LANGUAGE CORRECTNESS AS AN APPLIED LINGUISTICS PROBLEM
Non-discriminatory language
Non-discriminatory language attempts to be neutral as to group membership. Its neutrality distinguishes it from discriminatory language, which is defined in a booklet issued by the Equal Opportunities Unit of the University of Melbourne as: ‘that which creates or reinforces a hierarchy of difference between people … including sex and gender, race, ethnicity, class, age, political or religious beliefs and physical, intellectual or psychiatric disability’ (EOU 1998: 5).
The purpose of the booklet is to ‘expose how language can be used in discriminatory ways’ (ibid: 4). It discusses topics such as false generics (‘man’ used to mean both men and women), compounds with ‘man’ that can be perceived as exclusive (e.g. ‘manmade’, ‘manpower’), the use of clichés and stock phrases that may reinforce invisibility of the out-groups (e.g. ‘man in the street’, ‘man of letters/ science’), occupational titles which convey assumed gender or class norms (e.g. ‘cleaning lady’, ‘groundsman’), paternalism whereby less powerful groups are infantilized (e.g. ‘waitress’, ‘comedienne’), discriminatory humor (e.g. ethnic and racial jokes), quoting discriminatory material (here the commentary suggests the use of ‘sic’ to draw attention to the fact that the discriminatory words are a quotation).
The lists of U/non-U terms are intended as statements of fact. Non-U speakers are not supposed to see them as accusations, although that is probably how they do see them. The campaign for non-discriminatory language use goes further, further even than the pedagogic guides whose mission it is to prescribe Standard English. The EOU booklet is proscribing rather than prescribing.
