15 l nguage ideology and language prejudice

chapter takes the radical position (like Sledd 1972) that the burden of change should rest on the 
discriminators alone. Alternatively, or additionally, some linguists encourage the dominated 
to keep their non-mainstream dialects for informal use but to become bidialectal, developing 
competence in a standard or mainstream variety for work, school, and other formal contexts in 
which it is preferred (see Alatis 1970). 
Let's begin with the experiences of real people in everyday situations: 
A young woman comes to the United States from Uganda. After receiv­
ing a Master's Degree from the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, she 
accepts employment in that university's Office of Affirmative Action and 
Equal Opportunity. During the next four years three different supervisors 
are so satisfied with her performance that she is promoted to Administrative 
Program Specialist. Then a new Assistant Chancellor for Equal Opportu­
nity, an African American woman, is hired. In the next few months, the new 
289 
Lippi-Green, R. (2004). Language ideology and language prejudice. In E. Finegan & J. R. 
Rickford (Eds.), Language in the USA: Themes for the twenty-first century (pp. 289–304). 
Cambridge University Press.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---