Language Log

The Supreme Court hears oral arguments today in FCC v. Fox Television Stations, the case of the fleeting expletive. Bono got things going when exclaimed "really, really fucking brilliant" at the 2003 Golden Globe Awards.[*] The FCC first judged such usage non-offensive, then back-tracked in the face of pressure from the Parents Television Council. In this note, the FCC declares that

given the core meaning of the "F-Word," any use of that word or a variation, in any context, inherently has a sexual connotation

Language Loggers have commented on this and related topics before, and Arnold recently went meta on the Times coverage of the case. I recently spoke with Jess Bravin at the Wall Street Journal about the FCC's statement and the coming Supreme Court hearings. (His article with Amy Schatz appeared today, along with a cool wordle-like graphic on the results below.) During out conversation, Jess asked how a linguist might test the FCC's claim about the connotations of the F-word. Does it in fact have sexual connotations even when used as an intensive, as in Bono's "really, really fucking brilliant"?

Three weeks ago I wrote about the state of Kentucky's attempt to seize the domain names of internet gambling sites using a statute that authorizes the seizure of "gambling devices', pointing out that the belief that domain names are gambling devices is bizarre. The court has now held an adversarial hearing on the matter and has issued a decision confirming its ex parte order. Most of the opinion is devoted to other issues, such as the question of whether domain names are property and whether the Kentucky court has jurisdiction, but the question of whether domain names are "gambling devices" as defined in the statute is briefly addressed at pp. 22-25.

I’m running a couple months behind on this but I’m finally getting around to commenting on the issue that Bill Poser posted about the eventually aborted effort by Dell to register, trademark and thereby prevent other companies from using “cloud computing.” It seems to me that Dell’s effort illustrated one of the struggles that both the Patent and Trademark Office and trademark lawyers have when they try to deal with the conventionally accepted (but sometimes difficult to define) trademark categories.

I lived in Maryland many years ago and it’s a good thing I’m not living there now. Why? Because yesterday I attended a church meeting about Montana’s efforts to rid this state of its death penalty. If I still had been living in Maryland in 2005 and 2006, simply attending a meeting like this would have landed me on the state and federal terrorist watch lists. This Washington Post article tells me I could be in a heap of trouble for my Biblically supported views against capital punishment. The Maryland Judicial Proceedings Committee is now studying the matter and there is at least some hope that sanity will soon return to Maryland.

One of the several controversies that have recently arisen over voting procedures in Ohio concerns applications for absentee ballots. Although an official Absentee Ballot Request Form is available from the office of the Ohio Secretary of State, the law does not require this form to be used. For some reason, the McCain campaign created its own inferior form, which among other things omits instructions, the warning that false statements are a felony, and space for the requestor's telephone number and email address. The McCain campaign form has a checkbox next to the statement: "I am a qualified elector and would like to receive an Absentee Ballot for the November 4, 2008 General Election". Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, ruled that applications in which the checkbox was not checked would be rejected. In spite of her offer to allow rejected applicants to correct the omission, a lawsuit was filed, resulting in a decision by the Ohio Supreme Court, which ordered [pdf] that absentee ballot requests should be honored even if the checkbox was not checked. (The Court's order contains a photograph of the form in question.)

The Governor of Kentucky is attempting to seize 141 domain names associated with internet gambling sites on the grounds that internet gambling is illegal in Kentucky. On the State's ex parte motion, without a hearing, a Franklin County court ordered [pdf document] the transfer of all 141 domain names to the State of Kentucky. This has aroused considerable controversy, for reasons including the following:

Today is National Punctuation Day and once again the poor little virgule/slash gets short shrift. Let us celebrate/honor the comma, the full stop/period, the exclamation mark/point, the question mark, and even the semi-colon (which I’ve been learning to use correctly ever since a surgeon removed half on my colon a couple years ago).

But who will celebrate/honor the lowly virgule? Not the good folks from Pinole, California, who seem to be in charge/run/oversee National Punctuation Day ®.

When I read this article in the New York Times that is critical about the expert witness system in the US courts, I found a lot to cheer about. I’ve served as an expert in scores of cases in the US state and federal courts, before the US Congress, and at the International Criminal Tribunal, so my agreement may seem surprising.

It’s no secret that serving as an expert witness can be excruciatingly difficult experience. Some say it’s a lot like taking a four-hour doctor’s oral exam. In the US criminal court system, experts are hired either by the prosecution or the defense. No matter which side we’re working for and no matter how objective we may try to be, some people still call us “hired guns.”

One of the curious things about the uses of linguistics in the legal context is that the smallest units of language get the most public attention. Linguists analyze language in all its shapes and forms, from minute sounds to broad discourse structures, but the media's interest is on the smaller language units like letters, punctuation, and words, not the larger language units like syntax, discourse structure, and conversational strategies.

A case in point is the area of authorship identification, which typically focuses on small language units such as morphology, lexicon, or stylistic choices found in evidence documents. It's tempting to think that such language features can actually identify authors with as much validity and precision as the way DNA analysis helps law enforcement identify suspects. Personally, I have some reservations about what I see linguists doing as they try to help the police and the courts determine issues of innocence or guilt.

The LPGA has announced that it is backing down from its "plans to suspend players who could not efficiently speak English at tournaments" (which I posted about here).

[Democratic California State Sen. Leland] Yee said he understood the tour's goal of boosting financial support, but disagreed with the method. "In 2008, I didn’t think an international group like the LPGA would come up with a policy like that," Yee said. "But at the end of the rainbow, the LPGA did understand the harm that they did."

This understanding is indirectly reflected in a statement from the LPGA:

"We have decided to rescind those penalty provisions," [LPGA Tour commissioner Carolyn] Bivens said in a statement. "After hearing the concerns, we believe there are other ways to achieve our shared objective of supporting and enhancing the business opportunities for every tour player."

[ Hat tip to Ben Zimmer. ]

This just in (well, a couple of days ago): the Ladies Professional Golf Association (LPGA) "has warned its members that they must become conversant in English by 2009 or face suspension". According to the NYT article, this policy is "believed to be the only such policy in a major sport". Three other North America-based major sports organizations (Major League Baseball, the National Hockey League, and the National Basketball Association) have no such policy: "Given the diverse nature of our sport, we don't require that players speak English," says MLB; "This is not something we have contemplated," says the NBA.

Many of the comments on the article are crying foul, claiming discrimination, xenophobia, racism, ethnocentrism, whathaveyou. The common denominator of all of these evils, ignorance, is almost certainly at play in the decision to adopt this policy as opposed to other ways to get what the LPGA claims to be aiming for with the policy: more sponsorship opportunities. Unlike larger, better-established sports organizations like MLB, the NHL, and the NBA, the LPGA "is a group of individual players from diverse backgrounds whose success as an organization depends on its ability to attract sponsorships from companies looking to use the tour for corporate entertainment and advertisement." The geniuses at the LPGA appear to think that the money will flow a lot better if only their excellent South Korean players can answer post-game interview questions in English.

The US Patent and Trademark Office recently embarrassed itself by granting preliminary approval to a ridiculous application by Dell to trademark the generic term cloud computing. It partially reversed course soon afterward by canceling the Notice of Allowance. The matter has now reached a conclusion: USPTO has denied the application. The letter to Dell, which contains numerous examples of the use of cloud computing as a generic term, is available here.

Random House recently cancelled publication of Sherry Jones' novel The Jewel of Medina, about Muhammad's child bride Aisha, for fear of violent reaction by Muslims like that engendered by Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses. In a whine entitled Crying Censor in the New York Times, Stanley Fish takes Rushdie to task for describing this as "censorship" on the grounds that it is only censorship when governments forbid absolutely the publication of a work.