Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Monday, March 31, 2014

Droppin' G's

Video clip from September 2011 and but one of multiple examples:


Does this kind of sloppy diction from a Harvard graduate and the President of the United States bother anyone else besides me — a public-speaking teacher whose first lesson every year emphasizes the importance of precise enunciation?

Apparently such sloppy diction does bother some others, including Samuel L. Jackson:
President Obama has made a habit of deliberately dropping his G’s when talking to “ordinary Americans,” and it’s getting on Samuel L. Jackson’s nerves. In an interview with Playboy Magazine, Jackson criticized our Harvard-educated president for ‘trying to relate.’

“First of all, we know it ain’t because of his blackness, so I say stop trying to ‘relate.’ Be a leader. Be [expletive deleted] presidential,” he said. “Look, I grew up in a society where I could say ‘It ain’t’ or ‘What it be’ to my friends. But when I’m out presenting myself to the world as me, who graduated from college, who had family [that] cared about me, who has a well-read background, I [expletive deleted] conjugate.”...
Read the rest HERE.

On the other hand, we have others saying that the very act of transcribing Obama's sloppy diction exactly as uttered is racist.

Why is it that each and every criticism of Obama is deemed racist but Obama's selective use of blaccent is fine and dandy?

19 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Yes, but only in part.

      I clearly recall so many making fun of GWB's speech patterns. But there seems to be a barrier about criticizing Obama's speech patterns. Why, why, why?

      There has long been a propensity for dropping g's. However, I have noticed the increasing use of this linguistic error the past few years.

      Delete
    2. You know perfectly well, "why," AOW. Obama is a NEGRO. We simply do NOT criticize Negroes, and we do NOT criticize Jews. Soon we will not dare to criticize Hispanics, Homosexuals, Women, or Muslims.

      Let's not beat about the bush. Only White Christians are fair game nowadays -- especially White Christian MALES.

      Delete
  2. It's all about relating to the rubes who vote for these charlatans.

    Remember John Kerry stumping in Iowa or wherever, stepping into a country store and asking, hilariously "Anybody know where I can get me a huntin' license?"

    ReplyDelete
  3. Uh oh: HealthCare.gov 'isn't available' on last day of sign-ups.

    Yes, there has been in surge in those trying to enroll. Shouldn't that have been expected and compensated for?

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's all jess a reglur parta de Dummn' Down Process. If day makes us ignernt an' keeps us dat way, day kin kuntrole us more easier. Dat's wutt dis is all about -- POWAH an' KUNTROLE! Dare ain' nuttin' else in dare minds. Day jess wunts to be abull push us around howsomever day wants. Dat'sawl dare is tu it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Does anyone know the antonym for ASPIRE?

    Because all the standards by which I was raised have been either REVERSED or OBLITERATED in the past fifty years.

    We used to be encouraged in every way to look UP to our "BETTERS," and do everything possible to EMULATE them.

    Now we are being virtually FORCED to look upon our INFERIORS as "proper" Role Models. The Establishment helps this along by imitating, and therefore CONDONING and ENCOURAGING the use of sloppy diction, uncouth, low-class speech patterns, painfully limited vocabularies, and rotten syntax.

    What we are seeing today is the moral equivalent of Professor Henry Higgins earnestly taking lessons from Eliza Doolittle in hopes of his perfecting a COCKNEY ACCENT, so he can pass for one of the lowest of the low. This, of course, would better enable him to attain High Public Office -- perhaps the presidency -- or even a seat on the Supreme Court.

    The RACE TOWARDS the GUTTER is ON.

    The only contest known to Man where WINNING GUARANTEES LOSS.


    The tired poor huddled masses are no longer yearning to breathe free, they are DICTATING to US.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It drives me completely crazy! I may a teeny tiny bit sloppy around the house (very teeny), but when I have to do a public speech or lecture I am pristine.

    The president of the United States should never sound like a low-life hood rat.

    The other thing I find fascinating is the black people I grew up around (St. Paul/Minneapolis) never sounded like blacks do today. We all sounded alike. Now "they be speakin like dis."

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wish [that] was his only drawback.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Recall when Ebonics was to be taught in school? How did we dodge that bullet advocated originally by Jesse Jackson as I remember.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The "Think Yiddish, talk British" crowd has had a LOT to do with this, because THEY have been permitted to set special standards of Immunity from Criticism for themselves -- a status which has conferred tremendous power on them. The "fallout" from post-WWII thinking has inspired other self-styled "special" victim groups to follow suit using a similar brand of logic -- namely that former victims -- and all their relatives and progeny -- should enjoy "Sacred Cow" status on former victims in a society that's been bamboozled into trying to reform itself.

    Because of this RIght became Wrong and Wrong became Right.

    The object has never been to achieve "Social Justice," rather it has always been to DESTROY the DOMINANT White Christian CULTURE and SUPPLANT it with the degrading garbage we get a steady diet of today.

    Ignoramuses are much easier to control than those who are both well-informed and capable of rational thought.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Aaannddd this is why everyone getting up in arms about Belgium's cookie is utterly absurd. This "president" is specifically trying to sound stereotypical black- whether it is to prove he is an American black (not Kenyan) or to "relate" to the average man is beyond me...

    And relating is baloney anyways. Every good speaker on this planet polishes up his speaking style in order to sound educated, sound-minded and someone worthy of respect. There is a reason speaker's wear suits. We instinctively trust those who are more refined and polished- not those who talk like an idiot. Informal speaking, yes, you mimic other's speak patterns. But not formal. And especially not as a President, who is SUPPOSED to represent the very best of our country, NOT the average joe.

    -Wildstar

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, yes, Wildstar, -- sort of -- but in truth President Obama speaks much better than either of his predecessors. Both Bill Clinton AND George W. Bush sounded like a pair of hicks fresh from the barn yard. I resented it, and will always look down on uncouth, unmodulated speech patterns. Mr. Clinton at least had an excuse. He WAS a jen-you-wine, card-carryin' hick, but "Dubya" came from Sterling Silver Stock and SHOULD have known better. His brother Jeb speaks impeccably. So does his mother Barbara. Old George Herbert Walker? --- eh --- not so much.

      That aside I agree that Obama's AFFECTATION of lower-class speech is abominable.

      Vulgarity is something we should strive to overcome not emulate.

      Delete
  11. It's Opening Day. No time to be negative.

    If Grady Sizemore really can come back the Sox chances look good.

    Go Sox !

    ReplyDelete
  12. Wow, Samuel L. Jackson, interesting.

    'On the other hand, we have others saying that the very act of transcribing Obama's sloppy diction exactly as uttered is racist.'

    Everything is racist since Obama became president it seems....

    Debbie
    Right Truth
    http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

    ReplyDelete
  13. Boy, Ducky, I've seen you evade posts, but this is the biggest 'off topic' I've seen even from YOU :-)

    AOW.......I heard that "ain't" used to be the proper English; do you know that?

    And you are SO RIGHT and I am so impressed by Mr. Samuelllllll Jackson.
    And I loved Adrienne's comment about cleaning house...yes, we're a little more lax until company's comin' :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. >>.I heard that "ain't" used to be the proper English; do you know that? <<

    It was an affectation adopted by the upper classes as a fad, but it's never been considered correct. They used to say don't when they meant doesn't also.

    Oxford Dick

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thanks, Oxford Dick....that sounds more like upper class of the last hundred years; but you could be right. I was going for even more ancient times. Thanks for that information; you're probably right! I ain't sayin' you ain't :-)

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective