newyorker | If, for instance, a fourteen-year-old girl says, “So we, like, um,
went to the pizza place, but the, uh, you know—the guy?—said, like, no,
so we were, like, O.K., so we, uh, decided that we’d go to, like, a
coffee shop, but, uh, Colette can’t—she has, like, a gluten thing. You
know what I mean? So that’s, like, why we came home, and, um, you know,
would you, like, make us eggs?” To a sensitized listener, who recognizes
the meaning of the circumlocutions, the nuanced space between language
and event, the sentence really means: “So we tried, as it were, to go
and enjoy a pizza, but the, so to speak, maĆ®tre d’ of the establishment
claimed—a statement that we were in no social position to dispute—that
there was, so to speak, ‘no room for us at the inn.’ And then Colette
insisted—and far be it for me either to contest or endorse her
self-diagnosis—that she could not eat wheat-based food, so, knowing full
well that it is likely to be irksome and ill-timed, could you feed us
with scrambled eggs?” The point of the “likes”s and other tics is to
supply the information that there is a lot more information not being
offered, and that the whole thing is held at a certain circumspect
remove. It didn’t happen exactly this way, and, of course, one might
quibble with a detail here or there, but this is the gist of what
happened. Each “like” is a Jamesian “as it were.”
It turns out
that three sociolinguists at the University of Texas at Austin have been
studying these things systematically. The paper they produced,
published in the Journal of Language and Social Psychology, has the beautiful title “Um … Who Like Says You Know: Filler Word Use as a Function of Age, Gender and Personality.” The
study they conducted “aimed to investigate how the frequency of filled
pauses and discourse markers used in the English language varies with
two basic demographic variables (gender and age) and personality
traits.” The researchers explain that, to do this, they “focused on
three common discourse markers … (I mean, you know, and like) and two filled pauses (uh and um).”
They
recorded and transcribed interviews with the speakers, noted how often
the speakers used so-called “discourse markers,” and concluded that
these markers are, indeed, used most frequently by women and girls. More
important, the study also shows that the use of the discourse markers
is particularly common among speakers who score on a personality test as
“conscientious”—“people who are more thoughtful and aware of themselves
and their surroundings.” Discourse markers, far from being opaque,
automatic, or zombie-like, show that the speaker has “a desire to share
or rephrase opinions to recipients.” In other words, those “like”s are
being used to register that what’s being narrated may not be utterly
faithful to each detail—that it may not be, as a fourteen-year-old might
say, “literally” true—but that it is essentially true, and,
what’s more, that an innate sense of conscientiousness and empathy with
the listener forbids the speaker from pretending to a more closely tuned
accuracy than she in fact possesses.
0 comments:
Post a Comment