The Social Consequences of Linguistic Conformity

Let’s admit it — the study of linguistics is Eurocentric. 

For early grammarians — European of course — Latin and Greek were the standard for language study. Many languages, like Native American languages Quechua and Nahualt, were labeled “exotic” for being more linguistically complex than or having structures that varied from classical language rules.

And the social implications are immense. Certain marginalized groups have been stripped of opportunities because the manner in which they speak is viewed as inferior. In a University of Buffalo profile on Professor Baker-Bell, she noted that the “fluid, informal speaking style of many Black Americans — currently known as African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) — is often actively dismissed by those in the fields of education, business and politics as being inferior to the more formal, rigid style that is used by those of European descent.”

As a result, marginalized groups feel the obligation to present themselves a certain way in more professional settings, either to find belonging or to even be taken seriously. This phenomenon is known as “code switching.” In a study measuring the frequency in which people of color code switch, ninety-six percent of participants reported code switching over a two-week period. In my conversation with Anthony Ortega ’27, he explained how the way he talks has changed after arriving at Deerfield. He said, “I began using bigger words or focusing on articulating myself in a way that would make me look knowledgeable, and I think I did that because I was nervous or worried.” There is nothing wrong about adopting different speaking mannerisms, but what makes Ortega’s story — along with many others — scary is that he felt the need to conform to this “ideal” way of speaking as a means to fit into a certain environment, not because he had the innate desire to change. 

What Ortega described is more than a loss of personal tongue. How we speak is a reflection of our heritage and background, and diminishing that takes away an integral part of a voice. 

Standardization has already leaked into our education systems. Now, generations of students learn how to fit into linguistic molds. Deerfield Academy, despite being an international institution, mandates linguistic studies to revolve around a certain form of academic expression. 

However, Deerfield gives less attention to the social history behind those standards. In addition to that, we rarely explore how diverse linguistic practices can be. I believe that we cannot teach academic English without scrutinizing the reasons behind the linguistic structures we use today. I urge Deerfield students and teachers to pry on why certain forms of expression carry greater prestige and to understand that these current conventions of language are in no way neutral parameters. 

Although it’s difficult to counter the hundreds of years of preferential treatment towards European languages, the first step towards change is recognizing our bias. Linguistics doesn’t live in a textbook, and there are real social consequences that come from that partiality that we see around us.