It is certainly true that the English language has words that, through their historical use, take on negative cultural connotations beyond their original definition. The word “uppity” is such a word.
We are now in a time when people who use such historical “code” words are being held to account. On the whole, this kind of close examination of language can be beneficial to society, particularly in making people aware of historical uses of such “code” words.
The weakness of such examination, however, is that we end up with an article that focuses on Mr. Schirling’s use of the word and largely ignores the broader important discussion that was taking place regarding police tactics. Additionally, if we are going to hold people accountable for precision of language, then Rep. Selene Colburn’s tweet that Commissioner Schirling described Rep. Vyhovsky as “uppity” is inaccurate. Assuming VTDigger’s quote and characterization of the quote is accurate, then Mr. Schirling described the exchange as being “uppity,” not Representative Vyhovsky.
Parsing of language can have value, but can also turn into the proverbial “double-edged sword, requiring that all involved be very careful as to the words being used as well as the accuracy of any criticism or characterization of such words.
Henry Hayes
Essex
