As W. Labov has passed away, I came across a comment reposting this screenshotted request, along with the paper in question:
https://betsysneller.github.io/pdfs/Labov1966-Rabbit.pdf
The paper is quite a rollercoaster, ranging from describing of disturbingly racist ideas about native Hawaiian and Black children that some scientists still pushed at the time (1970!*), to Labov’s own disarmingly cute and humane solution to the issue of testing children’s language abilities.
Edit: *1970 - according to the article itself, which is apparently based on Labov’s 1970 talk; however, the URL suggests that the article was published in 1966, which is contradictory. I’ll try to find out where and when this was actually published…
Edit 2: It looks like it is from 1970, from Working Papers in Communication, vol. 1 (Honolulu: Pacific Speech Association). It is surprising that a recently published book also claims that it’s from 1966, probably the authors got the file from the same URL with the wrong year.
Edit 3: The original Twitter thread: https://xcancel.com/betsysneller/status/1516848959284678656
disturbingly racist ideas about native Hawaiian and Black children that some scientists still pushed at the time (1970!*),
Until a couple years ago, one of the main training manuals for nurses had racist and sexist assumptions about pain resistance.
As I’m reading this I’m getting angry. Not because of Labov himself (he’s simply denouncing this crap), but because this sort of adult that he’s describing is the one that I’d expect screaming with children.
And I’m glad that nowadays this sort of researcher would be barred from doing field work.
The rabbit approach was genius. Just like hiding himself behind the cloth hangers in another study; sure, nowadays this raises ethical concerns, but in his times it was the way to register spontaneous speech.
This reminds me of my experience when I was entering kindergarten.
There was a basic test/interview to assess reading skills to determine whether a kid should be in the “this kid doesn’t even know the alphabet” group or the “this kid can at least read a tiny bit” group. I was already a fluent reader (of books aimed at 5-year-olds, of course), but they tried to put me in the group that didn’t even know the alphabet.
I was afraid to read because I found the test taker intimidating. Fortunately, my mother knew that I knew how to read and she insisted that I go into the other group.
My favorite ADHD moment as a child was my school insisting I could read because I could answer the questions about the book.
My mother took me home and demanded I read the book. I still couldn’t answer the questions.
Frustrated she made me read the book out loud to her. I did so perfectly. Still couldn’t answer the questions. I read just fine, I just had trouble paying attention. I read the entire book out loud while thinking entirely about something else.
I think you left out the word “not” at least twice?
I found the one time I left the word out. Where was the other? Edit: there it is. Like I said, ADHD, I tend to just skim read. It’s lightning fast for me but it’s hard to proof read that way
My step brother had a somewhat similar story but in reverse. He couldn’t read, though. He memorized the words of the picture books. So he could go through them all beginning to end and answer questions about the stories, but if you opened to a random page, he had no idea.
I had that same problem as a kid because my mom read to us every night and I had all the books memorized. They realized I basically couldn’t read along with severe test taking anxiety, so they nearly put me in special ed in first grade. Somehow I ended up in gifted ed by second grade
That’s almost exactly what happened. Except my stepbrother did it intentionally. Not that he was trying to pass a test or anything. But he would intentionally request the same books over and over until he had memorized them.
because I found the test taker intimidating
Yeah honestly I’m pretty convinced that a large part of children’s “ability” depends solely on who’s testing them, and on how well they feel that day.
I actually tutored a kid to get her into kindergarten, lol. She was bright but her first language was Korean and she was shy about speaking in English, maybe also shy about white people. So we basically hung out and “read” picture books together, my role just being to give positive reactions to whatever she said. And she got in, so it worked I guess.
I’m guessing this was a private kindergarten?
Yes indeed.
I had a similar sort of experience myself (probably lots of people did) when I was at a psychiatric hospital, I was a kid, 15 or 16 or so. I had to solve some exams for what I guess was like two hours, and I was going crazy by the end, exhausted and losing focus. And based on that crap they were supposed to rate my cognitive abilites and emotional state. Thankfully I simply didn’t return there, no consequences, but it’s terrifying to think that some kids’ futures and whole lives were determined by such bullshit, and even more, as the article shows, that it could act as quasiscientific legitimisation of racism.
I wonder at what point do people forget how they were as kids?
That’s insane. Who in there right mind could think anybody would perform well in that sort of stressful situation?
A lot of people who are non verbal are perfectly capable of speech…
They just don’t want to for whatever reason, and “forcing” them to rarely works. You gotta come up with a scenario where they want to speak
A little 6 year-old boy doesn’t talk.
His Mother takes him to the doctor, who says, “He’s fine. Just give him time.”
A couple months later, his Mother takes him to a Child Psychologist, who says, “He’s fine. Just give him time.”
A couple months later, his Mother is cooking his breakfast and she accidentally burns his toast.
Scraping the burnt toast over the sink, She thinks to herself, “He’ll never know the difference”, and she serves the toast.
As she turns back to the sink, the little boy says,“This damn toast is burnt!”
Shocked, the Mother turns and says,“What did you say?”
“This damn toast is burnt!”
She says,“Omigod! You’re talking! What happened? Why did you take so long to talk?”
“Up till now, everything was OK.”
Reminds me too much of “children are like fig trees, they grow during times of (heat) stress”. Unfortunately that leads to a lot of parents being unnecessarily strict with their children.
When in reality, kids (really people of all ages) grow when challenged. It doesn’t have to be through trauma.
Well I can tell from my own experience that’s not the case; the times i was unnecessarily “challenged” are the worst times in my life that have inflicted the gravest of emotional damages that i still have to deal with. i prefer peace over challenges, but unfortunately my parents didn’t seem to care about what i want.
@antonim this post is how I learned that Labov died 🙇♀️
I posted about his passing two days ago, but it gained less traction - https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/33628658 (idk if you can see it on Mastodon)
man probably kept running averages in his head. you come in, he considers your age, class, subculture and diet and is able to predict how you’ll call him
Funnily enough, I have a somewhat similarly problematic name (not in pronunciation, but in declension - it can take up either feminine or masculine endings). The choice is purely regional and predictable, but I’m still glad to hear new examples (and it’s also fun to mention the whole issue and hear layman justifications for this or that option).
I wonder what my pronunciation /lə’bʌv/ says about my English, considering it’s my second language. It seems like it would be the more common option because it’s more likely to be deduced from the written form?
> a fun anecdote is that Labov didn’t correct people on the pronunciation of his last name (/lə’bʌv/ or /lə’boʊv/) because he liked to observe the variation.
man probably kept running averages in his head. you come in, he considers your age, class, subculture and diet and is able to predict how you’ll call him
Everybody is posting these elaborate eulogies and Peter Trudgill just says
> We owe him everything.
which I imagine must sound pretty trite to the casual onlooker, but if you’ve read both Labov and Trudgill you kinda feel the weight of this.
Genius outside the box thinking.
Thanks for sharing the full paper— that was interesting!
