3 ms·

In that case, why save anything? The internet archive is obviously pointless. Everything should be just one grey homogeneous mass. People save stuff like this

In that case, why save anything? The internet archive is obviously pointless. Everything should be just one grey homogeneous mass. People save stuff like this because it provides a interesting window into the human condition, not because of some assigned analytical "value".

csydas 8y ago
I'm pretty sure the GP is suggesting the article doesn't provide a compelling reason why the dialect/language in the article should be preserved beyond just being a note in a book somewhere. There are tons of things which we keep a copy of, but for no more reason than just to remember it. With regards to Chicagoese, maybe I was just listening to the wrong people, but I grew up in Milwaukee and went to Chicago basically whenever I wanted for most of my young adult life, and I never heard the term Chicagoese until reading this article. I actually thought the article was satire on first read, and I would agree with the GP that there isn't really a compelling argument for it, any more than I would suggest that we preserve the idiosyncrasies that my deep-woods Wisconsinite grandparents would come up with as I grew up, even if everyone in their region used the terms. I really don't get the thrust of the article's argument other than being upset that Chicago was ranked the accent as unattractive in the YouGov survey.
- wahern 8y ago
  If it didn't have a name it's probably because, much like the Italian Beef, nobody outside Chicagoland was aware of it or cared to be aware of it. Also, though so-called Chicagoese has its own distinctive features, it's part of a larger regional dialect. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Northern_American_English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Northern_American_Engli...). But that dialect is disappearing and Chicago, being the largest representative city, may become the location by which people remember it (e.g. in parody) in the future. That's the heart of it: the dialects are now quickly disappearing (after a brief period where researchers were sure some of them were growing!) making them increasingly prominent as part of a larger social discourse.

csydas 8y ago

I'm pretty sure the GP is suggesting the article doesn't provide a compelling reason why the dialect/language in the article should be preserved beyond just being a note in a book somewhere. There are tons of things which we keep a copy of, but for no more reason than just to remember it. With regards to Chicagoese, maybe I was just listening to the wrong people, but I grew up in Milwaukee and went to Chicago basically whenever I wanted for most of my young adult life, and I never heard the term Chicagoese until reading this article. I actually thought the article was satire on first read, and I would agree with the GP that there isn't really a compelling argument for it, any more than I would suggest that we preserve the idiosyncrasies that my deep-woods Wisconsinite grandparents would come up with as I grew up, even if everyone in their region used the terms. I really don't get the thrust of the article's argument other than being upset that Chicago was ranked the accent as unattractive in the YouGov survey.

wahern 8y ago
If it didn't have a name it's probably because, much like the Italian Beef, nobody outside Chicagoland was aware of it or cared to be aware of it. Also, though so-called Chicagoese has its own distinctive features, it's part of a larger regional dialect. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Northern_American_English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Northern_American_Engli...). But that dialect is disappearing and Chicago, being the largest representative city, may become the location by which people remember it (e.g. in parody) in the future. That's the heart of it: the dialects are now quickly disappearing (after a brief period where researchers were sure some of them were growing!) making them increasingly prominent as part of a larger social discourse.