We are a generation raised in the advent of “Clueless,” where “oh my gods” and “likes” have become the norm in our everyday speech.
However, is this phenomenon anything to passionately decry?
Last week, English professor and executive secretary of the American Dialect Society Allan Metcalf weighed in on the increased importance of the word in spoken interaction.
Metcalf gives us the modern definition of the word as laid out by a 2010 edition of the Oxford English Dictionary: “Often used to convey the speaker’s response to something, or to introduce segments of an ongoing conversation between two or more speakers. Sometimes also used to introduce a gesture or facial expression evocative of the speaker’s feelings.”
We can all relate. It is generally well known that everyday usage of the word “like” is now merely used to replace the word “said.”
“And she was like, and I was like…” We’ve heard it all too many times before.
But it’s worth considering what this substitution signifies about our patterns of speech. By replacing “said” with the more general “like,” are we merely making statements without committing to the actual content? It seems the word has given us a way for us to tentatively relay scenarios to others and not have to take ownership of our storytelling by worrying about painting an accurate picture.
However, Metcalf maintains that the definition clarifies and even enhances everyday speech.
“But I finally understand the difference between plain “I said I would” and “I was like, I would!” said Metcalf. “And now I understand why we need the latter for the moments when we need to show as well as tell.”
I agree that it is important to differentiate between spoken and written language. It is irresponsible to think that because one is not well-spoken they will write with the same “Valley girl” tones that their voice may inflect. However, many still believe that overuse of the word is a bastardization of the English language and does nothing but perpetuate an uneducated, lazy pattern of speaking.
I can agree with this. Too often in my life I’ve found myself face to face with a truly eloquent, well-spoken verbal sparring partner only to feel utterly embarrassed when I let an overabundance of “uhs” or “likes” litter my speech.
In response to Metcalf’s defense of the word, Marc Tracy published a response in The New Republic this week maintaining that for everyone older than 45, the word is still heinous to hear.
“But if ‘like’ in the non-dictionary sense is best for conveying tone, well, then we’ve really run into the basic contradiction behind it: It is a word only used in verbal speech that gets across the very thing verbal speech is best at getting across without extra words,” Tracy said.
Tracy is in the right, here. While we shouldn’t base individual intelligence on the differences in speech patterns, defaulting to the word “like” has become a signifier of lazy thought processes that is considered unacceptable to see in writing.
It is also a social signifier of lack of academic discipline that has clearly spread throughout our own generation. The proliferation of the word will continue to accelerate as it becomes more and more prevalent in our speech.
While individual expression in speech is important, it is equally important that we not breed lazy speech patterns in current and future generations that may impact how we are viewed by older generations.
Reach the columnist at llonghi@asu.edu or follow her on Twitter @lolonghi.
