“Uh,” “um,” “er” and such are filler words. In Chinese, the filler word is “that,” which sounds like “nega.”
See USC Suspended a Communications Professor for Saying a Chinese Word That Sounds Like a Racial Slur.
This story jumped out at me because I used to give lectures to Chinese businessmen on how the American publishing industry works. I don’t know a bit of Chinese, but I kept hearing them saying this word that sounded like the dreaded “n-word.” I asked a friend who speaks Chinese about it, and he didn’t give me a very satisfying explanation. This “uh, uh” explanation makes more sense.
The larger issue, of course, is how incredibly insane universities have become with all this speech policing nonsense. And this is the important point.
There is nothing for the university to investigate: Patton should be restored to his teaching position immediately. If anything, the offended students should apologize to him for causing the inconvenience.
Right. And not just an apology. There should be consequences for being that stupid — like getting points off their final grade.
If the story is “accurately” reported I would agree with the author’s conclusion. Yet, as we know, those in the left biased and right biased media don’t always report things objectively. In this case, “context” is key to understanding what happened and why this may have become an issue. Therefore, I’d want to know the following…
* What was the purpose and was there an expressed need for raising this point?
* Was it something the professor does regularly when teaching this course?
* Was there context given to students before he made the statement in question?
* Is highlighting the “nega” nuance something other professors typically do when instructing this course?
* Did the professor have a history of making statements that could be considered problematic or offensive?
* Has this situation come up previously ? If so, has the administration addressed this with him?
* Was it 1 student or were there a number of students that had issues with the professor’s comments?
* How did the students express or phrase their concerns?
* What were the findings of the university’s investigation?
In absence of such context, the reader doesn’t know if this situation was due to the students’ hypersensitive (aka political correctness on steroids). Or, did the professor do this to be unnecessarily provocative (aka being a jerk)? As the article is written, I’d need to see other reports before I could agree with the author’s conclusions. Indeed, the devil is in the details but they can surely make a difference in correctly understanding this and other situations.
In my experience, professors and other public speakers often like to make allusions to racy topics. E.g., if something “sounds like” sex, or some provocative topic, they’ll use it as a way of drawing and keeping interest. I personally don’t like it when people do that, but … so what?
Let’s say that in this case, the guy did it specifically for that reason — to be provocative. Let’s say he chose the “nega” example precisely because it sounds like The Word Which Shall Not Be Spoken By White People. And let’s say nobody else has ever done this. It was his own idea.
Should he be suspended or disciplined for that?
I say no, and it’s precisely the crazy response that makes me say that. People need to get over themselves. Just because a word sounds like another word is not an excuse to throw a tantrum. We can’t keep treating people like fragile children.
Remember when the guy got in trouble for using the word niggardly?
QUOTE: Let’s say that in this case, the guy did it specifically for that reason — to be provocative. Let’s say he chose the “nega” example precisely because it sounds like The Word Which Shall Not Be Spoken By White People. Should he be suspended or disciplined for that?
In that case, I’d say yes…especially if he knew it would be unnecessarily offensive to his students. It’s one thing to be thought-provoking. It’s another to be a jerk. The point of education is to prompt learning…not to get your jollies by being a bogan.
FWIW, I thought this article gave a more fulsome perspective of the situation. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/09/08/professor-suspended-saying-chinese-word-sounds-english-slur
“Did the professor have a history of making statements that could be considered problematic or offensive?”
Why is that relevant to you? What’s your working theory here, that possibly he’s secretly a thought-criminal mastermind, looking for clever ways to use words which sound like other verboten words so he can indulge himself with plausible deniability?
Do you think that’s a thing which happens?
QUOTE: “Did the professor have a history of making statements that could be considered problematic or offensive?”
In case it wasn’t obvious, the point was to try to develop an accurate understanding of the situation. Therefore, “IF” there was history of this behavior, it could be plausible the intent was to be purposely and needlessly offensive, in this case.
What’s your working theory here
I had no working theory given the article’s lack of detail and substance. Again, that’s the point of asking questions and getting further context. That’s part of the problem these days…people only get a piece of a story and “invent” the rest…most times incorrectly.
CORRECTED
QUOTE: “Did the professor have a history of making statements that could be considered problematic or offensive?” Why is that relevant to you?
In case it wasn’t obvious, the point was to try to develop an accurate understanding of the situation. Therefore, “IF” there was history of this behavior, it could be plausible the intent was to be purposely and needlessly offensive, in this case.
QUOTE: What’s your working theory here…
I had no working theory given the article’s lack of detail and substance. Again, that’s the point of asking questions and getting further context. That’s part of the problem these days…people only get a piece of a story and “invent” the rest…most times incorrectly.