WEBVTT

00:00:00.289 --> 00:00:03.486
People say that a long, long time ago,

00:00:03.486 --> 00:00:05.811
everybody on Earth spoke the same language

00:00:05.811 --> 00:00:07.947
and belonged to the same tribe.

00:00:07.947 --> 00:00:10.550
And I guess people had
a little too much time on their hands,

00:00:10.550 --> 00:00:13.085
because they decided they
were going to work together

00:00:13.085 --> 00:00:15.010
to become as great as God.

00:00:15.478 --> 00:00:19.349
So they started to build
a tower up into the heavens.

00:00:19.349 --> 00:00:21.649
God saw this and was angry,

00:00:21.649 --> 00:00:23.536
and to punish the people
for their arrogance,

00:00:23.536 --> 00:00:25.388
God destroyed the tower

00:00:25.388 --> 00:00:27.773
and scattered the people
to the ends of the earth

00:00:27.773 --> 00:00:30.526
and made them all
speak different languages.

NOTE Paragraph

00:00:31.016 --> 00:00:33.869
This is the story of the Tower of Babel,

00:00:33.869 --> 00:00:36.923
and it's probably not
a literal historical truth,

00:00:36.923 --> 00:00:40.683
but it does tell us something
about the way that we understand

00:00:40.683 --> 00:00:42.951
languages and speakers.

00:00:42.951 --> 00:00:46.494
So for one thing, we often think
about speaking different languages

00:00:46.494 --> 00:00:49.831
as meaning that we don't get along
or maybe we're in conflict,

00:00:49.831 --> 00:00:54.285
and speaking the same language as meaning
that we belong to the same group

00:00:54.285 --> 00:00:57.062
and that we can work together.

00:00:57.062 --> 00:00:59.414
Modern linguists know
that the relationship

00:00:59.414 --> 00:01:03.851
between language and social categories
is intricate and complex,

00:01:03.851 --> 00:01:07.733
and we bring a lot of baggage
to the way that we understand language,

00:01:07.733 --> 00:01:09.586
to the point that even
a seemingly simple question,

00:01:09.586 --> 00:01:13.545
like, "What makes a person
a speaker of a language?"

00:01:13.545 --> 00:01:16.383
can turn out to be really,
really complicated.

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:16.383 --> 00:01:19.953
I'm a Spanish professor at Ohio State.

00:01:19.953 --> 00:01:22.794
I teach mostly upper level courses
where the students have taken

00:01:22.794 --> 00:01:27.047
four to five years
of university-level Spanish courses.

00:01:27.047 --> 00:01:30.924
So students who are in my class
speak Spanish with me all semester long.

00:01:30.924 --> 00:01:34.477
They listen to me speak in Spanish.
They turn in written work in Spanish.

00:01:34.477 --> 00:01:38.091
And yet, when I asked my students
at the beginning of the semester,

00:01:38.091 --> 00:01:41.023
"Who considers themselves
a Spanish speaker?"

00:01:41.023 --> 00:01:43.961
not very many of them raised their hands.

00:01:44.143 --> 00:01:46.878
So you can be a really,
really good speaker of a language

00:01:46.878 --> 00:01:51.096
and still not consider yourself
a language speaker.

NOTE Paragraph

00:01:51.957 --> 00:01:55.244
Maybe it's not just about
how well you speak a language.

00:01:55.244 --> 00:01:58.963
Maybe it's also about what age
you start learning that language?

00:01:58.963 --> 00:02:02.691
But when we look at kids
who speak Spanish at home

00:02:02.691 --> 00:02:06.111
but mostly English at work or in school,

00:02:06.111 --> 00:02:10.130
they often feel like they don't
speak either language really well.

00:02:10.130 --> 00:02:14.291
They sometimes feel like they exist
in a state of languagelessness,

00:02:14.291 --> 00:02:17.678
because they don't feel fully comfortable
in Spanish at school,

00:02:17.678 --> 00:02:21.841
and they don't feel fully comfortable
in English at home.

00:02:22.038 --> 00:02:25.776
We have this really strong idea
that in order to be a good bilingual,

00:02:25.776 --> 00:02:29.295
we have to be two
monolinguals in one body.

00:02:29.295 --> 00:02:33.606
But linguists know that's not really
how bilingualism works.

00:02:33.606 --> 00:02:35.743
It's actually much more common

00:02:35.743 --> 00:02:37.159
for people to specialize,

00:02:37.159 --> 00:02:40.838
to use one language in one place
and another language in another place.

NOTE Paragraph

00:02:41.219 --> 00:02:45.941
Now, it's not always only about
how we see ourselves.

00:02:46.290 --> 00:02:49.276
It can also be about
how other people see us.

00:02:49.760 --> 00:02:52.953
I do my research in Bolivia,

00:02:52.953 --> 00:02:54.855
which is a country in South America,

00:02:54.855 --> 00:02:57.441
and in Bolivia, as in the United States,

00:02:57.441 --> 00:03:01.101
there are different social groups
and different ethnic categories.

00:03:01.337 --> 00:03:05.906
One of those ethnic categories
is a group known as Quechua,

00:03:05.906 --> 00:03:07.807
who are Indigenous people.

00:03:07.807 --> 00:03:10.484
And people who are Quechua
speak Spanish a little bit differently

00:03:10.484 --> 00:03:13.269
than your run-of-the-mill Spanish speaker.

00:03:13.269 --> 00:03:16.289
In particular, there are some sounds
that sound a little bit more alike

00:03:16.289 --> 00:03:18.874
when many Quechua speakers use them.

00:03:19.829 --> 00:03:22.602
So a colleague and I designed a study

00:03:22.602 --> 00:03:26.539
where we took a series
of very similar-sounding word pairs,

00:03:27.387 --> 00:03:31.624
and they were similar-sounding
in exactly the same sorts of ways

00:03:31.624 --> 00:03:35.762
that Quechua-speakers often sound similar
when they speak Spanish.

00:03:36.667 --> 00:03:40.705
We played those similar-sounding
word pairs to a group of listeners,

00:03:40.705 --> 00:03:43.825
and we told half of the listeners
that they were going to listen

00:03:43.825 --> 00:03:46.333
to just your normal
run-of-the-mill Spanish speaker,

00:03:46.333 --> 00:03:50.404
and the other half of the listeners that
they were going to hear a Quechua speaker.

00:03:51.059 --> 00:03:53.242
Everybody heard the same recording,

00:03:53.242 --> 00:03:58.053
but what we found was that people
who thought they were listening

00:03:58.053 --> 00:03:58.705
to a run-of-the-mill Spanish speaker

00:03:58.705 --> 00:04:00.306
made clear differences
between the word pairs,

00:04:00.306 --> 00:04:03.258
and people who thought they were
listening to a Quechua speaker

00:04:03.258 --> 00:04:06.401
really didn't seem to make
clear differences.

00:04:06.620 --> 00:04:08.771
So if a visual would help,

00:04:08.771 --> 00:04:11.207
here are the results of our study.

00:04:11.207 --> 00:04:12.675
What you see here in the top line

00:04:12.675 --> 00:04:14.626
is a little bit of an arch.

00:04:14.626 --> 00:04:17.201
That's what you would expect
from people who are making

00:04:17.201 --> 00:04:19.287
clear differences between the word pairs,

00:04:19.287 --> 00:04:21.056
and that's what you see for people
who though they were listening

00:04:21.056 --> 00:04:22.656
to a Spanish speaker.

00:04:22.656 --> 00:04:25.056
What you see on the bottom
is a little bit more of a flat line,

00:04:25.056 --> 00:04:27.124
and that's what we expect to see

00:04:27.124 --> 00:04:29.193
when people are not
making clear differences,

00:04:29.193 --> 00:04:32.686
and that came from the group that thought
they were listening to a Quechua speaker.

00:04:32.987 --> 00:04:35.839
Now, since nothing
about the recording changed,

00:04:35.839 --> 00:04:39.292
that means that it was the social
categories that we gave the listeners

00:04:39.292 --> 00:04:42.018
that changed the way
that they perceived language.

NOTE Paragraph

00:04:42.586 --> 00:04:46.372
This isn't just some funny thing
that only happens in Bolivia.

00:04:46.372 --> 00:04:49.041
Research has been carried out
in the United States,

00:04:49.041 --> 00:04:51.567
in Canada, in New Zealand,

00:04:51.567 --> 00:04:53.769
showing exactly the same thing.

00:04:53.769 --> 00:04:57.742
We incorporate social categories
into our understanding of language.

00:04:58.290 --> 00:05:02.217
There have even been studies
carried out with American college students

00:05:02.217 --> 00:05:05.353
who listen to a university lecture.

00:05:05.353 --> 00:05:08.155
Half of the students were shown
a picture of a Caucasian face

00:05:08.155 --> 00:05:09.458
as the instructor.

00:05:09.458 --> 00:05:12.640
Half of the students were shown
a picture of an Asian face

00:05:12.640 --> 00:05:14.502
as the instructor.

00:05:14.502 --> 00:05:17.055
And students who saw the Asian face

00:05:17.055 --> 00:05:21.081
reported that the lecture was less clear
and harder to understand,

00:05:22.015 --> 00:05:25.485
even though everybody listened
to the same recording.

NOTE Paragraph

00:05:27.670 --> 00:05:32.850
So social categories really influence
the way that we understand language.

00:05:32.850 --> 00:05:36.131
And this is an issue that became
especially personal to me

00:05:36.131 --> 00:05:38.441
when my children started school.

00:05:38.441 --> 00:05:40.643
My children are Latino,

00:05:40.643 --> 00:05:43.929
and we speak Spanish at home,
but they speak mostly English

00:05:43.929 --> 00:05:45.819
with their friends out in the world,

00:05:45.819 --> 00:05:47.972
with their grandparents.

00:05:48.257 --> 00:05:50.292
When they started school,
I was told that the district requires

00:05:50.292 --> 00:05:54.192
that any household that has a member
who speaks a language other than English,

00:05:54.192 --> 00:05:58.986
the children have to be tested
to see if they need

00:05:59.887 --> 00:06:02.072
English-as-a-second-language services.

00:06:02.072 --> 00:06:05.492
And I was like, "Yes, my kids
are going to ace this test."

00:06:05.492 --> 00:06:08.718
But that's not what happened.

00:06:08.718 --> 00:06:12.388
So you can see behind me the results
from my daughter's ESL placement exam.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
She got a perfect five out of five
for comprehension,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
for reading and listening.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But she only got three out of five
for speaking and writing.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And I was like, "This is really weird,
because this kid talks my ear off

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
all the time."

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But I figured it's just one test
on one day and it's not a big deal.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Until, several years later,
my son started school,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and my son also scored
as a non-native speaker of English

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
on the exam.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And I was like, this is really weird,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and it doesn't seem like a coincidence.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So I sent a note in to the teacher,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and she was very kind.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
She sent me a long message explaining
why he had been placed in this way.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Some of the things that she said
really caught my attention.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
For one thing, she said that
even a native speaker of English

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
might not score at advanced level

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
on this test,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
depending on what kinds of resource
and enrichment they were getting at home.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Now, this tells me that the test

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
wasn't doing a great job
of measuring English proficiency,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but it may have been measuring

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
something like how much resources
kids are exposed to at home.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
In which case, those kids need
different types of support at school.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
They really don't need
English language assistance.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Another thing that she mentioned
caught my attention as a linguist.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
She said that she had asked
my son to repeat the sentence,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"Who has Jane's pencil?"

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And he repeated, "Who has Jane pencil?"

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
She said this is a typical error made
by a non-native English speaking student

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
whose native language does not contain
a similar structure for possessives.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The reason this caught my attention
is because I know that there is

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
a systematic, rule-governed
variety of English

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
in which this possessive construction
is completely grammatical.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
That variety is known to linguists
as "African-American English,"

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and African-American English
is actually group of dialects

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that's spoken across the United States,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
mostly in African-American communities.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But it just so happens
that my son's school

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
is about 60 percent African-American.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And we know that at this age,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
children are picking things up
from their friends,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
they're experimenting with language,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
they're using it in different contexts.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I think when the teacher saw my son,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
she didn't see a child

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
who she expected to speak
African-American English.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And so instead of evaluating him
as a child who was natively acquiring

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
multiple dialects of English,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
she evaluated him as a child

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
whose standard English was deficient.

NOTE Paragraph

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Language and social categories
are intricately connected,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and we bring so much baggage
to the way that we understand language.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
When you ask me a question like,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
"Who counts as a speaker of a language?"

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I don't really have
a simple answer to that question,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but what I can tell you

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
is that people are pattern-seekers,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and we're always looking for ways
to connect the dots

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
between different types of information.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
This can be a problem

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
when our underlying biases
are projected onto language.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
When I look at children like my own

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and I see them in the gentlest
and most well-meaning of ways

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
being racially profiled
as non-native speakers of English,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
it makes me wonder,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
what's going to happen

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
as they move from elementary school

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
onto high school and college
and onto their first jobs?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
When they walk into an interview,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
will the person sitting
across the table from them

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
look at their color or their last name

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and hear them as speaking
with a Spanish accent,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
or as speaking bad English?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
These are the kinds of judgments
that can have long-reaching effects

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
on people's lives.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
So I hope that that person, just like you,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
will have reflected
on the naturalized links

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
between language and social categories,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and will have questioned their assumptions
about what it really means

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to be a speaker of a language.

NOTE Paragraph

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Thank you.

NOTE Paragraph

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
(Applause)