The BBC had an advisory committee on spoken English. It tried to define, promote and protect Received Pronunciation. How should "garage" and "vegetables" be pronounced, for example?
The committee was subsequently disbanded.
There is a new book on the history of this committee: "Dictating to the MOB". Here is a book review:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3629204/How-language-wars-raged-BBC-1920s.html
Please post your comments about the BBC, RP and allied subjects below.
It would be interesting to hear your views and what you would do if you were running the BBC.
Should teachers tell learners about usage in current affairs when teaching vocabulary?
It would be interesting to hear views from native speakers and learners (however advanced or elementary) alike. Please come forward and give your views.
Today is 22 January, 2016. A debate is raging in the world about diversity at the Oscars. An italki learner asked a question at 2 pm GMT, "What does lack of diversity mean?" Here is that post: http://www.italki.com/question/342594
Should we include "inclusion of minorities" in our explanation of what diversity means?
Should we tell the learner what a diversity committee is and what it does?
Or should we just say, "Diversity means variety"?
There is much food for thought here, especially for full-time teachers at conventional schools. There are so many other similar words, such as "self-determination", "democracy", "burqa", "secularism laïcité)", etc, which relate to current affairs or history. How much or how little should a language teacher teach? Does he or she have a duty to impart enough knowledge to enable the students to read and understand the news?
It would be great especially to hear from learners. How much or how little would they like? What do teachers think?
Thanks to Su.Ki., the member here whom we all know and love, I now know the answer to this question.
See this article, whose link was given by Su.Ki. in an Answer here:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/i-invented-virtue-signalling-now-its-taking-over-the-world/
The inventor of the phrase wrote, "It is slightly frustrating that some people have credited Libby Purves with creating the phrase. Unlike Liz Jones, she did not mention where it came from. But I forgive her. I am a fan of hers and the way she presents Midweek on Radio 4. We were contemporaries at Oxford and I’ll never forget seeing her walking in front of me wearing hot pants. That sort of thing creates a special bond." That is very amusing, but in this day qnd age, can we still write like this without inviting accusations of sexual harassment?
Being attracted (well, admittedly he did not say whether he found the sight attractive or repulsive) to a pair of pants (or their wearer), long or short, male or female, on campus is a very common experience. Are we or are we not allowed to admit to it or describe it nowadays?
