Does waste make language

Bibliographic Data

ID3647748
AuthorsJ Reno (0000-0002-6459-6910, Binghamton University Binghamton New York USA, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume26
Issue3
Pages418-425
Publication date2022-06-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Sociolinguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1360-6441 • E-ISSN: 1467-9841
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/josl.12556
OpenAlexW4223961657
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited11

In Thurlow's (2022) paper in this journal, he offers an innovative approach to combining discard studies and sociolinguistics. Many of the examples are about language creating waste in different ways. In this response, I explore the opposite possibility-that is, how waste could be said to create language in turn. I do so with specific attention to how sociolinguistics can be approached through what cannot be said (taboo) and who cannot speak. As examples, I compare two seemingly unrelated yet similarly controversial and important scandals in late 20th century New York State: the pollution caused by the closed yet undisclosed landfill in Love Canal and the abuse and neglect of disabled persons at Willowbrook State School. These are not normal subjects for sociolinguistics, and the latter is not a normal one in discard studies either. Yet I argue that taking them together helps create unexpected linkages between these fields. In doing so, I argue that taking into account what goes unsaid and who cannot speak also helps reveal some of the undiscussed politics in both discard studies and sociolinguistics alike

Epistemology · Linguistics · Neglect · Social science · Sociolinguistics · Sociology · State (computer science · Taboo · Unsaid · Vernacular · Anthropology · Computer Science · Discourse Analysis in Language Studies · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Multilingual Education and Policy · Philosophy · Psychology

Tools

Open DOI