fuck about? Grad schools don't admit based on my ability to understand obscure Chinese accents, as useful as that skill may be. If you want to add a GE class on accent comprehension that's fine. I can see the use in that. I don't see the use in making already difficult content courses harder in the name of not hurting the instructor's feelings.

    12. Re:LOL by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

      Hah! I had something smilar happen, but in real life. I was being introduced to a new employee (who had a northeast US kind of accent). I asked him for his name. The conversation went like this:

      "So, what's your name?"
      Cawwww!
      "I'm sorry, what?"
      Caw!
      "Huh?"
      Caaaw! Caaaw!

      Finally, my officemate relented and said, "Clyde ... his name is Carl."

      To me, he sounded like an f'in eagle! I have no problem with Hindi accents though ... go fig.

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    13. Re:LOL by jenn_13 · · Score: 1

      There's a difference here though. We're adults, and yes, we should be able to adapt within reason. However, the article specifically refers to second graders. I don't think we should expect the same of seven-year-olds as we do of adults. If I have to work with someone with a strong accent, I can adapt with a little extra effort, and it won't bother me as long as they don't get offended when I occasionally have to ask them to repeat something. But if my young child can't understand his teachers, I'm going to have a problem with that.

    14. Re:LOL by Berfert · · Score: 1

      Let me ask you a hypothetical question: let's say you're from an English-speaking country other than Australia, you have trouble understanding an Australian accent, and your boss sends you to Australia for a week. Let's also say, for some reason, the company doesn't want to give you six months' advance notice, a vocal coach, and listening comprehension classes. Would you seriously tell your boss you can't do the job? Or would you adapt?

      If I was going to be in Australia for more than a week, I'd do my best while there to adjust my accent so they could better understand me and do my best to learn to understand them. If they came here, I'd expect them to do the same.

      In theory, anyone can learn to understand any accent. It's a matter of best use of time and environment, though. If you're one of the minority speaking with (or having trouble understanding) an accent and you're in that acccent's home environment, then it's on you to adapt. As you take away "minoring" and who's home environment you're in, the responsibility to adapt changes targets.

    15. Re:LOL by Pope · · Score: 1

      If you haven't yet already, go read Iain M. Banks' Feersum Endjinn. It's a real hoot once you get used to the phonetic writing style.

      Woak up. Got dresd. Had brekfast. Spoke wif Ergates thi ant who sed itz juss been wurk wurk wurk 4 u lately master Bascule, Y dont u ½ a holiday? & I agreed & that woz how we decided we otter go 2 c Mr Zoliparia in thi I-ball ov thi gargoyle Rosbrith.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    16. Re:LOL by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Let me ask you a hypothetical question: let's say you're from an English-speaking country other than Australia, you have trouble understanding an Australian accent, and your boss sends you to Australia for a week. Let's also say, for some reason, the company doesn't want to give you six months' advance notice, a vocal coach, and listening comprehension classes. Would you seriously tell your boss you can't do the job? Or would you adapt?

      It depends on the job. If you're just there to talk to a few people and work out some business details or something, then no problem, you'll probably adjust quickly (after all, American English and Australian English aren't that far from each other).

      But if you're being sent over to teach a class to children, then you might have a problem. Of course, again, American and Australian aren't very different, so the kids might not have a problem (they probably watch a lot of American TV anyway). But what if you're a non-native English speaker, with a really thick accent? You could have a big problem.

      If you can't be understood by anyone over there, and you can't adapt in time, then you should really decline the job.

  4. depends by Dthief · · Score: 2
    in india its innovation

    in the US its a civil rights issue

    --
    www.RacquetUp.org - Helping Detroit Youth
    1. Re:depends by microbox · · Score: 1

      in the US its a civil rights issue

      The many faces of racism.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
  5. Government action vs. Corporate Action. by Tatarize · · Score: 2

    If a corporation hires you to stand on the street swinging a sign in a tutu, they are allowed. Nothing about asking people to speak in a way that maximizes profits is a violation of civil rights. However government action requiring people speak in a specific way because they want people to talk that way is a potential problem.

    --

    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    1. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by Dinghy · · Score: 1

      If a corporation hiring people is allowed to have accent neutralization requirements, then the government hiring people should be able to have the same requirements. A teacher who can't be understood can't teach anything. What some people call racism and profiling, others will call enabling success in education. There was nothing about forcing non-employees to speak without an accent.

    2. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      That's bullshit and trying to engage in that in the US would definitely end with an eventual discrimination law suit. An accent is a part of a person and ultimately, corporations that pressure employees to drop their accent run the risk of being sued.

      Now, in cases where it's a very thick accent that is demonstrably getting in the way of conducting business, as the employer you might be able to get away with it, but even then it's risky business.

      OTOH, when call centers do that in India or other countries, US law doesn't have anything to do with it.

    3. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. While anyone can bring a lawsuit about anything, chances of winning one on grounds of 'discrimination' for something like this are pretty slim. Discrimination suits where the discrimination is against something you can't (or can't be expected to) change are valid. That is things like race, color, sex, religion,age, etc. Saying you are discriminated against because of your accent is like a would-be teacher complaining that they are discriminated against because they have no teaching certificate, or an 'engineer' being discriminated against because he has never attended college. You can be trained to speak with an accent other than your own, thousands of actors and radio and TV announcers demonstrate that every day.

    4. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Utter nonsense. You aren't a protected class for your accent or inability to be articulate. Good luck with that 'lawsuit".

    5. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      An alcoholism is just what I am, you can't fire me for drinking on the job. That's discrimination!

      Yep, you can bet your ass it is, but discrimination is a vital and necessary function of daily life. You can only sue when the reason for the discrimination is that was arbitrary beyond the facts of age, sex, race, disability, and sexual orientation.

    6. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by Squiddie · · Score: 1

      The argument here is that it may become an issue with someone who has an accent, but is perfectly understandable. I can see where they are coming from.

    7. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by znerk · · Score: 1

      Honestly? I could care less how much of an accent you speak with. You, as a person, are entitled to speak with whatever (and however much) accent you want to.

      That being said, if your job is to communicate with my customers, and every other statement from the customer in the QA recording is "please repeat that, I couldn't understand you", then you're fired.

      Similarly, if your job is to teach others, and you are unable to communicate effectively with your students due to an accent that you refuse to work on, then you're fired.

      The requirement to speak clearly to those you are supposed to be communicating with is not racist, it's not a civil rights violation, it's just requiring you to perform the duties pertaining to doing your fucking job.

      Is that easy enough to understand?

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    8. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by Tatarize · · Score: 1

      Accent neutralization isn't about being understood it's about sounding normal. Most people with accents are very quickly understandable.

      --

      It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    9. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If a corporation hires you to stand on the street swinging a sign in a tutu, they are allowed.

      Not necessarily. For example if an EU company required workers to be clean shaven they would fall foul of equality regulations that require them to allow people to have a beard for religious reasons. That has also been extended to wearing a tie because usually women are not required to, and the dress code must be equal for both sexes. I can imagine that wearing a tutu would have multiple gender issues...

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by HopefulIntern · · Score: 1

      Almost, except where you said "I could care less". I think you mean "I couldn't care less". If you could, the point you are making does not really make sense.

    11. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      That's the EU, not the US. In the US requiring workers to be clean shaven EXCEPT for religious reasons is allowed. You can't force the Muslims to shave, but you can force everyone else to (Minus other religions that require beards...you get the idea). Gender specific dress codes are definitely legal in the US--or else they'd have to ban strip clubs. Likewise with the tutu: not a problem.

    12. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by RKThoadan · · Score: 1

      Most people with accents are very quickly understandable.

      To an adult this is certainly true, but not necessarily for children. Children are not just small adults.

      I can see the danger in this and it could be used improperly depending on how the decisions are made. It sounds like they are just sending people to the classrooms and having them make the call. That's clearly not a particularly good way of doing it. Ideally you'd want some sort of blind approach where you just play high-quality audio recordings of the teacher to some kids and ask them what was said.

      It's hard to overcome my raw suspicion of anything that Arizona does lately, but if done properly (very minimal punishment for accent offenders and free and convenient classes) then this could have a lot of benefits for both students and teachers.

    13. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by Tatarize · · Score: 1

      Children tend to be better at picking up language stuff than adults. And we're typically not talking about ununderstandable accents which everybody agrees is an issue, but just run of the mill funny sounding ones.

      --

      It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    14. Re:Government action vs. Corporate Action. by znerk · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely correct, thank you for the correction.

      I did, indeed, intend to express the idea that I could not care less about someone's accent unless and until it becomes necessary to be able to comprehend their meaning. The local dialect appears to have meddled with my speech patterns; I will need to exercise more care in my future communications.

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  6. Context by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Innovation or violation?

    Once again, context is everything.

    "clear" is an interesting judgement call. I am pretty sure that when used by the state in Arizona, this amounted to selective cultural bias and harassment. That would be constant with the other developments in that benighted corner of the US.

    I bet if you talk like Andy Devine or Beauford T. Pusser, no one in Arizona schools bats an eye at your "accent" or worries about the "clarity" of pronunciation.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Innovation or violation?

      It's interesting as well, because there is a difference in the application of the accent neutralization. The phone support providers are private employers, while the schools are public employers. As such public employers are restricted to certain conditions that private employers are not, because the public employers are both government and an employer.

      The Supreme Court has held that discrimination even by private employers based on not speaking English is only permissible when English skill is absolutely necessary to perform their job, because otherwise it is discrimination based on national origin (which is illegal).

      Therefore forced "accent neutralization" is clearly a discrimination based on national origin. So the immediate requirement is a necessity to show that it is absolutely necessary for job performance.

      Of course, Indian call centers aren't beholden to US law anyways, so even if it is a violation, it doesn't matter because in their country, it is not a violation. Of course, the Indian call center workers are also paid less than the US federal minimum wage, but it's not a "violation" because it's in another country. So, why can't it be both? Or context/country sensitive?

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    2. Re:Context by digitig · · Score: 2

      No, he means that accent can be used as an excuse to harass teachers who can be understood perfectly well but are not the "right" ethnic group.

      Yes, sometimes something needs to be done about a person's accent. I work in an international context so I'm used to dealing with accents, but I sometimes end up with a call-centre worker that I can't understand at all. If this picks that up and they get help then that's good all round. If they ignore it because the person with the accent is the right caste, whilst using it as an excuse to make life difficult for excellent call-centre workers (yes, I've dealt with some) who are the wrong caste then it's just as bad as if they do much the same with Arizona teachers. Is it such a radical concept that something can be used for both good and bad purposes?

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    3. Re:Context by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, some levels of clear are not judgement calls. Some "accents" are simply lazy nonsense. As a man once married to a filipina, I can attest that a huge portion is just mental laziness. If a person can hear when their accent is being mimicked, then they know when they are saying it wrong. The mix of F and P sounds is simply ridiculous as the sounds are not even remotely the same. Worse, when she heard a word for the first time, she would mentally spell it in her mind and then pronounce it "her way" despite that the first time encountering a word was audible rather than written.

      Some accents are beyond understandable and tries the patience of all who try to listen.

      And as someone who has a great deal of experience learning and dealing with the Japanese and Mandarin languages, I can say without any reservation that different people hear things in different ways. US English speakers hear consonant sounds primarily while Japanese hear vowel sounds primarily. And, of course, Mandarin speakers hear pitch primarily, so that's a whole other thing.

      While taking a Japanese language class, one of my classmates was British. He insisted on speaking his form of Japanese with his British accent. And so I had to ask him, "what good is it to learn to speak a language when the people won't understand you because you keep changing the sounds of the vowels?" This, of course, brings me to my main point in all of this.

      If the people you speak to cannot understand you, then your accent is most assuredly a self-imposed handicap. If you can't do it right, you might as well not do it at all, in my opinion. Personally, I am rather good at understanding even the strongest of accents but I am very sympathetic to those who aren't as good at listening as I know very well what it means to a straining mind to lose a transfer of information because the data stream is difficult to decode rapidly enough.

      And when we are talking about school teachers with accents, we are talking about young minds which are already straining to learn their new material, now we have to strain their minds further by making it more difficult for them to understand what is being taught? Which is worse? To ensure the best potential for student education or to coddle self-imposed linguistic handicaps of a smaller group of people? We need to look to the future and not hold education back any more than necessary. And if IMPROVING a NECESSARY SKILL is a rights violation, then we might as well stop teaching English in public schools, forget about spelling and grammar or anything where linguistic skills count.

      If teachers can't speak, how will students?

    4. Re:Context by swalve · · Score: 1

      Due to a hilarious "accent" difference, my kindergarten class learned how to say "wolf" properly: "woof".

    5. Re:Context by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      The is very little that is more frustrating as a student as being unable to understand your teachers. Speaking in clear English is very important in order to teach well, especially if you have students who may have an differing accent at home. Someones whose native language is Chinese has enough trouble with unaccented (a.k.a. Midwestern) English speaker, much less someone with a thick Russian accent. Nobody was fired on this basis, but rather received additional training in order to improve their classroom effectiveness.

    6. Re:Context by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I am pretty sure that when used by the state in Arizona, this amounted to selective cultural bias and harassment.

      So, in short, what you're doing here is assigning beliefs to a group of people based simply on where they live. I think there's a word for that, but I just can't put my figure on it.

    7. Re:Context by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's one thing to be able to reproduce the correct sound when one is laser focused on replicating the sound and quite another to be able to create the sounds properly whilst handling the other aspects of effective communication.

      Some individuals will have an accent as a result of not being able to hear or reproduce the sounds necessary to have a native like accent. But more commonly people will only be able to create the correct sound with great effort and will have to make other trade offs for it to happen.

      There is a minority of people out there that have an especially good ear for accents and more control over the muscles necessary to create the sounds, but they are very much in the minority and most folks just can't maintain it for long periods of time.

      I don't think it's been established completely the reason why some people can and others can't, one of the suggestions I've seen is that it's related to mirror neurons and empathy, but I don't believe that's at a point where we can say conclusively that is the case. But, whatever the means, the reality is that it's highly unlikely to involve the same pathway that one uses for other aspects of verbal communication.

    8. Re:Context by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      But what if they targeted a teacher with a New Jersey accent, or possibly a Mississippi one? Perhaps some harsh "tall corn" accent? Any of those can be as much of an impediment to understanding as a "parents immigrated from Mexico and I was born in East LA" accent - which would be the "National Origin" you are probably talking about.

      I hear the "it could be used against the white man as well" fairness excuse all the time. But, in practice, it isn't, and thus is illegally discriminatory. When that happens 100/100 times for hundreds of years, then it should take extraordinary evidence to prove such borderline cases as this aren't discriminatory, regardless of how "innocent" the intentions of the legislators are.

      It honestly is difficult to switch your ears and understanding back and forth so it would be optimal to have all of the teachers in the school at least speaking something close to the same accent.

      And when that's *always* "White man of English descent", then that demonstrates a clear civil rights violation. If there was a push from a state to standardize on a Mexican accent, there's be so many complaints, but for standardizing on white-man speak and everyone gets on the "it's not discrimination" bandwagon.

    9. Re:Context by Oligonicella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, no and no. Having an instructor with an accent so thick you can't understand them is a waste of every resource imaginable.

      The friggin' job of a teacher is to impart knowledge through communication. It is therefore incumbent on the teacher not the student to facilitate the communication.

      I love accents. I can do many and do frequently. Yet I have had a physics professor with a Hindi accent so thick that 100% of his class was failing. That is his fault and his alone.

    10. Re:Context by cHiphead · · Score: 2

      Hell, IBM only does it to trick people into thinking your not calling India and supporting the outsourcing of jobs...

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    11. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Um...

      For instance it definitely would be optimal for all the teachers to have their gonads removed... then you would never have to worry about them getting pregnant, getting anyone else pregnant, and actually, it would remove nearly all of their sex drive, so the rates of inappropriate teacher/student relationships would certainly go down.

      There was no implication of what gender the teacher was at all in any of this...

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    12. Re:Context by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      SCOTUS has said as much

      No, they never said anything that could be construed to be about accents. Foe one, foreign languages like Spanish are almost always taught as foreign languages. In school, they assume English is your first language in English class, and teach accordingly. In Spanish (even in the most heavily Hispanic neighborhoods), Spanish is taught as a second language, thus not meeting the needs of the students in attendance. The only reason Spanish is taught is to meet a "foreign" language requirement. ESL is different. Because teaching a language as a first language is different than teaching it as a foreign one, just dumping students who don't know English into English will result in poor performance (for both those who don't know English and those who do). So segregation is beneficial to all involved.

    13. Re:Context by Jessified · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is pretty ignorant to assume that because you can distinguish phonemes in your language, that others should have no problem and that they are lazy if they do. I bet you couldn't tell the difference between the four D's of Punjabi, even though a native speaker would think you are foolish for not hearing it. F and P are easy to you, and all those D's are just as easy to the Punjabi speaker. Any linguist worth their salt would tell you the same thing. And do you really want your children schooled in such a way that they only ever encounter perfect English (by your definition that is, as there is no such thing as one correct dialect in any language)? Cause that would really prepare them for the world we live in, right?

    14. Re:Context by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And when we are talking about school teachers with accents, we are talking about young minds which are already straining to learn their new material, now we have to strain their minds further by making it more difficult for them to understand what is being taught? Which is worse? To ensure the best potential for student education or to coddle self-imposed linguistic handicaps of a smaller group of people? We need to look to the future and not hold education back any more than necessary. And if IMPROVING a NECESSARY SKILL is a rights violation, then we might as well stop teaching English in public schools, forget about spelling and grammar or anything where linguistic skills count.

      If teachers can't speak, how will students?

      I grew up in a regional private school in Australia, miles from nowhere but with enough prestige that it attracted a wide range of students and staff. In just my first high school year I had teachers with australian, french, italian, two kinds of american, scottish and four kinds of english accents - not to mention students from many asian regions. What I and my classmates learned from that was the ability to listen to any accent and quickly adapt to the sound, then understand what was being said. That's part of the reason so many overseas asian students came to Australia, to improve their language skills both ways

      'Normalising' the accent of teachers is killing off just one more skill a student is perfectly capable of learning invisibly. The excuse that accents should be taken to some artificial or local norm is a language equivalent of justifying dumbing down maths education so the kids learn only what's needed in their own local town. The instant they go out into the world and talk to people with accents different from their own (and the world is full of them) they're the ones that just end up make stupid jokes about damned foreigners not learning to speak english, while their peers with more experience with accents understand the message barely noticing, and get on with a life that has more opportunities.

      Straining kids minds to actually learn a skill that comes in terrifically useful in real life? Heaven forbid.

    15. Re:Context by Mystiq · · Score: 1

      I take issue with your seemingly contradictory points. At first you say "some 'accents' are simply lazy nonsense" and then you answer yourself by saying "different people hear things in different ways," which mostly boils down to your first language. I'll concede one argument to you and say that, as someone who at least tries to mimic the "accent" of the original language when speaking in tongues, I don't understand the math teacher I had one year in college. He insisted on saying the word "path" as "pass" every single time. As this was a class in graph theory, the word path came up a lot. :(

      This whole thing reminds me of a class in linguistics I took. The teacher showed a video of a bunch of Americans in a submarine that was sinking. At the end of the video, the German dude on the other end of the emergency communication channel said, "So... what are you sinking about?" German lacks the "th" sound that English has and to the German speaker, the "th" phoneme translates to the nearest sound, "s," turning the word into "thinking" in his head, but it comes out as "sinking."

      Your original language controls very heavily how your perception works. There was another example of a tribe of people somewhere that count up to "many." They had 1, 2, 3 4, 5 or something and many. You show them 10 or 100 and they simply call it "many." Their notion of counting ends at "many."

      As someone who had a hard time in college with some accents, I really don't see this is as wrong when communication is a vital part of the job description, such as teaching or being a call agency of some sort. If you settle on a language, you need to have an accent that at least somewhat resembled the typical speaker. There are horror stories across the US, I'm sure, of colleges with student teachers with accents so thick you might as well not go to class. (And don't get me fucking started on students that ask said teachers in their native language and then receive an answer in that same language, without them ever explaining what the fucking question or answer was.) If you're saying "pass" and you mean "path," maybe it's time to get some accent training.

      English has a wide variety of sounds but if someone came up to you and started talking in a language that uses clicks (they do exist), you would have an incredibly difficult time distinguishing one click from another, even though to the native speaker, they are the difference between "path" and "pass."

    16. Re:Context by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      While I agree with your underlying sentiment ("accent neutralization" is definitely a can of worms best left closed) your arguments are bad and border on outright fallacious.

      I hear the "it could be used against the white man as well" fairness excuse all the time. But, in practice, it isn't, and thus is illegally discriminatory.

      That's been a myth for some time. The stereotypical "white man" who supposedly gets all the best treatment has been gone for decades. This is the only group that gets no special rights. This is the group that is generally used as the scapegoat for pretty much anything and everything anyone jolly well feels like.

      And when that's *always* "White man of English descent", then that demonstrates a clear civil rights violation. If there was a push from a state to standardize on a Mexican accent, there's be so many complaints, but for standardizing on white-man speak and everyone gets on the "it's not discrimination" bandwagon.

      We're talking about the USA here. Not Mexico. I don't know if you heard, but the official language of the USA is English. And it just so happens that the universally most-easily understand English accents are slight variations on accents most commonly spoken by Caucasians from the mid-western or western states. Don't get me wrong, I love other accents, but they are undeniably more difficult to understand.

      That being said, I think "accent neutralization" is a horrible idea. It does have the potential for discrimination, as well as the potential to destroy culture. And we've done just fine so far without it.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    17. Re:Context by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

      Due to a hilarious "accent" difference, my kindergarten class learned how to say "wolf" properly: "woof".

      And you're still trying to understand the moral of the story of "The Little Boy Who Cried Woof"...

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    18. Re:Context by matria · · Score: 1

      My high school world history teacher had such a heavy Brooklyn (NY) accent that nobody in the school (northern California) could understand him. So some years before I was in his class he had developed the technique of writing every word he said on the blackboard as he said it, including the answers to questions. The class was easy to ace, since all you had to do was copy as he wrote and get full extra credit for the "notes". However, we only covered about 1/4 of the official history book since his method took so much time.

    19. Re:Context by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Given the current level of pedophile-paranoia, I'm surprised no fringe politician has yet suggested manditory castration for all male teachers just as a precaution. We're already at the point where teachers are afraid to talk to the pupils about anything other than the lesson for fear of the contact being seen as inappropriate.

    20. Re:Context by Sique · · Score: 2

      As a man once married to a filipina, I can attest that a huge portion is just mental laziness. If a person can hear when their accent is being mimicked, then they know when they are saying it wrong. The mix of F and P sounds is simply ridiculous as the sounds are not even remotely the same. Worse, when she heard a word for the first time, she would mentally spell it in her mind and then pronounce it "her way" despite that the first time encountering a word was audible rather than written.

      Let me correct your bias here. It actually depends on your language which phonemes sound the same and which do not. So it might be that in modern English, F and P sound different. But that's solely correct for modern English. In the Middle Ages, F and P were interchangable, and you often see words morphing from a p sound to an f sound and vice versa during the development of language. As an example, the english word "plant" comes from the same root (pun halfly intended) than the german word "pflanze", where the p-sound is morphed to an pf-sound, but the overall phonetic structure is the same.

      There is a single criterion which allows you to assess if two sounds are the same for a language or not: Are there examples where the meaning of a word or syllable changes, if you change one phoneme into the other one? For modern English, there are such examples (e.g. pond vs. fond, paint vs. faint etc.pp.), thus english speakers consider them different. In spanish, no such examples exists, so spanish natives have a hard time making a difference between p and f.

      (That's also the reason why chinese and japanese people have such difficulties making a difference between L and R - in their languages, it makes no difference, if you pronounce the L like an R or vice versa.)

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    21. Re:Context by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Good day to you. I am Michael from Newcastle. What about that Alan Shearer chappie, way-aye? How can I be helping you today?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    22. Re:Context by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The stereotypical "white man" who supposedly gets all the best treatment has been gone for decades. This is the only group that gets no special rights. This is the group that is generally used as the scapegoat for pretty much anything and everything anyone jolly well feels like.

      I see why it bothers you. You must be a white male. Do you want an example of the mentality of the "average" white male? Bush Jr was against Affirmative Action because he said it's unfair for someone to get something just because of who his daddy was. However, he got into Yale via Affirmative Action (called "legacy" when it's rich white people getting the special treatment). How many black people are eligible for "legacy" admission? Still a tiny fraction of the number of whites that get that special treatment? Then we still have an explicit racial inequality issue in the US. The real problem is that wealth is power, and the rich (those with wealth) try to confuse people into thinking that income is power.

      We're talking about the USA here. Not Mexico. I don't know if you heard, but the official language of the USA is English.

      I haven't heard. When was English made the official language of the USA? Yea, I haven't heard the official language of the USA is English. Thanks for enlightening me, but forgive me if I assume the USA has no "official language" because I've never seen any "official" declaration of such.

      Don't get me wrong, I love other accents, but they are undeniably more difficult to understand.

      When the accent police pay as much attention to Germans as Asians (including Indians) and Hispanics, I'll consider it something other than baseless overt racism, and I've seen nothing to indicate otherwise, but I'll leave you with my favorite quote (I didn't make it up, but I don't know who said it first, someone told me Abraham Lincoln, but I haven't seen it properly attributed to him.

      "Do not judge a law by the good it may bring when reasonably applied, but by the evil it may bring when abused."

    23. Re:Context by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      From the accounts I've heard, American English is closer to Shakespeare's English than current British English is. So I don't know what the problem is.

    24. Re:Context by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      Within the U.S. it is, or at least it's the accent which is least often misunderstood by a random sample within the U.S. The English empire was so last century, love it or hate it (most sane people hate it) the U.S is the empire now. Anyways RP is the queen's English, and I don't have a queen. Why should I want to speak the queen's English in such a case? Anyways even that accent wouldn't be a problem so long as you avoided a lot of the slang. It's even quite a bit more understandable than a thick southern drawl.

    25. Re:Context by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      My wife is originally from New Zealand. Shortly after arriving here in Texas, she was trying to order food at a McDonald's

      Did she want a Falet-O-Fash?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    26. Re:Context by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Queen Elisabeth I spoke closer to American English than British English. So fuck off, I speak the Queen's English, just not your stupid queen.

    27. Re:Context by shilly · · Score: 1

      Erm. RP is just as much of an accent as any other form of spoken English. There is no such thing as accent-free English or indeed accent-free spoken language! And RP has certainly not killed off southern English accents. Media and mobility have had an impact, but RP was only ever spoken by a small fraction of the population. And significant regional differences continue to exist: a West Country accent is still pretty easily distinguishable from a Londoner's accent. It's even possible to quite clearly distinguish between a NW London teenage girl's accent depending on ethnicity: Asian, Jewish or WASP. And none sounds exactly like their parents...

    28. Re:Context by shilly · · Score: 1

      RP is certainly not "the Queen's English". The Queen speaks with a distinct upper class accent, as satirised endlessly by Steve Bell et al.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2010/nov/23/queen-prince-philip?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

    29. Re:Context by shilly · · Score: 1

      But surely you made a trade-off? Ie you weighed up the difficulty of understanding the accent vs the brilliance of what was being said? I mean, accent is important but it's hardly the be-all and end-all, is it?

    30. Re:Context by webnut77 · · Score: 1

      +1 Well said

    31. Re:Context by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      Somebody mod up.
      Without teaching the kids how to listen, and how to get over their inital accent problems, no kids will be able to learn more languages or hear more sounds.

    32. Re:Context by Another,+completely · · Score: 1

      The Supreme Court has held that discrimination even by private employers based on not speaking English is only permissible when English skill is absolutely necessary to perform their job, because otherwise it is discrimination based on national origin (which is illegal).

      Therefore forced "accent neutralization" is clearly a discrimination based on national origin. So the immediate requirement is a necessity to show that it is absolutely necessary for job performance.

      I missed a step in your argument. You are claiming that English skill is not absolutely necessary to perform the job of answering English-language telephone calls? If working in a call center doesn't qualify as a job that requires English skill, then what does?

    33. Re:Context by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      A very good point, very nicely made. Your education is serving you well.

    34. Re:Context by erroneus · · Score: 1

      I guess I should have said it more simply, which is to say this:

      Some people speak to be understood. Others speak to hear themselves speak. But when it is your job and responsibility to speak to be understood, it's time to lose the accent.

    35. Re:Context by webnut77 · · Score: 1

      And when we are talking about school teachers with accents, we are talking about young minds which are already straining to learn their new material, now we have to strain their minds further by making it more difficult for them to understand what is being taught? Which is worse? To ensure the best potential for student education or to coddle self-imposed linguistic handicaps of a smaller group of people?

      But then you would have left this out which is your best point

    36. Re:Context by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      Exactly my point - RP is not regional. The raison d'etre of RP was to strip out the regional cues that gave away where someone grew up.

      There's more to the South than the west country and London. Huge swathes of the south east, such as the home counties, have had their regional accents replaced by RP.

    37. Re:Context by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Someone I know works in a call centre. He recently had the experience that someone who called refused to talk to him or anyone else in the Indian call centre, and insisted on being transferred to a British call centre. The call centre in question was in Wales, and my friend has a Welsh accent...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    38. Re:Context by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      For being such an arrogant ass about the matter, you're awfully ignorant of linguistics and the neurology of language.

      Most people undergo what is called phoneme solidification around puberty. After that time they have great difficulty learning to distinguish new phonemes. An example would be aspirated/unaspirated bilabial stops in English (the difference between the 'p' in public and the 'p' in stop). In Thai the two are completely different phonemes, but in English they are not. Most English speakers have a difficult time learning this feature of Thai. Another example is 'r' vs 'l' for most speakers of Japanese when learning English.

      This is not laziness. For you to claim so just makes you look like an inconsiderate asshole. I'm surprised your filipina wife didn't machete you.

      The reality is that for most people the brain structures involved in learning to distinguish phonemes solidify around puberty. This is why for most people learning new languages before puberty is trivial (put a four year-old in a room full of people speaking a language he/she doesn't know and he/she will learn it without explicit instruction), and afterwards is generally difficult.

      Just because you're fortunate to be capable of learning languages more easily than most people doesn't mean that's normal, or that they're lazy. But it does mean you're an asshole.

    39. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      I missed a step in your argument. You are claiming that English skill is not absolutely necessary to perform the job of answering English-language telephone calls? If working in a call center doesn't qualify as a job that requires English skill, then what does?

      My argument is that a perfectly neutral American accent is not absolutely necessary to teach children.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    40. Re:Context by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Should a native English speaking student not be entitled to have a course taught in something approximately close to the English most American's speak ?

      There is no "English most Americans speak" though. The accents in different parts of your country are incredibly disparate, depending on where you are, to the point of almost being considered separate languages. (well, dialects, at least). Between accents and vocabulary differences, and other regional differences, how do you decide what accent somebody should be teaching in? Should somebody from deep in Louisiana have to go through the same language normalization so that they can be allowed to speak in California? How about somebody from the Bronx who wants to work in Florida?

      I'm all for people who have trouble being understood undergoing elocution coaching. Especially in a job like teaching, it's important that your audience can understand you. But as long as you can be understood, then there's really no point in going through language training. It's also worth mentioning that in order to actually get the qualifications you need to teach at the primary level in the US (where it might actually make a big difference), you need to re-qualify domestically. You can teach at the University level with a PhD from overseas, but in the US you still need a B.Ed, and most teachers' unions don't recognize foreign qualifications on it, so you'd have to re-do your B.Ed in the US to be allowed to teach at that level. That's at least 2 more years of schooling, in a degree where your ability to be understood is enough to turn a perfect grade into a fail.

    41. Re:Context by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Accepting your premise as true (which I do not accept 100% because if we are capable of learning new words, we are certainly all capable of learning new and correct ways to say them) then it should be safer to say that people with such strong linguistic handicaps shouldn't be teaching in the first place. After all, some people are simply not suited to some occupations. I doubt you would disagree with me were we talking about who should be a medical doctor and who shouldn't. If there is something about a person which makes them more difficult to learn from, they shouldn't be teachers at all right? That is, presuming they cannot overcome the distracting or impeding mannerisms.

      In reality, you can't have it both ways. So either they are lazy minded or they are actually incapable. In one instance, they can improve and keep being teachers, in the other they should stop being employed as teachers all together.

    42. Re:Context by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      (which I do not accept 100% because if we are capable of learning new words, we are certainly all capable of learning new and correct ways to say them)

      Capable does not mean that it is easy on any given time scale. The time scale required will vary substantially from person to person, regardless of effort (and some may not realize the effort required of them). None of this means they are being lazy--some may simply have extreme difficulty (as dyslexic people have great difficulty reading but are not incapable of it), some may not believe themselves capable (which is different from being lazy), etc.

      it should be safer to say that people with such strong linguistic handicaps shouldn't be teaching in the first place. After all, some people are simply not suited to some occupations. I doubt you would disagree with me were we talking about who should be a medical doctor and who shouldn't. If there is something about a person which makes them more difficult to learn from, they shouldn't be teachers at all right?

      I never disagreed with this. Just as I should not be a professional basketball player because I can't make a jump shot to save my life, people who cannot communicate effectively in a given language should not be teaching content in that language. I very much agree with that point.

      What I vehemently disagree with is your arrogant claim that because other people have a harder time than you do learning new phonemes and languages that they are being lazy.

      In reality, you can't have it both ways. So either they are lazy minded or they are actually incapable. In one instance, they can improve and keep being teachers, in the other they should stop being employed as teachers all together.

      Of course I can because the world is not a binary dilemma. Learning alien (utterly unfamiliar) phonemes requires varying levels of effort (and thus time spans to master), and many people on the lower end of linguistic learning capability will not even know they have a problem with it (as many with learning disabilities never realize they have a problem and thus never know they should be trying--which is still not the same as being lazy).

    43. Re:Context by Another,+completely · · Score: 1

      Ok, fair enough. I was thrown off by the conclusion.

      Of course, Indian call centers aren't beholden to US law anyways, so even if it is a violation, it doesn't matter because in their country, it is not a violation.

      I would be surprised if accent and diction training for call center workers (especially if time and expenses are paid by the employer) were illegal, immoral, or otherwise unacceptable in either the U.S. or India. I think the two arguments got a bit tangled. Thanks for the clarification.

    44. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      I would be surprised if accent and diction training for call center workers (especially if time and expenses are paid by the employer) were illegal, immoral, or otherwise unacceptable in either the U.S. or India. I think the two arguments got a bit tangled. Thanks for the clarification.

      If the time and expense are paid by the employer, then yeah, highly unlikely. However, if someone could be fired under sufficiently arbitrary criteria for failing to have a "good enough" accent, some of the firings could run afoul of US law.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    45. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      "never have to worry about them getting pregnant, getting anyone else pregnant"

      If anything I listed the females first in the list.

      I could quote mine you too, and demand that you apologize for something you didn't say as well. There will be no "my bad", because the gender that I had in mind when I was writing the text was explicitly female... I included the "getting anyone else pregnant" in order to be inclusive of men.

      The text also did not assume at first that these pregnancies were between teachers and students... they apply to ALL pregnancies, and if your women can't get pregnant no matter whom her partner is, then you never have to deal with maternity leave. Which was the entire point of why removing the gonads would prove to be more optimal.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    46. Re:Context by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure that when used by the state in Arizona, this amounted to selective cultural bias and harassment. That would be constant with the other developments in that benighted corner of the US.

      Yea, we must closely watch this terrible group of people defined by imaginary borders because we all know they are the absolute worst at judging other groups of people defined by imaginary borders. I don't understand why they can't be more enlightened like us.

    47. Re:Context by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      However, he got into Yale via Affirmative Action (called "legacy" when it's rich white people getting the special treatment). How many black people are eligible for "legacy" admission? Still a tiny fraction of the number of whites that get that special treatment? Then we still have an explicit racial inequality issue in the US.

      Nope, you have a class inequality problem.

      Poor whites are going to stand as bad a chance, if not worse. Correct me if I'm wrong but there isn't a charity called the "White Trash College Fund", nor a "National Association for the Advancement of Hillbillies".

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    48. Re:Context by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 1

      The point is that if you can't tell the difference between the four D's in Punjabi, you should not teach stuff in Punjabi.

    49. Re:Context by NitroWolf · · Score: 2

      if you the rest of the world all spoke the Queens sodding English as we taught it to you, Then there wouldnt be a problem.

      Yes there would, we'd have already used up all the supply of vowels buried in the ground. We're really close to peak vowel consumption now... if we had been using the Queens English from the get-go, all those extra vowels we'd have been using would have consumed the supply long ago.

      You Limey's should be thanking us for allowing you to continue in your wanton use of superfluous vowels. Letting you live in the lap of vowel luxury while we labor under the sharp lash of the consonant, with no soft, fluffy vowels to make our lives as easy as yours.

    50. Re:Context by jenn_13 · · Score: 1

      This depends on the level of the students. At university, I had several professors with heavy accents, and it just required a little more effort on my part to listen more closely, and ask for repetitions occasionally, and this was not a problem for me. I would expect university students, as adults, to be capable of doing the same, or in the case that the accent is just too difficult to understand, to say something to the professor. The article, however, was specifically referring to elementary school children. I would not expect the same of them as I would of university, or even high school students. In the second grade, kids should not have to struggle to understand their teacher. There is a lot for kids to learn in elementary school, and I don't think it benefits them to have to learn to understand accents at the same time.

    51. Re:Context by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      My argument is that a perfectly neutral American accent is not absolutely necessary to teach children.

      I don't think this is about what is absolutely necessary, but what is the most efficacious. There can really be no argument that teaching in a neutral "accent" is the most efficacious for the most number of people. Other issues not withstanding.

    52. Re:Context by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "And do you really want your children schooled in such a way that they only ever encounter perfect English"

      Yes. They will encounter lesser varieties elsewhere.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    53. Re:Context by AJH16 · · Score: 1

      Actually, an accent is by definition "a manner of pronunciation peculiar to a particular individual, location, or nation." (Wikipedia) "Accentless" speech would be speech which is pure to the definition of the language (dictionary pronunciation for example) without localized inflections and such. My brief understanding of RP (hadn't heard of it before today) is that it attempts to follow strict definition of words and pronunciation to prevent the distinguishing characteristics that deviate from standard pronunciation.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    54. Re:Context by AJH16 · · Score: 1

      But how is it discrimination if it doesn't impact them getting the job? I thought we were talking about additional training that is being provided for them. I would agree that it would be unfair to discriminate based on accent, but I don't think it is unfair to require someone who needs to be clearly understood to learn to speak clearly. It isn't like learning an alternate speech pattern overwrites your current one. Many people are capable of speaking in multiple accents quite comfortably and efficiently. Listen to an interview with the actor that plays Gregory House sometime. He has a heavy British accent, but you would never guess it from his part. Why is this not a fair expectation for those who need to be able to communicate publicly, at least to an understandable level?

      --
      AJ Henderson
    55. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      I don't think this is about what is absolutely necessary, but what is the most efficacious. There can really be no argument that teaching in a neutral "accent" is the most efficacious for the most number of people. Other issues not withstanding.

      The law does not allow one to discriminate upon certain grounds even if it is the most efficacious choice. As I noted elsewhere, the most efficacious choice would be to only hire men, or women who have been sterilized, as then your employees would never need to use maternity leave. This choice however is blocked because it's the unethical choice (as it unfairly excludes perfectly reasonable candidates).

      As a (very poor) analogy, the most efficacious way to figure out how syphilis progresses would be to infect a bunch of people and leave it untreated to see the disease progression, while continuing close monitoring of conditions to ensure that good data is collected. Now, regardless of how efficacious that process would be, it would be outright unethical to do it. (And it was outright unethical when it actually was done.)

      It's important to remember that civil rights and human rights trump efficacious choices when they come into conflict. Thus, just because it would produce better learning in students is not a sufficient reason to retaliate against employees who speak with a foreign accent. (I do not know if a regional accent that is not foreign to the US would have the same protections, so this comment was intentionally limited only to foreign accents.)

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    56. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Given the current level of pedophile-paranoia, I'm surprised no fringe politician has yet suggested manditory castration for all male teachers just as a precaution. We're already at the point where teachers are afraid to talk to the pupils about anything other than the lesson for fear of the contact being seen as inappropriate.

      This comment is clearly sexist. There are female teachers who rape students as well. Mandatory castration for all male teachers would be an unreasonable discrimination and prima facie illegal discrimination.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    57. Re:Context by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      The paranoia though focuses almost entirely on males. The discriminatory result merely reflects a discriminatory cause.

    58. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      The paranoia though focuses almost entirely on males. The discriminatory result merely reflects a discriminatory cause.

      I will grant you that. Garbage in, garbage out. :(

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    59. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      But how is it discrimination if it doesn't impact them getting the job?

      Because at some point, if someone fails to learn a "good enough" accent, then they might be terminated, or not promoted, or any of a number of negative employment actions that the employer might take. None of which would be legal under US law.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    60. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Everything you say is correct, but "primary language" has already been established in US law as being sufficiently linked to "national origin" so that if someone discriminates against you based on your primary language not being English, that it is equivalent to them discriminating against you for not being from the USA.

      It's seem everyone so wrap up in the discrimination issue and not think of the children. Regardless of his accent, If you can't understand the teacher, what good is the teacher?

      You're right. And this would be a case where accent is absolutely necessary to perform their job. However, if the teacher is teaching children just fine, but speaks with a hint of Spanish accent, and is sent to "accent neutralization" to remove that accent, then that is a discriminatory employment action.

      This "think of the children" thing can get annoying, too. A lot of people used to be of the mind to object to their children being taught by a black person, and even today, it's likely that a parent might object that a teacher is atheist/muslim, or a foreigner. But at some point, we have to acknowledge that not all limitations or objections need be corrected. I'm sure Andrew Schlafly would complain if his children were being taught by a female, because he wants an intelligent teacher, and he is of the belief that women are less intelligent than men. (Or "differently" intelligent.)

      In any case, there is an absolute minimum requirement that is acceptable or necessary to do a job, and rejecting someone who exceeds that minimum because they are not "optimal" is unethical, and depending upon the reasons, in the USA, it could be illegal.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    61. Re:Context by Jessified · · Score: 1

      I concede that the stakes are higher with instruction. I too have struggled to grasp the thick accents of teachers. I have also noticed that students are less patient with Asian accents than European accents (German, Russian, French etc.) These days, people are more likely to say, "You come to this country, you learn the language!" to a Chinese person than to a French person. The problem I have is when people take a reasonable concern (like wanting to understand their teacher) and use it to shield racism (as evidence by the generally inconsistent application of said concern). Furthermore, it should come as no surprise that this is Arizona we are talking about here.

    62. Re:Context by Jessified · · Score: 1

      Regionism?

      It's not exactly racism. If a white man were born and raised in China, and came to live in America, he wouldn't encounter the same racism as a person who looked like he belonged to an Asian race.

      At any rate, your comment doesn't negate the utility of the parent comment. For example, according to Stats Canada, Indo Canadians marry within their own culture ~90% percent of the time. When it comes to marriage, statistically speaking, Indo Canadians are a xenophobic group of people. That provides some interesting insight into Indo Canadian households. Every time the Arizona electorate votes in favour of politicians who support racist policies, whether they like it or not they are providing an interesting STATISTICAL insight into themselves. It is not unfair to say that the majority of people allowed to vote in Arizona are in favour of or at least indifferent to racist legislation.

    63. Re:Context by Jessified · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as "lesser varieties."

      The "proper" dialect is always considered the one spoken by the rich and powerful. The "uneducated" dialects are spoken by the poor or otherwise marginalized (i.e. black people speaking ebonics). Linguistically speaking, both the proper dialect and poor dialects are rich and complex. There is no scientific explanation for what makes a "proper" dialect superior other than racism and class discrimination.

      Language is constantly evolving and the "proper English" spoken today is massively different from the "proper English" spoken 500 years ago. You would probably have a harder time understanding the "proper English" of 500 years ago than you would with the "lesser varieties" spoken by the people of today you clearly hate so much.

      But don't let me get in your way. Go ahead and tell your kids all about the "lesser varieties" spoken by lesser peoples. Lets start them on the hate young.

    64. Re:Context by AJH16 · · Score: 1

      It can't be discrimination to require someone to be able to do a job. That would be like saying you couldn't have a literacy requirement for an editor. There are these things called qualifications. As long as the employer is trying to make things as accessible as possible, I don't see how it is discriminatory to require a minimum level of job performance and competency.

      --
      AJ Henderson
    65. Re:Context by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I had an Indian girlfriend in college. We went to school in a somewhat rural area in southwest Virginia, where the locals can have thick accents. It was pretty funny to see her switch from her slight Indian accent to a Southern accent on the telephone, to get totally different results from the person on the other end.

      If the people you speak to cannot understand you, then your accent is most assuredly a self-imposed handicap. If you can't do it right, you might as well not do it at all, in my opinion.

      I completely agree. Certain jobs require verbal communication. I had a class at that same college with a Vietnamese professor. I couldn't understand a word he said, so I dropped the class. When someone is completely unintelligible, they really have no business working a job that requires verbal communication (especially lecturing). Sorry if that makes life more difficult for people from other places, but that's the way it is. Maybe he should go back to Vietnam and teach people there, if no one here can understand him. I had no trouble understanding lots of other foreign-born professors from places like Russia, India, eastern Europe, etc. You don't have to speak perfect American English to get along here in a speaking role, but you do need to be able to speak it well enough that most people can understand you, and you also need to not be offended when someone has a problem.

    66. Re:Context by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      The law does not allow one to discriminate upon certain grounds even if it is the most efficacious choice.

      But that is not what you said. Let me requote you again:

      My argument is that a perfectly neutral American accent is not absolutely necessary to teach children.

      Your assertion is that an American accent is not absolutely necessary to teach children. Your argument makes no mention of moral or ethical implications, only that a neutral American accent is not absolutely necessary. I pointed out that the argument for it is based off what is most efficacious, not what is ethical or moral. You were not arguing the moral or ethical implications in your post, only what is absolutely necessary.

      But, if you want to bring the moral and ethical side into it, what is the definition of absolutely necessary? I would say the efficiency of learning and providing the greatest amount of good to the greatest amount of people would qualify as "absolutely necessary." If your definition of "absolutely necessary" is "whatever works well enough to get by," then I would like to point out that is exactly the reason our education system is in such decline. It is exactly that line of reasoning that our public school system is in such sorry, pathetic shape.

      No child left behind.
      Cater to the lowest common denominator.
      Teach to the test.
      Etc...

      We hamstring and neuter our education system so that we do not trample on the sensitive feelings of those that can't or won't keep up or make accommodations for the culture they have decided to be a part of. When I move to other countries (or even just travel) I make every effort to conform to local customs, traditions and even language. I do not (Yeah, I know, rare for an American) try to force my language or ideals on my host culture. I listen to how they speak and I try to imitate it as best I can. I very seriously dislike the "polite" people that will not correct me when I make a mistake - I want to be corrected, I want to understand and I want to be understood. No person in a foreign (to them) culture should strive for anything less. To not do so is not only rude but the height of arrogance.

    67. Re:Context by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I talked to someone in an Irish call center once, and it was pretty difficult to understand him. I have an easier time understanding Indian people than some Irish people. Heck, I probably had an easier time understanding Indians than Australians, before my wife got us hooked on watching all 5 seasons of "Sea Patrol". Now I understand Australian accents pretty well.

    68. Re:Context by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You are right that it's class based. But one reason that class warfare is acceptable is because it's "obvious" that those useless niggers are poor. Have you ever hung out with hillbillies? They hate black people as much or more than the average American. Their hatred of the Black man is such that they actively engage in class warfare against themselves. Voting in Kennedys and Bushes to support lazy white American Affirmative Action against blacks, voting for tax cuts for the rich, since those are all hardworking white folk, while the poor deserve nothing, because the poor are mostly Black.

      The saddest part about racism in the US is that it's so pervasive, but so many refuse to see the problem. Overt racism is alive and well in the US, and supported by most. Don't forget, DWB is still a felony in the south.

    69. Re:Context by Layogenic · · Score: 1

      This. And people speaking "proper English" in other English-speaking countries (say, ENGLAND) might have a hard time understanding our "lesser varieties." Way to use subjective isolationism as a basis for bigotry, eh?

    70. Re:Context by Jessified · · Score: 1

      Know that I'm not saying this sarcastically: I have no idea what your point is. Are we agreeing or disagreeing? Do you mean selective isolationism? Can you elaborate and explain a bit more?

    71. Re:Context by Layogenic · · Score: 1

      Agreeing with you, sorry for being unclear. Selective isolationism by subjective means, perhaps? Couchslug's (apparent) definition of "lesser varieties" of English as being those who speak it differently from him, and by extension Americans (by further subjective reasoning).

    72. Re:Context by Jessified · · Score: 1

      Aw yes I understand now. Thanks for clarifying.

    73. Re:Context by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      1. The USA has no official language. True Story. 2. Who is to say that for most of the US, a distinguished UK accent is not easier to understand than a southern or jersey accent?

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    74. Re:Context by nobodie · · Score: 1

      I had a friend who was offered a position as an IELTS (international English Language testing service) tester/ grader. She left after the second day with the comment that they were trying to get her to agree that European accents were "better" and "more comprehensible to most people". She had spent ten years teaching in China and found that Chinese accents were much easier to understand than European accents.

      The problem was/is not the accent itself, it is always the determination that one accent is "better" or more comprehensible than another. People speak Indian English as their mother language, but that doesn't necessarily make it comprehensible to every other native English speaker. Ditto for Nigerian or Kenyan or Australian for that matter. No offense intended of course, that is the point. Only people without international experience assume that the problem is with the speaker, when you are "somewhere else" and can't understand how people speak your language the problem of understanding is yours!

      --
      Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
    75. Re:Context by shilly · · Score: 1

      Whose dictionary? American, Australian, British? etc. There's no such thing as "spoken English without localized inflections". There's no single "correct" pronunciation of "bath", for example. This notion of a "standard" pronunciation is a centraliser's wank-fantasy, to be honest.

    76. Re:Context by shilly · · Score: 1

      But you claimed that RP was *unaccented*. That's clearly not true. RP is an English accent. It's also more Southern than Northern in flavour (baath, not bath), as well as being entirely artificial. This notion of "neutral" English is just anti-scientific; it doesn't reflect lived reality.

    77. Re:Context by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      It can't be discrimination to require someone to be able to do a job. That would be like saying you couldn't have a literacy requirement for an editor. There are these things called qualifications. As long as the employer is trying to make things as accessible as possible, I don't see how it is discriminatory to require a minimum level of job performance and competency.

      That's exactly the point, there is a minimum level of requirement. Once the person satisfies that minimum, it is discrimination to take any action against them for failing to be "perfect". Thus, despite Random Former-Mexican Citizen #42 being reasonably comprehensible to students, and consistently being rated well by the students as a good teacher, some manager somewhere might decide that because he speaks with an accent, that it is valid justification to fire him, and hire Random Mid-West American Citizen #39, who speaks with a considered-to-be-neutral accent.

      RFMC#42 has met the minimum requirements, and is clearly performing his job adequately, if not exceedingly well. So, firing him because he has any form of accent at all is clear discrimination against him for being a former foreign national.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  7. Both? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why can't it be both an innovation and a civil rights violation?

  8. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

    No, it's a stupid idea, no matter who thought of it. Look, I grew up in Texas and Florida. One of my English teachers had such a thick Southern drawl that even for 'native' speakers it was sometimes a bit hard to figure out what she was saying. I survived. So, I imagine, did everyone else. I even survived learning Russian from a teacher with a pronounced Mexican accent.

    It's just racism, plain and simple.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. Neutralization an offense? by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. If you are paid to talk to people on the phone, you need to be clear. People whose accents are too heavy - even if they know their stuff - can be incoherent to callers. The employer isn't forcing them to talk that way outside of work, or necessarily even when not on the phone.

    In other words, their neutralized accent is a job tool. It is no more a rights violation than being expected to know how to use MS Word.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Neutralization an offense? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2

      My worst run-in with an accent was my matrix algebra class, where the teacher quite clearly knew what she was talking about, but you couldn't hear and comprehend a word of it because of her thick Asian accent. Regrettably, I have since determined that there's a whole lot of awesome stuff that you can do with matrix algebra (e.g. approximate nonnegative matrix factorization) and I wish that I'd been able to absorb more of that material. :(

      So yeah, there's definitely a spot where a heavy accent becomes damaging to your ability to communicate, and especially to teach. The premise is reasonable -- the implementation, of course, has plenty of room to be suspect.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    2. Re:Neutralization an offense? by KermodeBear · · Score: 1

      My Calculus II instructor was from China. I never could tell if he could speak English or not because his accent was so incredibly thick that it wouldn't have mattered. His students contacted the math department on multiple occasions and, instead of addressing the problem, we were told that we were inconsiderate and intolerant.

      No, sorry, we were not being intolerant. We simply couldn't understand anything he said.

      Needless to say we all fared quite poorly in his classes.

      Just one more reason not to send your kid to Miami U. of Ohio.

      --
      Love sees no species.
    3. Re:Neutralization an offense? by drolli · · Score: 1

      Yes. Exactly. I would be thankful if my employer helps me to settle a problem which is possible to fix but can make a big difference for my performance.

      If my Job is to speak, then so it is. There are a lot of things which i am not good in and i dont complain not being hired for them, and if they are part of my Job i am willing to work on my problems.

    4. Re:Neutralization an offense? by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      One of my lower division calculus professors was from Bulgaria and had learned math in the traditional Soviet style system. He shunned calculators and computers, but had an outstanding grasp of the material and an intuitive sense of whether or not the students were following him. He even used the alternative names for certain theorems. For example the "squeeze theorem", limit of a curve bounded by limits of two others, became the "two policemen theorem" because when Bulgaria was still communist and two policemen approached from opposite sides of the street, the goal was to squeeze between them and keep on walking; great sense of humor that guy.

    5. Re:Neutralization an offense? by chihowa · · Score: 1

      My thermodynamics prof was Japanese and had very poor English. He knew it, though, and helpfully covered his mouth with his hand and trailed off at the end of every sentence. That, coupled with his complete disuse of the blackboard or powerpoint, made for a very enjoyable class. Ironically, his accent wasn't all that bad.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    6. Re:Neutralization an offense? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Ugh. I am math-challenged, so this happened to me with a much more pathetic class, college pre-algebra. The instructor should have taken voice lessons from Jackie Chan, it would have made him more intelligible.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Neutralization an offense? by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      But the key is that he actively worked around his handicap (for lack of a better word). Many such instructors (I had two in my college math courses) do not.

    8. Re:Neutralization an offense? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      The premise is reasonable -- the implementation, of course, has plenty of room to be suspect.

      The thing is the examples of poor pronunciation that lead to language coaching given in the artical are not specifically one accent. The say that "da" for "the", "anuder" for another and "leeves here" for "lives here" were all causes of a teacher being written up. While the third one is a Spanish speaker's mispronunciation, the other two are generally the result of lazy pronunciation. I was sent to speech therapy class in elementary school for similar pronunciation reasons. As a result, I am incapable of speaking English with anything other than my native accent (which is the accent that TV announcers are taught, with a few minor regional variations, but less so than most from my region). However, while I am unable to speak English with a Spanish accent (or any other accent), when I speak Spanish, my accent is similar to that of a native Spanish speaker (every native Spanish speaker thinks I learned Spanish in some other Spanish speaking region than where they are native to).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    9. Re:Neutralization an offense? by DinDaddy · · Score: 1

      Must be a requirement for that class. My teacher's German accent was so thick he was unintelligible.

    10. Re:Neutralization an offense? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I had a Vietnamese professor like that. I just dropped the class. There's no point in staying in a class where you can't understand the professor.

  10. Singled out = discrimination by buback · · Score: 1

    I think a key here is that the employees are being singled out. if every teacher had to attend an accent-nomalization class, there is no discrimination.

    In fact, the summary even states that this is exactly what IBM did.

    1. Re:Singled out = discrimination by buback · · Score: 1

      Not saying it makes a lot of sense, but it's the law.

      'Cause otherwise, we might as well institute this at the Federal level. Everyone must conform to the Federal way of speaking, which should be standardized as Washington DC/Mid-Atlantic accent. This is the accent of most mass market, national media, as well as the accent of our seat of government.

    2. Re:Singled out = discrimination by igreaterthanu · · Score: 2

      It's simple, everyone goes to the class until they pass it. If a teacher already has a clear accent, they immediately pass and don't have to go back.

      --
      I dream of a nation where a man is not judged by his skin color but by an number assigned by a credit rating agency.
    3. Re:Singled out = discrimination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Discrimination is not an ultimate evil.

      I have a limited amount of resources then damn straight I will use my resources to train those who I believe are in need the most. It will also help avoid pissing off those who blatantly do not need the training.

    4. Re:Singled out = discrimination by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      If you have a music teacher who is going to be teaching a new unit on an instrument she doesn't play, she takes lessons or attends a workshop. You don't make the math, phys ed and social studies teachers go too.

      Here in Canada we call it professional development and there are several paid days every year for all teachers to do it in subjects relevant to what they teach.

  11. It depends by ironjaw33 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If nobody can understand what a teacher is saying, then how much benefit do the students get from that teacher? Those students may be better off staying home and reading a book. Plenty of college professors fall into this category, but most of them aren't hired based on their teaching ability. For those whose job descriptions include communication, a thick unintelligible accent can be a serious hindrance.

    That said, if someone has a trace of an accent but he or she is completely understandable, then there shouldn't be a problem. Some of the examples given in TFA I would consider ridiculous. But, if parents are complaining that their children can't understand their teachers, a remedial course to mitigate a thick accent might be beneficial.

    1. Re:It depends by phantomlord · · Score: 1

      I had a professor that taught M68k assembly to first year computer engineering students... when class started, he had just gotten back from spending the summer term back in India and his accent was so thick, nobody in the class could really understand him. On top of that, he struggled for words to help students relate to basic processor fundamentals, not being able to think of the terms like "post office box" when talking about registers. Despite the supposed pre-reqs to even get accepted maybe 2 of us in that class of 35 or so even knew what binary numbers were, so when it came time to actually take what we learned in class and implement it in a lab setting, all but a couple of us were completely lost and the vast majority of them failed the lab and class.

      I don't care if the guy was Indian or whatever, but he was being paid to teach the students, which he was clearly unable to do. Those of us that had some previous experience (I knew x86 assembly, so learning the m68k flavor was fairly trivial) managed to get by, but for most students, the money they spent on tuition for that class was an utter waste. Sure, you could argue that they should have leaned more heavily on the book and taught themselves, but despite the $100 the book cost, they still spent somewhere around $4k on the credit hours they dedicated to that professor's class. As for why I didn't help the others much, I was busy working full time to pay for college so I wouldn't come out with a ton of debt, so it's not like I could afford to dedicate all of my time to teaching people what he should have been.

      --
      Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
  12. Bubba and LaQueefa need such classes. by couchslug · · Score: 1

    When your accent is a speech impediment, you have a problem.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    1. Re:Bubba and LaQueefa need such classes. by macraig · · Score: 1

      Qualification: when your accent is a speech impediment for people not from your neck of the woods, then you have a problem.

      I certainly wouldn't speak for any of my former classmates, but when I was in school and learning to write and speak English, ACCURACY was my goal, and I had a high expectation. The result is that anyone who reads or understands English will be able to fundamentally understand (if not comprehend) me. I paid a heavy price for it: slow cursive and block-letter handwriting speeds and the need to subvocalize everything I read or write. I doubt the expectations of my classmates were nearly so rigorous, and the result is that their handwriting is often illegible and people not from their 'hood may think they're speaking gibberish.

      Just last week I wound up speaking with a tier-1 support specialist who was clearly in India, obvious not only because the VOIP connection was horrid but because her English pronunciation was so distorted by her accent carried over from her native tongue that I could understand only a third of what she said.

    2. Re:Bubba and LaQueefa need such classes. by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      Seems fair if such a policy affects both white rednecks with excessive Southern drawl and blacks with excessive Ebonics. (and other categories, but this is what seems specifically referred to by the title of your post)

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    3. Re:Bubba and LaQueefa need such classes. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      It absolutely should. I grew up in the South (or close, VA and TN), and had some trouble understanding people with thick accents even though I lived right there. Of course, there was some class distinction going on too: I went to schools in areas where most of the students' parents had moved from out-of-state, and thus didn't have any accents (aside from Standard American), so I only came across people with thick accents when dealing with other classes of people.

  13. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's embarrassing for the teacher, and embarrassing for the students.

    I took a chem class in college where the professor was just horrible at teaching. I don't know if he just didn't give a damn, or if he was just a really bad teacher who did really good grant work, who knows. Either way, it was well known that you basically had to bring a list of "what the fuck was he talking about" topics to your discussion classes to ask the TAs to explain. I had a brilliant TA who who was saddled with the thickest indian accent I've encountered in my entire life. We'd ask him to explain a topic, and he'd explain, and none of us would understand his accent, we'd sheepishly ask him to repeat again, and he'd just speak louder.

    I actually talked to a bunch of the other students about it after class, and we were all releaved to find out we were experiencing the same problem. none of us could understand the guy. We all agreed that when we could cut through the accent, we thought he was much better at explaining the concepts than the teacher, and he certainly knew what he was talking about, but at least half the time it was almost like he wasn't speaking the same language as us.

    Now, that's just a single TA in a class that had A. the professor, and B. other TAs to ask questions to. If this was a single teacher instructing the class, and that person was all the class had to turn to for explanation of the topic, say what you want... a lot of people are going to fail that class who otherwise shouldn't have.

    I'm not sure how widespread a problem it is, since I only encountered it once in my life, but "people's feelings" be damned, it WAS a problem.

  14. My best English teacher had an accent by Bowling+Moses · · Score: 2

    "So, is accent monitoring and neutralization a civil right violation, as the U.S. Depts. of Justice and Education suggest, or is it an 'innovation', as IBM argues?"

    Provided the individual is easily understood an accent is utterly irrelevant save for some language classes. One of the best teachers I ever had was Mr. Tsang, my AP English teacher. Nearly 20 years later I still remember examining Shakespeare and Kafka in that class. If you had older siblings or friends who had taken his class he was always recommended. He also had a heavy Chinese accent; when he was in his teens he and his family fled from the Cultural Revolution in the PRC.

  15. It's a reasonable requirement by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

    I'm a resident alien in the U.S. I do speak English with an accent, though mine is much milder than that of most of my compatriots. Regardless, if I were aspiring to teach children of native English speakers in a school in a country where English is the majority and de-facto standard language, I would expect to be required to conform to certain norms regarding pronunciation. This is especially true in junior school, where children are still learning to speak right and rapidly acquiring vocabulary, and being exposed to a strong accent may undesirably affect their speech patterns.

    1. Re:It's a reasonable requirement by Mr.+Shiny+And+New · · Score: 2

      My 3 year old daughter goes to daycare where her current teachers are both non-native speakers (one from China, one from a slavic country) and the both have an accent. It is not harming her speech at all, she learns new words just fine. Sometimes she learns them improperly but they get corrected in short order. The key is that children hear language from many different sources and incorporate all of it, not just the one or two teachers with an accent. So I think this whole accent thing is quite overblown.

    2. Re:It's a reasonable requirement by thejynxed · · Score: 2

      I saw on PBS, where they are testing language immersion courses starting at pre-kindergarten and going the entire way through 12th grade. They were dual-learning English and Mandarin Chinese. It was amazing to see 2nd and 3rd graders speaking fluently in both languages, even if it was only "basic" things.

      They were even learning Math and Science courses in both languages.

      To me, this is what Americans should be doing. As much as we all seem to be reliant on English as our primary language, this won't be the case in the future, even with all of the chest-thumping coming out of certain political parties.

      I speak with a "Pennsylvania Dutch" accent. I do get funny looks. I accept this. I also have no problems understanding most people from India or Asia either, and I think that has something to do with it - having spoken and heard a form of German growing up as well as English made it easier for me to pick out what others were saying.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    3. Re:It's a reasonable requirement by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      There's no problem with teaching kids several languages - indeed, the more, the better. The problem is that they should also learn where the boundaries of those languages are, and the appropriate context for their use, rather than randomly mixing pronunciation and vocabulary from both. To that extent, it helps when the people who teach them speak those languages in their standard form or forms.

      I'm not saying that it's reasonable to fire anyone who speaks anything even remotely different from General American. But I don't think that e.g. Ebonics should reasonably be considered "normal English" for education purposes. It all depends on how much the difference actually is. It also helps when the difference is understood as abnormal, and not something to emulate (which in our world bent on political correctness may be a hard message to get through).

      Oh, and don't dismiss the ability of people to pick up pronunciation from those around them. I'm not even talking about kids, who are naturally good at learning; I had also observed it in myself as an adult - moving between New Zealand, Canada, and now U.S., I find that my speech takes on some of the local flavor after a mere few months of moving in, which surprised me quite a bit (especially as you don't actually notice it at first, until you catch yourself contrasting your accent with that of the native speaker you're talking to, and find that it differs much less now than it used to).

    4. Re:It's a reasonable requirement by nine932038 · · Score: 1

      While I agree with your overall point, I disagree with the notion that exposing children to a single strong accent (that is, a strong accent differing from the one used in their environment) could affect their speech patterns. My experiences suggest that it is the overall environment that determines language development, and not a single source of linguistic information. For example, my parents speak English with very heavy accents, and I studied at a French immersion high school. Yet, my English is still excellent and adheres to the Canadian standard, even after four years spent abroad.

      Similarly, my ESL students speak rather... less... like me than I would prefer.

    5. Re:It's a reasonable requirement by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have a theory that the way southerners talk today is the result of some influential individual with a speech impediment. No one else talks that way, so they didn't get it from anyplace...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  16. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by wembley+fraggle · · Score: 1

    I am pretty sure you should have used "clearly" in that post title. Which might be just a teensy bit ironic. Not sure.

  17. Is That All? by chill · · Score: 1

    Just accents? How about handwriting.

    I remember my first day in Calculus 2 in University. Half-a-dozen of us were in class, waiting on the professor and discussing what was taught in the class in the prior hour.

    All four walls had blackboards that were covered in a scrawl. Our best guess was Hebrew or another Semitic language.

    Then the professor walks in and asks "have you copied down everything from the boards, yet?" We were dumbfounded. His handwriting made the average doctor look like a penmanship winner.

    Three of us passed that semester. The rest gave up in despair.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Is That All? by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      We were dumbfounded.

      It was actually an experiment to see how long it would take for someone to say, "We can't read your handwriting."

      From my experience as a TA, I'd guess that none of you ever said anything, except maybe on your course evaluations at the end. Good job!

  18. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by theArtificial · · Score: 2

    I prefer learning a language from a native speaker (but we don't all have that luxury) however being critical of how someone speaks is not racism. People who cannot speak clearly are in teaching positions where clarity matters, surprisingly someone has an issue with this, story at 11.

    --
    Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
  19. college by bcrowell · · Score: 1, Insightful

    As a reality check, maybe we should compare with what happens at the college level. At US research universities, you get profs and TAs who are there because of their research. Many of them have strong accents. With grad students, it's common to assign the ones with really unintelligible accents to grade papers rather than to TA discussion sections or labs. When it comes to profs, I'm sure you can find people who will recount horror stories of unintelligible lecturers, but in reality I think that's very uncommon. It's not unusual to find profs who have strong accents, and in some cases they may be strong enough that they are initially difficult to understand, but in almost all cases students learn to understand their accents fairly rapidly. The key here is that these people are highly educated, they've usually done most or all of their higher education in English, and they use English all day long. They may pronounce "th" as "d," but they are smart people who know how to use words precisely. It works. Nothing bad happens (except in a tiny minority of cases).

    So if it's good enough for Berkeley or Harvard, why is it not good enough for an elementary school in Phoenix?

    Of course the answer is that this isn't really about the quality of teaching, it's about xenophobia.

    BTW, kids don't emulate their teachers' accents. They generally make fun of them. They get their accents from their friends, from TV, from music, and, to a lesser extent, from the people they interact with in the community.

    The real issue is whether these teachers use correct grammar and diction, know how to punctuate a sentence, etc. That has nothing to do with their accents. We already have mechanisms for making sure that people who teach our kids to write an essay are able to write a good essay themselves. These mechanisms don't always work (mainly because market forces make it impossible to set the bar too high), but that has nothing to do with accents.

    The slashdot story's comparison with Indian call center workers is ridiculous. When you're on the phone with someone you've never met, it's much harder to understand that person's accented speech than it would be in person with someone you were familiar with. The call center workers' job consists of nothing but talking to people on the phone, all day. Of course it's a bigger deal for them to have neutral accents.

    1. Re:college by daknapp · · Score: 1

      Of course the answer is that this isn't really about the quality of teaching, it's about xenophobia.

      Your mind-reading ability is astonishing! Somehow you are able to get into the minds of the people involved and you know their motivation! Have you ever considered running for office?

      Actually, there is a very good psychological term for what you are doing here. It's called projection. Since you would do this from some xenophobic motivation, you assume that everyone else must, as well, since it's impossible to imagine people who think differently than you do.

    2. Re:college by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

      "So if it's good enough for Berkeley or Harvard, why is it not good enough for an elementary school in Phoenix?"

      Well, perhaps because those students do not have fully developed language skills, and many of them may be of more modest intelligence. That someone who has completely primary education, and tested highly can understand something doesn't mean a child who is still being taught can do so nearly as well. Someone going to Harvard has completed most of the English education, their principal mental development, and is likely a standard deviation above the mean or more in intelligence. You cannot compare them to an elementary student, particularly one who might be learning disabled.

      Also please consider that there isn't "an" English accent, there are different ones based on the native language of the speaker. It is also much harder for a non-native speaker with one accent to understand a non-native speaker with another. So if you have a teacher with a strong accent who is different form the ESL children in their class, that is an additional barrier to those children.

      It can also be pretty bad, perhaps you've not been to a campus with a large number of foreign students but I happen to work on one in a department that has that. I can go on for days with stories of the various problems language barriers have caused but the one most relevant to education:

      Our student workers are frequently undergraduate students in our department. Makes sense. One of them was complaining because his TA kept marking down his homework because the TA didn't understand what he was saying. I had a look and confirmed this. The TA was grading his English, taking away points for words the TA believed were incorrect. However in every case the word was a real word, was spelled correct, and was used properly in the sentence. The problem was the TA's English skills were poor, whereas our student's English skills were extremely good.

      Unfortunately I could not convince our student to appeal this to the department and attempt to get the TA slapped down. In his case, no real harm done. He got As anyhow since he was a very smart individual and he knew his TA to be incorrect. However consider this with, say, a student who is foreign but speaks a different primary language from the TA, who is being given incorrect instruction or, more relevant to this story, a child who's language skills are still under development.

    3. Re:college by westlake · · Score: 1

      So if it's good enough for Berkeley or Harvard, why is it not good enough for an elementary school in Phoenix?

      Because the university student is eighteen to twenty years old and the third grade student nine?

      The call center workers' job consists of nothing but talking to people on the phone, all day. Of course it's a bigger deal for them to have neutral accents.

      What do you think the grade school teacher is doing all day?

    4. Re:college by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 2

      So if it's good enough for Berkeley or Harvard, why is it not good enough for an elementary school in Phoenix?

      Of course the answer is that this isn't really about the quality of teaching, it's about xenophobia.

      It's not "good enough" when college students can't understand their instructors. It's a serious problem and a slap in the face to students. It's bad enough when the student is an adult and paying for instruction. At least college students can (ostensibly) stand up for themselves and demand better. Allowing small children to be subjected to teachers they can't understand is a travesty. The public school teachers of this country seem to think that the education system exists primarily to provide them with jobs. The fact that maybe some kids will learn...or not...is a complete afterthought. Reason #1006 why this country is doomed.

      BTW, way to play the race bias card. I'd love to see YOUR KID stuck with teachers he can't understand. I wonder if you'd still think it is all about race then.

      --
      "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
    5. Re:college by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      At the grad school I went to, if you were foreign, you had to have a language test. If you didn't do well, you had to take classes to help you learn how to speak English more clearly. We had some foreign TAs who still were nearly unintelligible, but that was fairly uncommon and somewhat of an embarrassment to the grad student selection process. Potential professor hires have to give a lecture and have private talks with groups of students, and being unintelligible is generally a deal-killer.

    6. Re:college by jenn_13 · · Score: 1

      this^^

    7. Re:college by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Even easier than that. I'm an American in a foreign country. Our oldest has spend more time outside the US than in. He speaks with an American accent, not a local one. Despite the fact that American accents are exceedingly rare here. Why? Because when he came home from school one day pronouncing "girl" as "gill" we made sure to beat the accent out of him every chance we got. If we went back to the US, nobody would know he spent the majority of his life outside the US. It's not hard to "correct" poor pronunciation, so anyone who fears their child will take on the accent of a single teacher he sees a few hours a day is ignorant and wrong. But racism (or xenophobia) is strong in the US these days.

    8. Re:college by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Having talked to a large number of people who have expressed this to me before, it is xenophobia. And I'm not projecting, I'm extrapolating based on impartial fact. That you don't like the implications about the US being a backward racist and xenophobic nation of ignorant hicks doesn't change the reality that it is.

    9. Re:college by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Because the university student is eighteen to twenty years old and the third grade student nine?

      That seems irrelevant to me. What does age have to do with listening to accents?

      What do you think the grade school teacher is doing all day?

      Talking in person much of the time is the answer you are looking for, yet even that indicates your glib response is not relevant. You can't see over the phone whether someone understands you. A good teacher will, as they can see the faces of those they are talking to. Whether the problem is a thick accent or a difficult subject, you'd have to assert that teachers do not look at the students for the cases to be the same. A teacher facilitates learning. There's nothing explicitly verbal about that, we just have traditionally done so because it's easiest. And for the racists, it's easier to respond superficially and imply there is no other means to communicate than verbally and that any verbal impediment will harm the children - neither or which is necessarily a valid assumption (and explicitly racist to assume any accent to be an impediment).

  20. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

    I had a similar problem at University, our structural engineering lecturer had a thick accent and interesting pronuciations, we would be sitting there with our text books trying to work out if the word he used was a new term we had to learn or an existing one we should already know.

    From memory I was one of about 15 people in my entire year that passed the course, and that was primarily due to my residential college having additional tutoring available.

    --
    Sara
    Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  21. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Republicans, you mean the same ones that want to roll back various civil rights legislation and voting protections? Don't you think that the repeated attempts to disenfranchise minority voters has something to do with the interpretation?

    It's easy to pretend like motivation doesn't have anything to do with it, but at the end of the day if you come from a party that's known for racist behavior it can take a long time for the reputation to die. Even longer if you're actively encouraging it with overtly xenophobic rhetoric.

  22. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by lvxferre · · Score: 1

    It's not civil right violation to be asked to speak clear, but it is to be pressed to speak without your native accent. It's not about teaching Shakespeare in Vulcan, it's about being able to teach it in Texan English, Hiberno English, Canadian English or whatever.

    --
    Nerdy news for your nerdy needs? http://www.soylentnews.org Soylent News is people!
  23. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 2

    Time is all that's needed. My grandmother called my mom her "little anchor baby" (in Spanish of course). My mother speaks decent English despite the fact that her mom only wanted to teach her Spanish. There wasn't a way around learning English when you're surrounded by it daily. The long and short of it is this: I'm a second generation American, speak abysmal Spanish, and despite my olive skin am as much of a Star Wars loving George Lucas hatin' gringo as the rest of you. Just give it a few generations and we'll be complaining about those damned Englishmen who take all of the jobs and refuse to learn English.

    --
    "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
  24. Re:Difference between a Government Department & by hedwards · · Score: 1

    Government versus private entity isn't relevant, however US versus Indian law is very important indeed. Given what a cash cow call centers are in India, I'd be surprised if it wasn't legal.

  25. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    I am pretty sure you should have used "clearly" in that post title. Which might be just a teensy bit ironic. Not sure.

    That's okay, Avril - we already knew you didn't write your own songs.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  26. English accents sound sexy by buback · · Score: 3, Funny

    I applaud the efforts of the Arizona officials. A smooth English accent makes the speaker sound smarter and more attractive. I hope my children can learn to speak with English accents instead of the muddled Mid-Atlantic American that is so common in these parts.

    1. Re:English accents sound sexy by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      The United States is made mostly of non-indigenous people. Some came from the British Isles, most of them from somewhere else.

      They speak with an accent. To grade that accent is to discriminate, literally, based on their national origin. I agree that people need to be understood. I disagree that they need to be flawless. To demand the degree of "accent-free" diction is to exercise both xenophobic tendencies, and also to discriminate. Both are wrong; both have become typical of caucasian attitude, as manifested in legislation and attitude of elected government officials.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    2. Re:English accents sound sexy by FailedTheTuringTest · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as "accent-free". We all speak with an accent, the accent of the place where we learned our language. You may think your way of speaking is "normal" and everyone else's as "different", but you are not the center of the linguistic universe; it is all relative. People from other places can hear your accent and can probably tell where you grew up by listening to you.

      I suspect that discrimination on the basis of accent would probably violate the civil rights of U.S. citizens to travel freely and work in any state in the USA. You can't discriminate against someone just because they sound like they are from Boston, Brooklyn, or Charleston.

    3. Re:English accents sound sexy by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      Not all discrimination is wrong, much less detrimental. To prefer certains accents is not only acceptable but perfectly natural. Which accents those are will vary by person and culture, but trying to wipe out the preference not only won't happen, it is an attempt to strip something that makes us human.

      Where it becomes an issue is when programs like this get into play and we try to force an accent. That much we definitely agree on.

    4. Re:English accents sound sexy by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      How droll. I'll bet I can guess your background.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    5. Re:English accents sound sexy by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      What you're really thinking of is Received Pronunciation. Although if you don't want to sound like a foreigner, I'd suggest learning Standard American English instead of one of the mid-Atlantic accents.

    6. Re:English accents sound sexy by westlake · · Score: 2

      A smooth English accent makes the speaker sound smarter and more attractive.

      There is no such thing as a "Received Pronunciation" in American English.

      But it is true that radio, the movies, televison helped to define a kind of national voice intelligible across all regional, racial, ethnic and class divisions.

      It is also true that the drive towards standardization often comes from below. From the immigrant or minority population itself. Because it translates into better jobs and upward mobility.

    7. Re:English accents sound sexy by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      It's not xenophobic to insist that teachers have clearly comprehensible accents. Accent policing might be misused to discriminate against people in an undesirable way, but that has no bearing on the desirability of standardized accents for teachers.

    8. Re:English accents sound sexy by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      It's not a demand of accent-free, its a demand to have a comprehendable accent. Most people pick up on speaking a local accent pretty quickly. For those that don't some formal training can be helpful. If I notice someone has a Chinese accent that's okay, what's not okay is if that's all I can figure out when they open their mouth to say something.

    9. Re:English accents sound sexy by rossdee · · Score: 1

      I often get accused of having a British or English accent. (Mind you they usualy say 'I Love your accent)
      While my grandparents did come from Britain I was born and raised in The North Island.

      Anyway what has this got to do with monitors in classrooms. Even if you are using the built in speakers that doesnt change the sound in that way. All modern monitors have option to change the language of the (written) text of the conrols displayed, even back in the days when they were all CRT's rather than LCD/LED

    10. Re:English accents sound sexy by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Better check 'em. Might not be good. People might need to use their brain a little bit. Those HR people, they're shit. They don't know nothing about what's intelligible, and what's not.

      Xenophobia has many manifestations. This is one of them. If an HR department can't decide this, then checking up on them isn't going to do much. It's all part of the slippery slope.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    11. Re:English accents sound sexy by postbigbang · · Score: 2

      I understand that it's not a demand of "accent-free". It's a second guessing of the HR process.

      Anecdotally, I deal with lots of accents every day. Indian, Chinese, Japanese, German programmers and admins. I have an ear for English. Many others do, too. I also know there are people that have a great deal of difficulty with accented English. They're usually in the clear minority, and they need to understand spoken language.

      But what we have here is a policing of accent control, the only one in the United States. In the State of Arizona, there's a lot of hostility towards people termed (pejoratively) "illegals". This has also been the crux of legislation in Arizona, parts of which have been found to be discriminatory towards people that are both immigrants, but also natives of Arizona; mostly these individuals have a Latino/Hispanic but probably Spanish-speaking background. The xenophobia, in my estimation, stems from a fear of the ultra-conservative, often xenophobic State Legislators in Arizona. The accent control is one more pressure put on the populace. The HR department that hires teachers knows the rules; the Accent Police are discriminatory pressure applied to a minority. This is America, and we believe in civility; such Accent Police dissolve some of that civility at the price of the pressure.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    12. Re:English accents sound sexy by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Monitors, in this case, are human monitors of the situation.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    13. Re:English accents sound sexy by Savantissimo · · Score: 1

      What about Queens? Seriously, listening to someone who sounds like Fran Drescher (The Nanny) for six hours a day could scar a child for life. Check out this clip of her attempting French (first 45 seconds). I'm absolutely in favor of discriminating against the more egregious New York and Boston accents.

      Also, accents shade into dialect, which shades into totally different languages. Some of the older rural southern Blacks I have met make Uncle Remus sound like BBC received pronunciation - usually 8/10ths incomprehensible, different vocabulary, common vocabulary with different meanings, or pronounced in a way that makes it have nearly nothing in common phonologically with the the word in any other variety of English, tenses totally different, grammar mangled beyond recognition. Some say that Joel Chandler Harris' transcription of negro folk tales dialect was racist and made up. No, he actually soft-pedaled the dialect to make it possible for the average reader to decode. When listening in real life, one can't spend half a minute puzzling out what something like:
      "Hit was tech en go wid um, too, mon, en w'en dey make up der mines w'at hatter be done, 'twant mo'n menshun'd 'fo, hit wuz done. Well, dey 'lected dat dey hatter hol' er 'sembly fer ter sorter straighten out marters en hear de complaints, en w'en de day come dey wuz on han'." means, particularly when the actual sounds are less distinct than in in the transcribed version and the boundaries between words are often unclear, not to mention that actual daily conversation of most dialect speakers is much less polished than that of a storyteller.

        A more accurate transcription of the modern rural deep south black dialect of the older generation would be more like this: "Ih wuh tuhengo wid um, tumon, en wendy make upda mines wuhdahbe duhn, wont moan menshun'd fopy duhn. Welldy lected dat dey haddah hola sembly ferda soda straiten ow madda en hearduh complainse, en wendy day come dey wuddon han."

      ("It was touch and go with them, too, man, and when they made up their minds what had to be done, it wasn't more than mentioned before it was done. Well, they elected that they had to hold an assembly for to sort of straighten out matters and hear the complaints, and when the day came they were on hand.")

      I don't think that general education classes should be taught in dialects foreign to students, whether Gullah, valley girl, surfer dude, slurvian, or whatever. The common dialects of TV, radio, politics (and 99% of native speakers within minor, mutually intelligible variations) should be the standard in classrooms. If the kids need to learn that as a second language, then that's what should happen, but it's rare now for such kids not to be actually non-native speakers - native speakers usually pick up the mainstream dialect and accent from TV.

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
    14. Re:English accents sound sexy by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as a "Received Pronunciation" in American English.

      You don't need a Received Pronunciation, just forget American English and learn the Received Pronunciation.

    15. Re:English accents sound sexy by Greystripe · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing he's at least half-troll, however he lacks in imagination and flair. Just doesn't pull the hate out of you like a real full-blooded troll working his mojo.

    16. Re:English accents sound sexy by shilly · · Score: 1

      I like the fact that you both made a thoughtful comment about accent and finished with a Mark Twain comment. His preamble to Huck Finn on accents seems very relevant! ("In this book a number of dialects are used, to wit: the Missouri negro dialect; the extremest form of the backwoods Southwestern dialect; the ordinary "Pike County" dialect; and four modified varieties of this last. The shadings have not been done in a haphazard fashion, or by guesswork; but painstakingly, and with the trustworthy guidance and support of personal familiarity with these several forms of speech. I make this explanation for the reason that without it many readers would suppose that all these characters were trying to talk alike and not succeeding.")

    17. Re:English accents sound sexy by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

      RP is the dog's bollocks!

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
  27. Not to mention Jobs by timeOday · · Score: 1
    Not just college; jobs nowadays often require working with people who have accents as well. I grew up in Idaho and never had to deal with accents. (Actually quite a few Hispanic farm workers lived in the area, but they might as well have been on another planet; I never got to know even one of them). Now I can't understand accents at all. It can be embarrassing, giving a seminar and not understanding a question, or not understanding a stewardess on an international flight. Oh look, a hick!

    Yes, I can imagine a case where a teacher's English is so bad it is a real impediment to learning. But I would only agree to taking action in pretty extreme cases.

    1. Re:Not to mention Jobs by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaijin (negative Japanese word for foreigner/outsider)
      Also, Japan is amongst the first world nations that have a below-replacement-level birthrate.
      In the US and Europe, immigrants are offsetting much of this. However, lots of immigration can create its own social, cultural and political issues.

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  28. business needs to do with the overseas help desk by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    business needs to do with the overseas help desk and other customer service.

  29. Too late for me by paiute · · Score: 1

    Freshman physics discussion group, led by a postdoc from India. First day, he kept talking about "el squaw". The whole hour was about this Hispanic Indian maiden and her relationship to other constants. Went home and read the chapter. The young woman turned out to be L squared.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Too late for me by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      The squaw of the hippopotamus hide is equal to the sons of the squaws of the other two hides.

      (*rimshot*)

    2. Re:Too late for me by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry to hear you are a quadriplegic. Otherwise, I can't fathom why you wouldn't raise your hand and ask for clarification, rather than sit dumfounded in ignorance for an hour because of your misunderstanding. But then, that may be the natural state for you, in which case your mental handicap may exceed your physical one.

  30. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  31. It's all relative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Someone from South Carolina thinks they speak normally and that the person from the Bronx has a funny accent; the person from the Bronx thinks the reverse; and a person from London thinks they're both nuts, innit? Mid-west American and "BBC English" are supposed to be widely understood by American and UK English speakers, but they are still accents.

    The example given in the article is ludicrous: 'the state had written up teachers for pronouncing "the" as "da," "another" as "anuder" and "lives here" as "leeves here."' That's not a barrier to communication, that's regional prejudice. I wonder if there are any people from Boston teaching in Arizona and whether they would pass the test.

    1. Re:It's all relative by shilly · · Score: 2

      This is English, nobber, not Spanish or Italian. The mapping of vocalisations to spellings is incredibly unreliable, and pupils relying on how a teacher pronounces a word to decipher its spelling are going to come a cropper the first time they meet the letters "g" or "e".

    2. Re:It's all relative by swalve · · Score: 1

      I had an english teacher like this. Ghetto as all get out, but when the classroom bell rang, she spoke with perfect english, and forced the rest of us to do the same.

  32. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by jrumney · · Score: 2

    however being critical of how someone speaks is not racism.

    It depends on the people you select to be critical of. If they are all African-American or Hispanic, while the teacher from Glasgow gets off scott free, then yes, it probably is racism.

  33. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by sjames · · Score: 5, Funny

    BZZZT! I'm sorry, that's incorrect!

    If the Democrats did it, The Republicans would say it's a leftist nanny state plot to interfere in our lives and destroy American individualism.

    If If the Republicans did it, the Democrats would call it a xenophobic fascist conformism.

    Either way, the Libertarians would insist that if the kids want an education, they can go work in the copper mines and hire a private tutor on their own time. The free market will fix it, it fixes everything.

    According to the Tea party, nobody should do it, they're taxing me, we gotta quit taxing people and handing out these accent subsidies! Now where's my damned medicare check?

    Thank you for playing KNOW YOUR POLITICAL MEME!

  34. Speak proper English by PPH · · Score: 1

    Its about bloody time you blokes learned to speak the Queen's English!

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Speak proper English by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Wow, some country has an inferiority complex.

    2. Re:Speak proper English by ktappe · · Score: 1

      Actually, Americans do speak Queen's English. Americans speak English as it was spoken in the 17th and 18th centuries. It is Brits whose accents have changed in the last 200 years. (yes, I'm serious.)

      --
      "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
    3. Re:Speak proper English by artor3 · · Score: 1

      This is true, though with the caveat that it is the Americans living in the South (the ex-confederate states, primarily) that have kept their accent pure. Most Americans have had their accent shift over time, just in a different direction from the British. As humorous as it would be if Shakespearean plays were once performed in a Boston accent, it is sadly not the case.

    4. Re:Speak proper English by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's about bloody time you blokes learned to stop bastardizing a heavenly language with your barbaric Anglo-Saxon vocalizations, and learned to speak the proper King's French! ~

    5. Re:Speak proper English by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No, we need to go back to Anglo-Saxon (now called "Old English"), and dump the French influence from the language. Remember, the French were invaders. Of course, the Angles and Saxon were invaders before that, so maybe we should go back to Pictish.

    6. Re:Speak proper English by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The English spoken in the US today is closer to what Queen Elisabeth I spoke than what those speaking modern British English manage. So we are speaking the Queen's English, just not the Queen you are thinking of.

  35. Also consider how bad it is for non-native speaker by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We have this problem at my university. Particularly with grad students, we get some with very, very heavy accents and garbled English. Ok well maybe you could try and argue this would all be fine if all the foreign students were from the same place. To them, the accent would be "normal" and you could say the native English speakers need to suck it up and deal, since when you natively speak the language dealing with accents is easier.

    Things is, that's not the case. We have students from China, India, Europe, the Middle East, and so on. All of course have different accents, different problems with the language. So how fair is it to the undergrad from Kuwait to ask him to not just learn a second language, but then be able to deal with a Chinese grad student who is badly mispronouncing it, and then an Indian grad student doing the same, but in a different way?

    Then think about the same situation for primary education, when language skills are less developed. How fair would it be to a third grader who immigrated from Mexico, who's still working on language in general never mind English, to be taught by someone who has a heavy Chinese accent and speech errors? How well do you think that child will learn?

  36. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  37. just go to Hollywood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are specialists in making you sound appropriate for whatever role.

    There are many who specialize in making Canadians sound more like Americans.

    When part of your job is communicating and being understood, a strong accent could interfere with your ability to do the job.

  38. Depends on Context by Rehnberg · · Score: 1

    If you're doing it to improve customer service by making sure that everyone can understand everyone else through a global network of call centers, it's innovation. It's the vocal equivalent of requiring employees to wear uniforms when they're interacting with customers. If you're doing it because you don't like Hispanics who are CLEARLY illegal immigrants because their first language isn't English, rights violation, or at least discrimination. PS French isn't my first language, yet the French people I know seem to really appreciate my effort to speak their language, in spite of an American accent.

    1. Re:Depends on Context by Quila · · Score: 1

      If you're doing it because you don't like Hispanics who are CLEARLY illegal immigrants because their first language isn't English, rights violation, or at least discrimination

      That's not the reason they're doing it, and I haven't seen this related to the subject of illegal immigrants (I doubt many teachers are illegals).

      PS French isn't my first language, yet the French people I know seem to really appreciate my effort to speak their language, in spite of an American accent.

      Suggest you teach their kids in a French school with that accent, or get an appointment to L'Academie Francaise. You will see a different attitude.

  39. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's 2011 now.

  40. Also what some people call an accent by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is even more serious. I work at a university with lots of foreign students so I get a lot of exposure to accents of all types. However for a good number of our foreign grad students, it goes beyond just an accent, it is straight out poor English skills. The easy way to tell is if the "accent" continues in e-mail, the written word. You, for example, do not. Your written word gives away no hint that you have anything but a mastery of the language. Someone would need to hear you speak to determine that you weren't a native speaker.

    However we have plenty of students that is not the case for. They send in an e-mail for support that, well, has an accent. The language is misused and done so in a particular way that you can hear it in your head in the accent. Verbs are incorrectly conjugated, word order is mixed up, terms are used improperly and so on.

    That isn't just an "accent" that means their English skills are poor. However you'll see people try to pass it off as such. "Oh they just don't like my accent." No, that isn't the real problem, the problem is you are improperly using the language. You are trying to lean on the fact that you are not a native speaker as an excuse for not improving your skills.

    1. Re:Also what some people call an accent by sgtrock · · Score: 1

      Hey bruh! Why for you say dat? ;)

  41. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by khallow · · Score: 1

    It's easy to pretend like motivation doesn't have anything to do with it, but at the end of the day if you come from a party that's known for racist behavior it can take a long time for the reputation to die. Even longer if you're actively encouraging it with overtly xenophobic rhetoric.

    Didn't take long for people to forget that the Democrats were the racism party.

  42. All sorts by Hecatonchires · · Score: 1

    In uni I had lecturers from China, India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia among other places. I could understand them. The two hardest to understand were one lady who was extremely soft spoken. Had to sit in the front to hear her, even with a mic. The absolute hardest was a scottish guy. I had no idea what he was saying, even with a presentation up that he was speaking to. And english was his native language! All the foreign nationals put more effort into learning a second language than he did his first.

    --

    Yay me!

    1. Re:All sorts by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Yup. The hardest time I ever had understanding anyone allegedly fluent in English was a Scottish fellow with such a thick accent that I basically had to piece together what he was saying with about a 50% word comprehension rate. I've had thickly accented Indians who spoke more comprehensible English.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:All sorts by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      The absolute hardest was a scottish guy.

      That was the alcohol causing problems, not the accent.

      On a related note, I once met a Scottish fella on my travels in New Zealand. I couldn't understand a damn thing he was saying whenever he opened his mouth until he did start drinking. With each beer his speech got one step closer to crystal clear. I take that as evidence that Irish and Scottish folk have actually evolved to rely on alcohol for nominal, daily bodily functions. In the same way that most people need a proper supply of oxygen to the brain to function, I figure the Irish and Scottish need a proper supply of ethanol.

  43. Umm hello? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Where do we begin? How about starting with a simple civics lesson. People of India (the country in which Bangalore rests) do not have the same rights as the people of the US.

    We could move on to another civics lesson: An investigation does not mean that something has been done wrong. It simply means someone thinks perhaps something was done wrong. (I know the pesky media want to equate investigation with being guilty, but that isn't how it really works.)

    Beyond that, in one case people are told up front that they will be given the class. Contrast this with someone being on a job and the first they know about the program is when their boss tells them they must take additional lessons. Yes, there is another difference.

  44. Context is important by ook_boo · · Score: 2

    Call centers in India have good reason to Americanize (not "neutralize") the accents of the workers there. But the Arizona case reminds me of my grandfather, who was born and raised in a certain rural area of Canada, and got a job teaching in the same area. So if ever there was a local accent, it was my grandfather's. But some fool administrator with a Scottish brogue so thick nobody could understand him sat in on one of my grandfather's classes and marked him for his "foreign" accent, which in his ignorance he didn't recognize as a local variant. I sincerely hope nobody is doing something like that in Arizona.

    1. Re:Context is important by Arker · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure a lot of variants on that story will be happening. Arizona has a pretty diverse population, with parts dating back to long before English was ever heard in the region and other parts moving in from other regions on a daily basis. The local accent features a reduced and simplified phonetic inventory inherited from the substrate. Local judges will find most other US dialects somewhat unclear, because they express a larger phonetic inventory than they normally distinguish. Imported judges will find the local dialect deficient as well, because it doesnt preserve every distinction they expect it to preserve. If anyone manages to look past their regional prejudices and actually deal with the real language problems in a truly neutral way it will be a miracle.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  45. sense of entitlement by microbox · · Score: 2

    I had a math teach who couldn't pronounce the word "X" after he had a stroke. We all hated him because he was so boring to listen to -- he had lost a lot of his speech. Reflecting back, we all acted like spoilt arrogant asses. The guy was doing his best, and we certainly didn't try. Apparently he was a math genius, and we weren't interested in math.

    At some stage, children have to learn to drop their sense of entitlement in order to become adults.

    --

    Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    1. Re:sense of entitlement by MacTO · · Score: 2

      While such sentiments lack empathy, a classroom teacher's job is to communicate. If they're unable to do so because of an accent or a speech impediment then they are unable to perform their responsibilities. If they believe that they should keep their job in spite of that, then they are the ones who have a sense of entitlement.

      That is not to say that they should not teach. There are other ways that they can pursue that passion. They may undergo speech therapy if it is effective for their condition. If they have fine motor skills they may wish to become a teacher for the deaf. They can teach online courses. Or maybe they'll become an educational consultant (provided that their role doesn't depend upon verbal communications).

    2. Re:sense of entitlement by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      At some stage, children have to learn to drop their sense of entitlement in order to become adults.

      Or just become a democrat.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    3. Re:sense of entitlement by matria · · Score: 1

      Sounds like my high school freshman algebra course. The teacher was a genius, but had something like a stroke while fishing and a foghorn went off right next to him, basically paralyzing his entire left (or right? it was a long time ago) side. I did very well in the class - A with extra credit actually, even though I'm dyslexic and can't add 24+42 without getting something backwards - but he didn't get rehired because he told the parents of one girl that she wouldn't have failed if she'd paid more attention in class instead of sitting at the back giggling and flirting with the boys. His speech did improve as the year progressed.

    4. Re:sense of entitlement by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      It may be a sense of entitlement but that doesn't mean it's incorrect. For example, if I paid a moving company to pack and ship my furniture I'd feel entitled to having people show up who can say, lift a couch and carry it outside. If all their workers showed up were geniuses at how to pack things efficiently but had thrown out backs and thus couldn't do one of the main things I hired them for I'd be rather upset about not receiving what I felt I was entitled to in return for my payment rendered.

      Now it sounds to me, that the state is doing the correct thing, and instead of simply firing people unable to communicate giving them free speech therapy instead. I'm sure your teacher that had a stroke would have been happy to have the state give him free speech therapy, I know my grandfather would have appreciated someone else picking up that check after his stroke. It would be no different then the moving company paying for physical therapy for one of their works who had a back injury. So why all the uproar?

    5. Re:sense of entitlement by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      I had an aerothermodynamics teacher that was of Chinese descent (never did find out which part of China). Anyways, he had some serious speech issues, probably even a speech impediment. But one thing that was for sure was that 50% of the time nobody could understand what the hell he was saying. He was a brilliant thermodynamicist, and it was very evident that he had a lot to teach all of those who were willing to put in the effort to learn. But, at the same time, folks were paying a few thousand dollars a quarter to attend school, and being provided a teacher that had a hard time communicating certainly made some folks feel like they were getting ripped off.

      Most of us figured out that we could e-mail him questions right after class and get very clear textual responses from him as a bit of a compromise. But the point is, calling a desire for an effective education is disingenuous at best. If someone is paying for that education, it's downright false and stupid to call the desire for an effective education an entitlement.

  46. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by theArtificial · · Score: 1

    If they are all African-American or Hispanic, while the teacher from Glasgow gets off scott free, then yes, it probably is racism.

    So, if you're doing something based on race, it's probably racism? I agree with you. Did you read what I was replying to? I'll quote it for you:

    No, it's a stupid idea, no matter who thought of it. Look, I grew up in Texas and Florida. One of my English teachers had such a thick Southern drawl that even for 'native' speakers it was sometimes a bit hard to figure out what she was saying. I survived. So, I imagine, did everyone else. I even survived learning Russian from a teacher with a pronounced Mexican accent.

    It's just racism, plain and simple.

    He said "it's racism plain and simple." to which I replied: Being critical of speech is not racism. Period.

    To reply to your hypothetical situation:

    It depends, do they all pronounce things incorrectly (enough to meet whatever requirements for disqualification & metrics which do not involve ethnicity) while the guy born in Glasgow and raised state side does not? Just because they're "white" doesn't mean they're safe either. I know Glasgow is in Scottland, however next door to them are the Irish had it rough in America in the past. My point still stands: being critical of someone's speech does not make you a racist. For it to be considered racism you'd need to successfully argue that accents are ethnically inherited traits. Which is not the case, if anything it should underline the difficulty of mastering a language.

    --
    Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
  47. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by ktappe · · Score: 2

    It's just racism, plain and simple.

    The hell it is. You are blatantly misusing the word "race" which is wholly independent of linguistics. A black person in the UK has a completely different accent than one in Harlem than one in Haiti. "Racism" indeed.

    --
    "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
  48. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by kenj0418 · · Score: 1

    I'm with Lauren in thinking even the Scottish shouldn't be allowed to teach an English class:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxB1gB6K-2A

  49. Frank Burns Eats Worms by bmo · · Score: 1
  50. It's either legal or illegal by msobkow · · Score: 1

    Whether you're a public or private provider, discrimination based on accent is either legal or it is not. But do you expect the Indian wage slaves to complain about language training if it gets them a job?

    Only in America would people think their rights are being violated when they're told to speak clearly in English when doing a job that requires communication. Oh, and Quebec, of course -- they'd have an issue with the "English" part of it. *LOL*

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:It's either legal or illegal by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Let's see that issue come up, when US workers are trained to act as say a Russian call centre and are required to speak with distinctive Russian accents rather than regional US accents.

      Obviously the distinction for speaking english in a classroom is not about accent , it is whether or not the teacher can be readily and easily understood. So remedial elocution classes, rather than accent adjustment.

      So teachers should speak clearly in an engaging cheerful manner, rather than grumpily mumble slur and stammer their way through lessons.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  51. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

    If you can't pronounce the words properly, don't teach the language. It's very simple, and no discrimination necessary. In fact I'm sure they'd be willing to have telephone screeners, then there'd be no way for the person to know the nationality or color of the person on the other end of the phone speaking mangled English.

  52. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by hedwards · · Score: 1

    I don't know about you, but I hate it when I can't see the blackboard because the teacher's speaking.

  53. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by WorBlux · · Score: 2

    If you can't speak English clearly and articulately, then you are simply not qualified for a job whose primary duty is to communicate various sorts of information by means of the spoken English language. It doesn't matter if the particular accent is mexican, brazilian, italian, french, russion, one of those clicking languages, chinese, due to some genetic or birth defect, or the result of an injury. It is not a civil rights violation to discriminate against such people, it is simply common sense. You wouldn't hire a lifeguard who couldn't swim would you?

  54. Other native English speakers by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    Northeastern US here.
    In my experience, the accent of those from other US regions or other English-speaking countries is more understandable than the accent of a non-native.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    1. Re:Other native English speakers by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Native English speakers also use the same grammatical structure you do, which means that it's easier to fill in the gaps if you miss a word here or there.

    2. Re:Other native English speakers by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      Interesting point, but the assorted differences between British English and American English come to mind here.

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    3. Re:Other native English speakers by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Vocabulary difference is usually much easier to get over than sentence structure and pronunciation.

  55. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by geezer+nerd · · Score: 1

    The Civil Rights act of 1964 was put in place by a Democratic administration. Kennedy and Johnson were Democrats, not Republicans. Or else your accent prevents me from understanding what the crap you are talking about.

  56. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    See my reply to theArtificial. I know what race is, I know what regional / ethnic accents are.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  57. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by Infernal+Device · · Score: 2

    It is biologically impossible for you to be a Vulcan, as they do not exist, so your argument is invalid.

    And demonstrably stupid.

    QED.

    --
    "My God...it's full of trolls!"
  58. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by WorBlux · · Score: 1

    Professors are a lot of the time paid mainly for research and to work with graduate students, undergrads really are just and afterthought. A lot of his graduate students may very well be from india.

  59. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by hedwards · · Score: 1

    Yes, and ultimately, I have a feeling that it has less to do with changes to the Democratic party and more to do with the combination of changes to the Democratic party and changes to the GOP. I doubt that it would have happened so quickly if not for the GOP changing.

    Also, during 60s or there abouts, much of the racist presence in the Democratic party left for the GOP. They weren't particularly liberal to begin with, but the changes were just enough to make them leave. IIRC that had something to do with some of the civil rights legislation that Johnson signed into law.

  60. The Language in the IBM SIte Itself is Screwed Up by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 1

    I checked out the latter link and it by itself showed signs of the problem: It described the accent-correcting application which was written in that new language "VB or 'Virtual Basic'" (SIC) and using "structured Query Language" (SIC). Pathetic.

  61. Grammar Police by znerk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry, I can't stand it.

    While many of the customers on that particular support line would of been American, I was not.

    What you meant there was "would have been". Using "would of been" indicates to an educated person that you are practically illiterate, and don't understand what you are saying, and thus your entire point is missed because you portray yourself as not having enough of an education to respond adequately to any subject.

    Seriously, look those two words up in the dictionary, and figure out why it's so retarded and infuriating to anyone with a decent vocabulary when people write things the way they are used to saying them without knowing what the phrase actually means, or how their accent has colored their ability to communicate.

    I'm not saying that you are stupid, I am merely pointing out that you look stupid when you say things as you have spoken them, rather than as they are actually supposed to have been written.

    --
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    1. Re:Grammar Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's a standard contraction for the "of" sound: "would've been".

    2. Re:Grammar Police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a bit cheeky coming from someone that uses a colloquial meaning of 'practically' (as he is clearly not functionally illiterate) and the same again for 'retarded' - so well done, you can spell, but your vocabulary is a stunted mess. Not to mention, you have no idea how he 'looks', only how he appears to you.

      I'll leave the 'missing u' alone, as those from the US truly seem to believe they have it correct - even when it results in them losing words because of it (amour and armor is a lost distinction on you I assume?).

    3. Re:Grammar Police by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      There's a standard contraction for the "of" sound: "would've been".

      Umm... no... that is a contraction of "would have," thus the " 've " and not "would'f."

    4. Re:Grammar Police by cain · · Score: 1

      I believe that was his point.

  62. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by glenstar · · Score: 1

    I spent about a year doing some work for the Seattle school district but quit shortly after I found out there were multiple teachers in the district that they had to hire "translators" for because the teacher could not effectively communicate.

  63. Another example, and good general points by KingAlanI · · Score: 2

    I recall my dad mentioning how his family had been a bit overzealous about not speaking Italian at home.

    I think being able to speak the language of the new country is a fair request to make of immigrants, even if they retain their native language amongst themselves. This is especially so for young people who learn new languages better than older people. It seems mainly like an issue of efficient/effective communication.

    All of the bilingual this, bilingual that (namely, English and Spanish) is aggravating and reeks of being overly accomodating.

    Immigrants and/or minorities not cooperating does seem to contribute to such tensions.

    I've taken a harsher stance against illegal immigration lately, but I've long since thought like this on the language issue.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  64. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    Like I said in a previous comment:
    The accent of those from other US regions or other English-speaking countries (Scotland in this case) often seems more understandable than the accent of a non-native.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  65. It doesn't matter the language. by idbeholda · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An accent that is detrimental to learning a specific language should not be allowed. Also, back in my day, we called that problem a speech *impediment*, because it IMPEDES proper and basic communication.

  66. Re:Accent Police? Really? by lahvak · · Score: 1

    I don't know about Chinese, but Russian has fairly large number of loan words. Most of them did not originate from English, though. They have words form Latin, Greek, French and Germen, mostly. At least some of the examples that you quote as loan words in Korean and Japanese, would work probably even better in Russian, though. Computer would be either "compjuter" or "vychislitjelnaja machina", in the first case it is a complete loan word, in the second case at least the second word is a loaner.

    --
    AccountKiller
  67. "bona fide occupational quality" by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    In US law, 'discrimination' relating to a certain characteristic is allowed if the characteristic really is essential to the job.
    I can see how "not having a really thick accent" might fall under that for teaching jobs.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  68. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by lahvak · · Score: 1

    I agree that is the students cannot understand the teacher, it is a serious problem. However, I don't think that is what TFA talks about. They are talking about people who already work as elementary or middle school teachers. They had to pass fair amount of teacher education classes and exams, and people that are completely unintelligible would be already filtered out. They are talking about people that have a noticeable accent, that could make them somewhat harder to understand, but not unintelligible. Good teachers are hard to find, and if any of my kids had a good teacher with an accent, and I learned that the school administration is giving the teacher a hard time because of the accent, I would personally raise a stink to high heaven, and give the administration hard time myself.

    I agree with you that people who are bad teachers should not teach. However, my experience with American schools seems to tell me that accent is rarely the problem. My kids had some excellent teachers, some with a slight accent, but they also had some horrible teachers. The reason the teachers were so horrible had nothing to do with their accent or language, but with the fact that they either were mindbogglingly stupid, or they new absolutely nothing about the subject they were supposed to teach. My impression of the American education system is that these problems are both much more frequent and much more serious than problems with accents. In that light, policing teachers who have a "noticeable accent" and forcing them to take pronunciation classes seems to me at best a complete waste of resources and time.

    --
    AccountKiller
  69. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by egamma · · Score: 1

    The Civil Rights act of 1964 was put in place by a Democratic administration. Kennedy and Johnson were Democrats, not Republicans. Or else your accent prevents me from understanding what the crap you are talking about.

    Why not read it yourself? Votes:
    The Senate version:[12]
    Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
    Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)
    The Senate version, voted on by the House:[12]
    Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
    Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)

    You'll notice that in both the house and the senate, a greater percentage of Republicans voted for the bill, than did Democrats.

  70. This happens everywhere by williamyf · · Score: 1

    In Madrid they had to kindly ask teachers to moderate their accents while in the classroom, because some where using common street pronunciations that where plain wrong like saying "Madriz" instead of 'Madrid', or saying "fogo" instead of 'Fuego'

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
  71. English Please by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    I'm not a racist. I don't hate people from other religions or places of origin. But I really don't like the notion of a teacher with poor skills in English including accent. If we as a culture have anything at all to be proud of it rests in the body of literature common to England and America. I can live with the fact that some defects are genetic and do not reflect upon the person. The axed instead of asked problem is one and the R sound to some Japanese is more than a challenge.
                            But I have seen teachers that simply were not capable of speaking on a fifth grade level who were born in America. I am convinced that we have teachers that have never actually studied a subject in their entire lives. They went to college and parroted what they were told and get credentials and the end result is awful. Now we have all kind of junk diplomas and many teachers have degrees from these nonsense establishments. We have released barbarians upon our kids.
                            I really don't care what subject or grade level a teacher is assigned to but being well read and well spoken are essential precursors for any teaching position. I don't care if it is a gym coach. I want a fairly deep understanding of the body of classic English literature for every employee in the schools right down to the kitchen help and custodians. Kids need good roll models.

  72. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by Rockoon · · Score: 1

    See my reply to theArtificial. I know what race is, I know what regional / ethnic accents are.

    Just just don't seem to know how to separate them when thinking.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  73. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by Rockoon · · Score: 1

    They had to pass fair amount of teacher education classes and exams

    The demographic breakdown of teachers also have to pass affirmative action quotas. Guess which one wins?

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  74. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by billcopc · · Score: 1

    All I'm going to say is:

    "HUE HUE HUE HUE HUE HUE"

    But yeah, fuck this shit. I'm perfectly fluent in english and french, yet (go figure) I'll actually adopt an accept in either language if I feel it will help the other party understand what I'm saying. Make the wife every time we catch a cab home, as I turn my smooth french into "immigrant french" and accent it up, because somehow my drunken habits have decided that's the best way to converse with taxi drivers.

    Accents are a product of your first language. The fact that English is essentially a mash-up, a hybrid language, should exclude it from accentism. Even those from the United Kingdom aren't really native English, because English itself is a rehash of old frankish, french, and god-knows-what. Those of you who speak a "real" old-world language know what I mean... English is just cobbled together. It is dominant, but that does not make it an authority.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  75. Re:The Language in the IBM SIte Itself is Screwed by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

    Virtual Basic is so new that you've never even heard of it.

  76. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by 517714 · · Score: 1

    Perhaps a breakdown by party would be helpful to you. Kennedy was dead, and the act was legislation - not administrative. Johnson was instrumental in its passage, Kennedy never could have gotten it through Congress. Johnson twisted a lot of Democrats arms, but not nearly so many Republicans. Both parties are very different than the parties were in 1964, the historical legacies of each party is largely BS, but the historical facts remain a matter of record.

    --
    The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
  77. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

    And I know it's needed in Louisiana. No, not because of the Mexicans, because of the Cajuns - I've lived here 20+ years, and still can't understand someone with a thick Cajun accent.

    If you can' unnerstan' dem, why you move der, cher?

    Because the people of New Orleans don't speak with Cajun accents. They sound more like New Yorkers. Which I can understand just fine, thank you.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  78. Lopsided "Free-Trade" has got to end by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    It's yet more evidence that lopsided trade is stupid. The math models for claiming lopsided trade is better than tariffs is outdated and flawed, relying on over-simplistic assumptions and misleading case histories. Time for a flush.

  79. Huh???? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    Wadda yu friggin talking bout?

    Teaching proper language skills to students is a job requirement.

    Requiring a teacher to teach a without an accent is appropriate where the students are learning the language. That is why schools ask for native Spanish speakers to teach Spanish.

    One picks up accents that they are exposed to. Do you want students learning "proper" language? Of course when teaching post secondary, it is not important as the language skills are solidified.

    1. Re:Huh???? by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Requiring a teacher to teach a without an accent is appropriate where the students are learning the language. That is why schools ask for native Spanish speakers to teach Spanish.

      Of the three German teachers I had in High School, only one was native German.

      One picks up accents that they are exposed to. Do you want students learning "proper" language? Of course when teaching post secondary, it is not important as the language skills are solidified.

      Actually, phoneme "solidification" occurs at about puberty. So, unless you're in high school at a particularly young age, then it should matter equally as much in High School, as it does in post-secondary.

      And even if young children are exposed to an unusual accent, they will not pick it up unless it is prevalent throughout the community that they're raised in. Growing up in New Mexico, I've met people who were raised in Spanish-only homes and speak fluent English with a neutral English accent. (NM is actually known for being "accentless" for TV anchors, etc.)

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    2. Re:Huh???? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Of course when teaching post secondary, it is not important as the language skills are solidified. Actually, phoneme "solidification" occurs at about puberty. So, unless you're in high school at a particularly young age, then it should matter equally as much in High School, as it does in post-secondary.

      You present evidence that learning proper pronunciation in high school is important. You use that to say that teaching with proper pronunciation should be as important in high school as in post-secondary in response to someone who said that the teacher's accent is not as important as in earlier education.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    3. Re:Huh???? by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      You present evidence that learning proper pronunciation in high school is important.

      I didn't do any such thing. I said that of the three German teachers I had in High School only one of them was a native German speaker. If you think about it, I'm kind of saying that high schools don't typically seem to care that a foreign language teacher is a native speaker of the language.

      If you're talking about the comment "unless you're in high school at a particularly young age", then I would point out that most people get to High School at about age 14, which is still over the 12-13 age rage of puberty onset for boys (girls even earlier.)

      Looking at the statement syntactically, I could say "unless pigs fly, you won't see one flying", but that doesn't mean that I am asserting that pigs actually do fly.

      TL;DR: if you read "proper accent learning is important in High School", then you misunderstood me.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  80. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

    It's not civil right violation to be asked to speak clear, but it is to be pressed to speak without your native accent.

    Isn't this really a question of marketing? "Accent neutralization" or "voice neutralization" is definitely evil. OTOH if your employment comes with the perquisite of "free elocution lessons" there can hardly be any complaint, can there? ;)

    If you native accent is a (more or less) standard flavour of English --and Standard Indian English pronunciation is every bit as much as say Australian or American English standards a proper pronunciation --then yes, I agree, it is mere chauvinism not to recognise that English can be spoken to more than one standard or regional variation.

    However if you are learning any (living) language as a "second" language, part of the task is to learn a pronunciation of the language sufficient standard to be easily understood by native speakers of that language. Judging by the output, I feel that there is too much stress on grammar and too little on elocution in much ESL teaching. I had quite a time trying to decipher "wartal" when the (Chinese) guy on the desk next to me was trying to say 'virtual,' just today. We can surely deal much more easily with grammatical errors such as "asked to speak clear [sic]" if we can at least understand the words being uttered. Then again, I'm not an ESL teacher and judging teachers by their students (who don't necessarily make the effort to learn absolutely everything taught to them) is perhaps unfair.

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
  81. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

    Which might be just a teensy bit ironic. Not sure.

    Depends on how pedantic you want to get about the meaning of 'ironic' <g>

    --
    Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
  82. Nucular by Frankie70 · · Score: 1

    What if someone pronounces nuclear as nucular - is it considered as a non-native accent?

    1. Re:Nucular by foobsr · · Score: 1

      is it considered as a non-native accent?

      No, it is considered a metathetic mispronunciation.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    2. Re:Nucular by HopefulIntern · · Score: 1

      It's considered stupid. Like people who say "would of", "all of the sudden", "for all intensive purposes", and people who use a variety of misplaced apostrophes (such as people who represent the year 1997 as 97' instead of '97), to name a few things.

  83. Yeh there is by Falconhell · · Score: 1

    "Reality"

  84. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

    No, it's a stupid idea, no matter who thought of it. Look, I grew up in Texas and Florida. one of my English teachers was dumb as a post, so much so that she just told blonde jokes instead of teaching. I survived. So, I imagine, did everyone else. I even survived learning math from one teacher who couldn't add fractions, nor answer any questions about geometry.

    It's just racism, plain and simple.

    Incompetence is incompetence. If, as a teacher, something about you makes it difficult to learn, then you are a poor teacher. People who are poor at their jobs should either work to improve their performance or find something they are good at.

  85. Re:it's all been done by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

    What is this 'unaccented English' of which you speak?

    I'd say the Queen's English.

    A rule of thumb for the "understandable accent": if someone educated in that has a hard time understanding what you say, your accent is probably too thick.

  86. It's a lost cause by dbIII · · Score: 1

    That dawned on me one night when I was watching locally rebroadcast CNN and they had an interview with the King of Tonga. He was speaking in perfect Oxford/BBC English and some CNN idiot had not only subtitled it but at times got the subtitles wrong.
    If viewers can't even work out BBC English what hope do they have with the mild regional accents in Dr Who or more importantly a visitor from another State?
    In my opinion children should be exposed to different accents.

    1. Re:It's a lost cause by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I go to the gym regularly and watch TV while riding the exercise bike, using closed-captioning because I don't feel like wearing headphones. I see mistakes in the CC all the time, with any speaker. I'm not sure, but I suspect that the CC is actually computer-driven these days using voice recognition, and it isn't perfect.

  87. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by martas · · Score: 1

    Oh man, thank you. It amazes me that there are people around who still fall for the whole us vs. them game. I've lived in this country for just 5 years, and even I already get it. How can someone miss something so glaringly obvious for an entire lifetime?

  88. Re:Accent vs. Bilingual by shilly · · Score: 1

    I love the irony of a racist complaint about put-upon white guys having to put up with poor English being written by some arse who doesn't realise that English does not capitalise random words like "White" or "Ilegal Aliens" just because they're important in what passes for his mind. AC, try again, but in German. Then you can live out your sub-Aryan fantasy in full.

  89. Re:NOT Racism by shilly · · Score: 1

    WTF has concision or prolixity got to do with accent or place of origin?

  90. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by khallow · · Score: 1

    My point was that the Democratic party didn't have any trouble shedding the racist side of its image, even though it was far more racist for about a century through to the 50s and 60s than either party is now. That reputation died fast.

    I figure the same courtesy will be extended to the Republicans when it is convenient for various ethnic groups to do so.

  91. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

    You seem to be mistaking Avril Lavigne, who is known for such songs as Sk8r Boi and Complicated with Alanis Morissette, who is known for writing a song called Ironic, in which the only actual irony was that the song had nothing to do with irony.

    It's ok... they're both Canadian. You're allowed to confuse us all. I do know Bob from Calgary, but he never mows his lawn and his igloo is in really bad repair.

  92. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2

    Yeah, you can say that, and you're technically correct, but your actual point is simply wrong. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was put in place by a Democratic administration with the overwhelming support of the Republican party over the screaming objections of a significant minority of the Democratic party. The reality is that the vote in Congress was strictly North vs South. It had nothing to do with political party membership (as another replier to your post has pointed out). At that time the Republican Party was the party of the North, the Democrats of the South and North. The Southern Democrats left the Democratic Party because of that law, and joined the Republican party, took over it from the pre-1964 Republicans, and made it the monstrosity it is today.

    So yes, the Democrats passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because there were so many of them that the Republicans were irrelevant to the vote (you'll notice from one of your other repliers that there were 67 Democrats in the Senate and just shy of 50 voted for the act, but the Republicans voted yes by a larger margin--their votes just didn't matter as much because they were such a minority party). The Democrats did NOT pass the act over the objections of Republicans, they passed it over the objections of other Democrats.

    In short, talking about the pre-1968 parties (the shift began in 1964, continued in 1968, and was more or less finalized by the election of 1972) as if they were the same parties as today is moronic.

  93. Re:Also consider how bad it is for non-native spea by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    So how fair is it to the undergrad from Kuwait to ask him to not just learn a second language, but then be able to deal with a Chinese grad student who is badly mispronouncing it, and then an Indian grad student doing the same, but in a different way?

    the proper response, unfortunately, is to demand that they repeat everything you can't understand, and when you become a nuisance, go to the dean, then when they do nothing which is typical, you go up to the next level of adminstration. Then when that bears no fruit, you get the other students in your class together, make up signs, and hold a protest.

    It's YOUR education. Stand up for it.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  94. Re:The Language in the IBM SIte Itself is Screwed by HopefulIntern · · Score: 1

    So this is that rarest of birds, the "programming hipster".

  95. Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    If you have an accent and want to teach in an English based school then not only should you be monitored you should have to pass yearly tests to make sure your English is crystal clear. I had prof's who talked with strong accents and honestly going to class was a waste of time, they screwed up simple English and more then 1/2 the time I couldn't make them out. It's not a violation of anything, North America is an English speaking continent. Yes there are other languages but honestly every language should get it's own school and own teachers. Accents can make it near impossible to learn properly or to understand properly, it's a problem that needs a solution.

    1. Re:Accent issue by Arker · · Score: 1

      Everyone has an accent. The English language is spoken natively all around the world, of course there are going to be differences in pronunciation.

      What you are doing, and what it sounds like the school is doing, is conflating the idea of an accent with the idea of speaking unclearly.

      The latter is a real problem, but it has absolutely nothing to do with regional/accent differences in pronunciation. It's quite possible to speak any dialect relatively clearly, or unclearly.

      These two things are very commonly conflated, however, particularly by those who also believe the host of popular language fairy tales. And this is why I suspect the program in question actually should be shut down as a violation of the civil rights of the teachers.

      If they are truly and only working on clarity of speech alone, that is one thing, and fine and good. But every time I have seen anything like this being done it has gone far beyond clarity of speech, and instead expresses a preference for a particular dialect, and varying degrees of disapproval for others, regardless of clarity of speech (and regardless of mastery or abject lack thereof of Literary English.)

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    2. Re:Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      You are right, but it goes beyond the clarity of speech. There are many accented people who talk with excellent clarity, there are also people who talk accented English that in itself is almost a new language. In general from my own experience I have experienced more of the second. Your also right that English in itself has an accent but that's not the issue here. The problem is the teachers and profs who speak English that is so hard to understand that you expel 1/2 of your total brain power to focus and make out what there saying.

      This is much more of an issue for elementary school then anything else. When your growing up and learning the fundamentals it's important to learn them in your own dialect taught with clarity. This clarity can be lost entirely when a strong accent is applied. There are many teachers who would have no issue teaching with there accent and fully engaging the students how ever there are teachers so hard to understand that you need to wonder how there allowed to teach.

      One of my profs was so hard to understand that it was worth more to me to read the text book and just show up to write the tests then sit in his class. His accent was so hard to get past that it often lead to him replacing words that you can't just swap out. The issue also came when he design exams, he would write the questions as if he spoke them, leaving us with very unclear questions and massive confusion on how to answer. This is what needs to be watched and stopped in schools.

      In elementary school I had a teacher in grade 7 who had a rather strong British accent but she spoke wonderfully clear and I have no issue what so ever listening to her. I also have an Indian prof in college who could speak English so clearly it was amazing. All teachers who have an accent should have to get tested and monitored. However in the same idea if an English accented teacher went to a French school or a Iranian school they should also be monitored and tested.

      Bottom line is accents can get in the way of proper learning, learning in what ever language is native to you and this has to be watched.

    3. Re:Accent issue by Arker · · Score: 1

      As far as teachers go, the one that I had the most difficulty simply understanding was a Nigerian. He was also one of my best teachers ever, and his enunciation was far MORE clear than is normal in american English. It was much closer to RP in many ways, he enunciated every syllable clearly, in all honesty he was one of the clearest speakers I have ever heard. But it was so different from what we were used to hearing that people did have major difficulty understanding him at first. For me it was 3 class periods, towards the end of the third my ears finally adjusted and I could understand what he was saying.

      Many people I met in the UK, on the other hand, have incredibly sloppy enunciation, complete with collapsing whole series of consonants together (mah bruvver) yet I never had that kind of difficulty understanding them.

      Why? Well it stands to reason I have heard a lot more UK English than Nigerian English through tv, radio, etc. and at a much earlier age.

      As long as a teacher can speak clearly and has the required grasp of literary English (which is a non-spoken specialty dialect itself, learned from books) I really dont think anyone should care what sort of dialect he speaks with. The younger a child is when first exposed to varying dialects the better, and the easier for their brain to correctly configure itself to make sense of speech across variations anyway.

      The problem isnt the idea of checking to make sure everyone can speak clearly - the problem is that practically speaking it is extremely unlikely to be implemented without inappropriate bias dominating the outcomes.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    4. Re:Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      But with out testing and monitoring how can we be sure kids are getting clear English. It's not to watch the good apples, it's to find the bad ones. When you pluck even 1 teacher how can't be understood out of the system it's worth it.

    5. Re:Accent issue by Arker · · Score: 1

      When you pluck even 1 teacher how can't be understood out of the system it's worth it.

      Worth what? Worth purging dozens of excellent teachers who happen to speak with an 'accent' that an arbitrary reviewer finds objectionable? I don't think it's worth that.

      If a teacher truly "can't be understood" I would think HR should have noticed.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    6. Re:Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      On this note I'll disagree, why would it bother you if you have nothing to worry about, if anything it will make you look good.

    7. Re:Accent issue by Arker · · Score: 1

      It wont make you look good if you are from an area that the reviewer stigmatises. That is the point. Where are they going to get these reviewers from? Do you really think they will be able to, or even try to, distinguish between someone who simply comes from an area with a dialect they stigmatise, and someone who actually has a speech problem?

      I foresee it being nothing more than an excuse to purge people of certain origins in favour of those from others, and to institutionalise prejudice.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    8. Re:Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      Not the issue here, the only issue at hand is if you can be clearly understood. If you can't be don't teach, if you can be welcome aboard.

    9. Re:Accent issue by Arker · · Score: 1

      In what dreamworld do you live again?

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    10. Re:Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      The post wasn't about picking out who is capable on monitoring the teachers, it's about if there should be a monitor in the first place. So i guess the dreamworld of relevant replies and posts?

    11. Re:Accent issue by Arker · · Score: 1

      The monitors are human beings. In what dreamworld do you think they can be something else?

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    12. Re:Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      Most people are indifferent when it comes to others, just because some people judge based on culture doesn't mean all do. So I still don't see the issue, just monitors that as indifferent.

    13. Re:Accent issue by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

      just monitors that as indifferent.

      should be

      just PICK monitors which are indifferent

  96. Re:Also consider how bad it is for non-native spea by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Well it's not actually. I am staff, not a student. I'm in the customer service business, being computer support, so I try not to be a jerk. That said "Send us an e-mail," is one of our favorite phrases. Part of it is so we don't forget to do things, part of it is to have documentation, but part of it is people are often more intelligible in a written form.

    The students I feel sorry for, because while what you say is right, it isn't what happens.

  97. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

    What makes him being "Vulcan" biologically impossible instead of highly unlikely?

  98. Discrimination vs Business by skyraker · · Score: 1

    There is not clear cut way to respond to this. Providing training to employees to improve their accent so more customers can understand them is a business practice, where not doing so could drive people away from that company. Monitoring teachers to see if their accent meets some vague 'requirement' for maintaining a teaching license is discrimination in its base form, especially as its use in Arizona is targetted at Mexican and South American accents. The first is perfectly acceptable, as the employee can always quit if they do not like it. The second is not.

  99. Of course it's the context by Quila · · Score: 1

    If it has anything to do with regulating immigration or immigrants, it's automatically considered to be a violation of rights.

    Well, that is if it's seen to affect Latino immigrants. They wouldn't give a damn about a school district telling a German immigrant with a heavy accent to change his speech so that the students can understand him.

  100. I can't understand thick accents in German by Quila · · Score: 1

    Badish, Bavarian, very difficult.

    But when I tell someone I can't understand, they usually switch to understandable high-German without missing a beat. They could just speak high-German all the time, but they get lazy, or they just prefer their localized accent for everyday speech.

  101. Re:I guess it depends on the politics of the State by LanMan04 · · Score: 2

    Republicans, you mean the same ones that want to roll back various civil rights legislation and voting protections?

    You mean the ones that voted for the Civil Rights act of 1964?

    Fine, say "Social Conservatives" instead. They may have had a different label 50 years ago, but they're the same assholes.

    --
    With the first link, the chain is forged.
  102. Very good point by Quila · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Then I suggest not immigrating to a country where you are incapable of speaking the language understandably.

    But that's not the case here. Native Spanish speakers can learn English without advanced training if they want to. I'm betting her problem is more about wanting to push her Hispanic identity over American (very common). These people want the host country to bend for them, and I find that insulting to the host country. They have a duty to assimilate.

    I knew a Hispanic girl, fom Spain, working among Americans. It took me a while to catch the barest hint of an accent. She learned English in regular school and while living with Americans. Same with Germans in the US, some pretty thick, some it takes a minute to catch it, some have no German accent at all.

    1. Re:Very good point by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      If you moved to Miami, you'd better learn Spanish if you want to assimilate.
      http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/spanish_miamis_primary_language/

      The US has always been a melting pot, with concentrated pockets of immigrants. Those pockets eventually blend together, but it happens over the course of generations.

  103. Discrimination is a good thing by Quila · · Score: 1

    People forget that. We all discriminate. Clean water, dirty water; red meat, moldy meat; competent doctor, incompetent doctor. Beyond that it's tastes: music, food, looks, cars, computers.

    At a basic level discrimination protects us by attempting to avoid things that are bad for us. Socially, varied discrimination gives us a much wider variety. It would be downright boring if we all liked and disliked the same things.

    Yes, they are discriminating. They want teachers who their students can easily understand, thus facilitating the students' education. Teachers who do not fit that description should be discriminated against, just as I discriminate against moldy meat.

    To send every teacher to a class would be a waste of resources and achieve nothing concrete but pissing off those fluent teachers forced to sit through the class.

  104. As a former Military Brat ... by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

    I'm all for it.

    I remember failing spelling tests in the 5th grade in Montgomery, Alabama, as I couldn't understand what the teacher was actually saying.

    (Because she had an Alabama accent, and I had only spent time up 'til then from DC and northward on the east coast, or in Europe on military bases.)

    Now, by the time you get to college, you need to start dealing with learning accents (although, I admit again, that there was a teacher whose class made much more sense once I figured out that 'mayored' was 'measured' and I was able to decode his accent), but there were some TAs (in engineering for the most part) that had difficulty understanding what the students were asking, and in teaching us as we couldn't understand them.

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
  105. Re:NOT Racism by Quila · · Score: 1

    It would be interesting to know whether there is a correlation between people who failed the accent test and people who are visible minorities.

    By far, the largest immigrant population in Arizona is Latinos; thus, those who fail the test would logically be mostly Latino. That doesn't mean racist, that means they're immigrants who have too thick an accent.

    People need to stop the racism claims until they can show unintelligible white German, Russian or even Scottish speakers who are not likewise told to to work on their accents.

    then it surely must violate the civil liberties of any U.S. citizen to travel freely and work anywhere within the United States

    It has absolutely nothing to do with travel, It has something to do with work only insofar as a person being qualified for said work. A reasonable qualification (e.g., students being able to understand you) should raise no civil rights issues.

  106. This isn't that complicated by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

    If you think your teachers' accents are an issue, you make IELTS testing a job requirement and test all of the teachers. ALL of them. Not just the ones that you think look or sound foreign.

    If they pass, hooray... they're fine for teaching even if they have a bit of an accent and you leave them alone.

    If they fail, you arrange for them to take speech classes. If they consistently fail and/or refuse to take the classes to improve their speech, then you fire them. There's no discrimination in firing a teacher who can't do their job properly as long as you apply the same standard to all teachers.

  107. Or "corpsman" by Quila · · Score: 1

    How do you pronounce that?

  108. What does that tell you about you? by Quila · · Score: 1

    You have a problem with assimilation? You're a Reconquista, right?

    You think this former immigrant is anti-immigrant?Yes, I lived in a foreign country for a long time, I bothered to learn the language, I bothered to abide by the customs. I didn't complain when none of the official forms for regular internal stuff were in English. I didn't complain that stores and ads didn't have English versions. I realized I was in their country and had a duty to assimilate while there. And when I brought my wife back here, she assimilated to the US, doesn't even have a detectable foreign accent.

    The oh-so enlightened Switzerland will even kick you out if you haven't learned German or French well enough after a few years. Good idea.

    1. Re:What does that tell you about you? by Layogenic · · Score: 1

      Yes, I have a problem with assimilation. Because 'assimilation' doesn't mean what your whole paragraph just said. You obviously did not give up your rights to have an identity other than Swiss, and your native culture is in no way threatened by extinction. You also didn't answer the actual questions. English isn't the official language of the US. In part, presumably, because quite a large part of it is still legally, contractually meant to be Spanish-speaking. Given those options, a "Hispanic identity" might well be just as American as yours. So who are we kicking out? Besides that is the fact that the US is a very heterogenous country, and anything you call "American culture" could easily be disputed by another white, middle-class male (making wild assumptions here) in another, not-too-distant part of the country, to say nothing of somebody of a different color and creed.

  109. Re:Early logopedic training by Jessified · · Score: 1

    Interesting idea. In fact babies up to six months can distinguish between the phonemes of all languages. But they begin to lose the ability for the phonemes of other languages at six months, but have an increased awareness for their own language.

  110. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Ooh, guilty as charged. Although I tend to think of them both as posers first, and Canadians second.

    Well, at least I didn't confuse Alanis with Celine Dion or Michael J. Fox.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  111. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    I think it's demonstrably stupid of you to assume that there are no intelligent beings on a planet of 40 Eridani, and that it's impossible for the OP to be one of those.

    Of course, it's about as likely as, well, an alien from a planet used in a popular sci-fi series coming to earth and posting on Slashdot... But to say it's absolutely impossible is really quite ridiculous. Unless you've personally been to the 40 Eridani star system and can confirm none of the planets there have intelligent life, then you don't know. I doubt we've even discovered any exoplanets in that system yet, though they most probably do exist (the latest findings are showing that exoplanets are common in every star system, and that's with us only being able to detect really big ones at this point, as we can't yet detect ones as small as Earth).

  112. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Accents are a product of your first language. The fact that English is essentially a mash-up, a hybrid language, should exclude it from accentism.

    Huh? Every language has accents, including English, and every language is a hybrid or mash-up of older languages. No language is pure, except perhaps Lojban (which isn't a natural language anyway).

    French is a mash-up of Latin and some other tribal languages, and wouldn't exist in its present form if it weren't for Latin and the influence of the Roman Empire. The thing that's so remarkable about English is that it's a mash-up of (older forms of) German and French (and by extension, Latin and Greek). As far as Indo-European languages go, Germanic and Romance languages are rather different, so a mash-up of the two is rather odd in some ways.

    French is just a cobbled together language too. If you want to see a "real" old-world language, go visit your Basque neighbors in the south of France and listen to them speak. That language is much older than your French.

  113. The laws are written in English by tepples · · Score: 1

    but forgive me if I assume the USA has no "official language"

    The Constitution of this country is written in English. All acts of Congress and all regulations of the executive branch are written in English. That's as official as I need.

    1. Re:The laws are written in English by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      A de facto standard is not an "official language." There's nothing to prevent Congress from writing all laws from this day forth in Spanish, thus it is not "officially" a standard, just unofficially.

  114. Re:Civil rights violation to be asked to speak cle by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

    The fact that English is essentially a mash-up, a hybrid language, should exclude it from accentism. Even those from the United Kingdom aren't really native English, because English itself is a rehash of old frankish, french, and god-knows-what. Those of you who speak a "real" old-world language know what I mean... English is just cobbled together. It is dominant, but that does not make it an authority.

    What fact? English is neither a creole nor a pidgin. It is a Germanic language at its core syntactically, phonologically, and in its vocabulary. It still shares much in common with its past forms (including Old English a.k.a. Anglo-Saxon) and other Germanic languages (Dutch, German, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, etc). Yes, it has many words of French and Latin origin but so do most "real Old World" languages. It has also acquired quite a few other words from various languages as appropriate for any language with an imperial legacy and diverse peoples taking it up. Further reading: History of the English Language.

    You sound awfully upset about English's high standing in the world. A rather small thing to get so worked up over.

    --
    Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
  115. They should have learned English when they arrived by Quila · · Score: 1

    Speaking a second (what used to be your first) language at home or among friends is fine. But do not expect the natives to learn your ways. The natives expect you to learn their ways, and you're in their country. Then the natives will pick and choose what they like about your culture and integrate it into the culture overall. In the case of the Cubans, I love the inclusion of picadillo into our larger cuisine (Mexican and Puerto Rican picadillo, not so much).

  116. Could of used this at my high school... by Spugglefink · · Score: 1

    Where we was goin to school at, we could of definately used some accent neutralization. I ain't never gon' ferget my English teacher who knowed how to talk real good, and teached us good to. Or my biology teacher who teached us all about Armageddon, which for which'uns of y'all is ignerint is pronounced ar-MEG-gadon.

    It shore was depressin where I growed up at.

  117. Re:Also consider how bad it is for non-native spea by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    When I worked for a school I insisted on email because lots of the time they weren't supposed to have what they were asking for. "I can't do it without an email" is an awesome tool.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"