Conclusion^18

Civil (dis)obedience and the Shadow of Language

Most of the greatest evils that man has inflicted upon man have come

through people feeling quite certain about something which, in fact,

was false.

Bertrand Russell, cited in {ukHaught (1996}: 149)

Marge, it takes two people to lie. One to lie, and one to listen.

Homer Simpson

The process of language subordination targets not all variation, not all
language varieties, but only those which are emblematic of differences in
race, ethnicity, homeland, or other social allegiances which have been
found to be less than good enough. Dedicated practitioners of language
subordination do not complain about most of the variation which is active
in U.S. English. There has never been an outcry about Chicagoans’
inability to distinguish between “merry,” “Mary” and “marry.” Nor are
there essays in local papers on the stupidity and unworthiness of people
who say “cawfee” rather than “cah-fee” or “coo-off-ee.” People do not
lose jobs because they wait on line rather than in line. There may be an
occasional ruffled feather about the use of hopefully or healthy, about split
infinitives and dangling participles, “who” vs. “whom,” but such debates –
while often loud and sometimes acrimonious – eventually fade, because
these are points of language variation leading to change which are largely
completed, and solidly entrenched in the vernacular.
But people do lose jobs and school children are belittled because their
native language makes it difficult for them to differentiate between /l/ and