Revisionist History - The Origin of “You” – A Conversation with John McWhorter

Episode Date: May 1, 2025

Malcolm sits down with the linguist John McWhorter, to discuss his new book, Pronoun Trouble: The Story of Us in Seven Little Words. Among other things in their wide-ranging conversation, John makes an impassioned case for the return of “thou.” Get ad-free episodes to Revisionist History by subscribing to Pushkin+ on Apple Podcasts or Pushkin.fm. Pushkin+ subscribers can access ad-free episodes, full audiobooks, exclusive binges, and bonus content for all Pushkin shows.  Subscribe on Apple: apple.co/pushkinSubscribe on Pushkin: pushkin.fm/plusSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I was a fan of John McWhorter long before I met him for the first time. McWhorter is a linguist at Columbia University and a music lover and a New York Times columnist, basically a rena Renaissance man. It was maybe 2019 when we first spoke. At the time, I was working on something about Tom Bradley, who was mayor of Los Angeles from 1973 to 1993. And while I listened to old tapes of Bradley, I was struck by something I heard. Listen.

There is nothing there to hide. I want everybody to know that Tom Bradley's life has been an open book and this is another demonstration of that. Tom Bradley is black. Born in Texas, grew up in south central Los Angeles. So I went to see McWhorter, went to his rabbit Warren of an office, played him that bit of tape and said, explain this to me. Why does a black guy whose parents were shark-croppers from Texas sound like Cary Grant? And for an hour of the most wonderful conversation, he explained to me exactly why he did. Fast forward a few years, I was doing our

series on the 1936 Olympics and I got obsessed with Dorothy years, I was doing our series on the 1936 Olympics, and I got obsessed with Dorothy Thompson, who was one of the most important journalists in the world in the 1930s. And I heard some old tapes of her. And she sounded like she was a Duchess of York, only, do you know where she grew up? Buffalo. So who do I go to see to explain how people from Buffalo end up sounding like English royalty?

You guessed it, John McWhorter. My point is that there is a certain kind of question about language, about race, about why we speak the way we speak, for which the only answer is, let's call up John McWhorter. I love John McWhorter. And when he said he had a new book coming out called Pronoun Trouble, I asked him, could I interview you about it? And lucky for me, he said yes. My name is Malcolm Gladwell.

This is Revisionist History, my podcast about things overlooked and misunderstood. In this episode, we're gonna run the conversation I had with John McWhorter this spring at the 92nd Street Y, which was delightful. I did this interview with John right after finishing up the Joe Rogan episode of Revisionist History. If you listen to it, you'll know that I spent a lot of time talking about how to properly interview someone, how hard it is, and how Joe Rogan

could learn a lot from someone like Oprah. And that episode was very much on my mind as I was interviewing the quarter, because I was thinking, oh, am I going to measure up? Where do I land on the Oprah-Joe Rogan continuum? I'll let you be the judge of that, although I will say this is not exactly a fair test. The degree of difficulty with interviewing someone as charming as John McWhorter is very, very low. Hello, everyone. Thanks for coming.

John, thank you for agreeing to join us tonight. Malcolm, thank you for having me. No, no. This is, I wanted to, I was thinking back when I first met you and I think it was, I called you, Oprah, went to see you because I was doing something on the first black mayor of Los Angeles, Tom Bradley. Yeah, it was Tom Bradley, that's right. And I was listening to tapes of him speaking and he sounded like the whitest guy I could imagine. I was trying to figure out why.

He sounded like a Disney announcer. Yeah. And you gave, wait, tell me a little, before we even get into this, it was so much fun, your answer. Explain to me why that would be so. I don't remember what I said then because it was before you know what and therefore it feels like it was 75 years ago Yeah, but I know that I probably would have said that he would have grown up in a time when the unspoken cultural expectations of Oratory culture were such that if you were trying to make your way in the world whatever color you are as an American There was an expectation that you would learn the standard dialect and be absolutely comfortable in it.

Frankly, Booker T. Washington did that too. He was born a slave. If you listen to recordings, you'd think he was Teddy Roosevelt, and that's because that's what you had to do, which was kind of unfair, but I was thinking he comes from the time when black people were expected to speak that way

if they wanted to have public influence, and I'm sure that he spoke in Different ways when he did not have the camera on yeah, didn't I say that? I think you said something along that lines and we were the thing the fascinating question is when it Did that stop it stopped? Yeah, he doesn't sound like that if he's the mayor of Los Angeles today No No that that ended in the late 60s and there was a new idea and in some ways a healthy idea that to be taken Seriously, you don't have to learn to talk in the standard way. You can express yourself how you feel like it the minute I Mentioned Tom Bradley to you. You were like, oh, I remember I played you a tape you like oh and I realized oh

This is old hat for John. This is what it means to be a linguist. You're constantly entertaining, asking yourself those kinds of questions. You can't let a... More or less. Yeah, although I happen to be what's called a historical linguist, which means that I'm interested in how language changes.

You can be somebody who's interested in just how language is right now. In which case, that Tom Bradley question would be less of interest. But for me, it's all about what was going on in the past, and especially nowadays, we're at the point where you have 100 years, it's actually technically 102 years of people recorded speaking

and moving at the same time. And so there's some sound films starting in 1923. And that to me is history, especially now that we've got the internet. And so you can just see these things happening and you can listen to the way people talk. And so that's something I do. Not all linguists would be inclined to do that.

They would do other interesting things. But it's a little obsession of mine, especially lately, how has American English changed over about the past 125 years when you can actually hear it. You can listen to, this won't go on for too much longer, but you can listen to the black musical theater artist Burt Williams, who has a certain name, but he first became famous working with George Walker. They're two black men. You can see them in pictures and you know they've

they've got the minstrel makeup and they're in these forced poses and you kind of think What what were they like and it's hard to tell there's some recordings of them There are a few and they're like like that You can listen to the way they spoke and sang they both sound Caribbean Including George Walker who grew up in Kansas because black English vowels were different back then if you listen to black people on Cylinders from the 1890s and then them, they don't say coat, they say court, like that, somebody's gonna marry me,

somebody's going to marry me, that's how they sounded. And so these are the obsessions that one starts to have. When you say you have, this sounds like a fantastic obsession by the way. How does that like, is this something you do sort of for fun? In other words, do you have places you go to find these historical? or you just watching a movie from the 30s and you stop it and you Go back five minutes and you lay up both of those. Yeah, and it's not only black people It's just people in general listen to that vowel.

Why did the person use the word fantastical in that particular way? There are all sorts of things. And then, do I go looking for it? Not necessarily, but if I find out that there is some four CD player set called Sounds of the Deep Past, the first thing I'm thinking is

how interesting could most of that be? but there'll be two things where somebody Is black or somebody is using something colloquial? and so I'll listen to all four of those damn CDs once because you never know what you're gonna get and you get just enough to Put into books and to mention to you and things like that. So when did you when did you at what point in your? So when did you when did you at what point in your? In your career life, whatever did you realize that this was something of particular interest to you You mean linguistics in general no no this thing and you just talking about that It's a summer day in

1975 and my father's got his beer and he's watching this bad old movie. And it was a movie biography, old one, of Stephen Foster. And the people keep walking through and the vowels are different. I'm gonna write Swanee River. And I asked him, why do they talk that way? And he said, well, you know things change And that's about all he had but I remember thinking those were real people and yet they don't talk like us

Why and then a seed was gradually planted? There's an episode of Spoken about this there's an episode of the Lucy show not I love Lucy But her second show that got bad and in one of the early episodes She Lucy gets a maid and the maid is snobbish and so Lucy starts buying the maid lunch and at one point She says oh, it's a roast chicken. It's roasted and she says it's roasted I was listening to that when I was about 13 and thinking that's not a word anymore. Is it that sort of thing for some reason? I was about 13 and thinking, that's not a word anymore, is it? That sort of thing, for some reason, interests me.

And next thing you know, you've got so much of it stuck crowding out more important things in your head. But you can write books about it. John, you gotta do better than that. You can't say for some reason it interested me. You gotta tell me. You gotta tell us more than that. The way people talk is very resonant to me.

And as I've gotten older, I've realized that for other people, it's the way people walk, or the way somebody dances, or the way people dress. But I know from a very early age, just speech was interesting. It was a window into the soul. People spoke differently. And that was about this much blackness.

It was just listening to people in general, getting a sense that my teachers had a certain accent that the white people on TV didn't have. In Philadelphia, you say, lousy, whereas Lucy says, lousy. And I was thinking, well, that's interesting. Annoying my southern relatives by noticing that they had different vocabulary here and there. You know, I'm this little kid.

I talk like this, and I say, you say carry when we would say take. And they would get tired of that. But I realized it was because I was interested in dialect. Also, one thing I missed, and I think it's partly from being black, is I never heard black English as wrong. I didn't grow up speaking it, I grew up hearing it.

I have a good passive competence, but I remember cousins who very much spoke it, and they would use features of black English, and I would listen and not think nothing, some people just not care, I would not think that's bad grammar, that's wrong. I wouldn't think it was exotic, I would listen to it and think,

hmm, that's different from the way. I would put it and I wonder why is that based on something in history? I had one cousin who was using what we call the narrative ad people who study black English and so and then we had gone downstairs And then we had seen that there was a raccoon in the basement And then we had said hey, let's get rid of that raccoon And then we had gone back upstairs And I keep waiting for you had what and then what and it was just All had and I remember listening to Darren doing that and thinking that must be different

Instead of him not knowing what had means and then years later I found out that linguists had written about that wait my wife who's black She uses that that's where it comes from. What? She sticks had in the craziest places. It might be a black thing. Yeah, or like when Will Smith says, well what had happened was he's taking. That's what she did. Yeah.

She said, today she said, I had went. Now understand this is a highly educated, went to Princeton corporate lawyer. In her. She just takes had and just kind of like shovels it in randomly into her senses that is that is because it's a good earthy yet systematic way of using using the language it's called a narrative had there are papers about it notice I papers there's one paper about so her father wait I want to her father grew up in both Harlem and Jacksonville, Florida. Mm-hmm

And he would be growing up in the 50s. Mm-hmm He would have gotten that narrative had from Harlem most likely from Harlem. Yeah, that's good solid northern black English Yeah, now you said something earlier That you didn't speak black English growing up, why not? That's deep Malcolm, actually. That gets into my parents and what they were like. And so plenty of black family speaking the dialect fluently. Mount Airy in Philadelphia was a very integrated

neighborhood, the black people in the neighborhood had become middle class from mostly being working class. So there was plenty of black English spoken in the neighborhood. The black people in the neighborhood had become middle class from mostly being working class. So there was plenty of black English spoken in the neighborhood. Close friends of mine spoke it. My mother grew up speaking southern black English but switched to a kind of generalized suburban northern when she moved to Philadelphia.

My father spoke Philadelphia black English but, and this is something I really have only wrapped my head around over the past year, really thinking about it, they were not inclined to use their vernacular around their kids. They didn't speak it to us. I remember thinking, mom gets on the phone with her relatives and all of a sudden

there's this other way she has of speaking. I was trying to wrap my head around it. Whereas, to tell you the truth, most Black moms would have spoken that way, at least some to their kids as well. And the truth is, both of my parents tried their best. They were both brilliant people. They provided a materially great existence. But they were both very closed off people in general. And that played out in terms of dialect. Then also, my sister talks exactly like me. If I have a weird voice, there's one other person, it's my sister who's four years younger

and she sounds just like this. So it was both of us. And I find myself thinking sometimes, we both do that, but also I'm not an imitator. As much as I love other languages and trying to learn them and never doing it as well as I'd like to. Holly, my sister, went to Spelman

and came back with this new repertoire. All of a sudden she could switch, she had a kind of black English, she had the cadence. Whereas I never did that and to be honest, if I had gone to Morehouse, I don't think that would have happened. I talk the way I talk and other people imitate me. And I think that's just neurons or something.

I like the way I talk. I'm not going to talk like someone else. But that is the reason. And I wish that I had picked it up for real because not having that natural competence means that you come off sometimes as thinking you're better than people when really it's just that that's not in your mouth and I can completely understand what it would look like from another perspective. But yeah, that's it. Sometimes to be honest, I have wished that I was, and I'm not just saying this because it's you, except I am,

I wished that I was black Canadian because I think that's less of an issue there in terms of the place of American black English in what it is to be a black person, but that's just an idle thought. I remember the first time I saw that kind of To the switching as a kid in Jamaica Seeing my uncle, you know a brown-skinned Jamaican Who talked to us in the Queen's English. He was getting gas, had a gas pump. And he says, I'm maybe nine, he gets out of the car and he starts talking to the guy pumping the gas

and there's some, it wasn't just that he switched into patois, it was that he also, his manner completely changed. You're a different person. That he was, they were doing that Jamaican thing where they're shouting at each other even though they're not angry. Yes.

Which I had never seen before. I don't know if this is the coolest thing I've ever seen in my entire life. That he could go from literally Malcolm Blah Blah Blah and then boom, and it was just that kind of. And that kind of trash talking thing. Just like. There are papers written about that.

One actually. Yeah,'s written about that. One, actually. Yeah, that is very common. That must have been wild, especially to see that big a switch. Because in my case, it was like from here to here. But with Patois, first he's Margaret Thatcher, and then suddenly he's Bob Marley. That must have been amazing.

When my mother hearing that, then I began to hear my mother when she would get angry. She would lapse, not into full-on bad work, but you could hear the Jamaican coming out of her voice. The vernacular. That idea as well. No, it's funny, because I'm making the same, on some level, observations you are as a child, but I have no...

What sidetracks me at that age is not how people are speaking but how they're telling other explaining things I Get obsessed in the same way that you I think it's funny in the same way You got obsessed with how how your people are expressing themselves grammar. Yeah to me. It was about We're we're gonna we're playing hearts and our cousin doesn't know how to play hearts And my brother starts explaining hearts to my cousin. He's doing it all wrong. That was my obsession. I'm six, I'm just like, why, why start with a point of the game?

Like, what are you doing? Yeah, like that. And I realized how deeply kind of. And it bothered you. Oh, to this day, it works. I get bothered by it. I always just assumed that people were gonna do stuff wrong and I would have been listening to what the grammar was.

No, no, no. The surest way for me to completely lose my cool is to read instructions that someone has written for something. Just like, what is this? I mean, come on. I want to call up the company and volunteer my services. We'll be right back with more of my conversation

with John McWhorter. I want to talk a little bit about your, and by the way, I always find this question, if it's asked of me, deeply annoying, so you don't have to answer it if you don't want to. But I wanted to talk about your kind of place in the culture right now, which is really interesting to me. And I have a grand unified John McWhorter theory. I want to hear this because I don't Here's my theory at any given moment in in in sort of

Popular culture or intellectual popular culture. There is someone who's allowed to get away with saying anything You're that person I think you get to say whatever you want For a variety of reasons which I'd like you to unpack. Can you give me can you give me one half of an example of what you mean? Like I'm allowed to say it but no one else is. Well you wrote a beautiful was it an op-ed? I can't remember where you wrote it. A thing about your own experience with affirmative action. Yes. No one else could write that. True. You write about, you in your column are constantly

in a very beautiful way kind of setting down the rules for discourse, particularly around, it was your code switching column of yesterday. Like, all right, you're not allowed to do that. You're gonna do it this way. Very few, most of the people. I forget them the minute I write them. You can't.

This, oh, today is, what's her name? The congresswoman, Jasmine Crockett, yes, okay. Jasmine Crockett. You said it very gently and nicely, you said to her, come on now. You get to do that. I do. You know what? Who else can do that? What you're

saying is something I'm feeling as I get a little older because I'm pushing 60 and so I'm no longer the young pup and I feel like I've got a certain amount of life experience and also just I'm beginning to come off as the kind of person who you call sir or in the parking lot, okay boss, you know that sort of thing. And so I'm beginning to take those chances to an extent. With Jasmine Crockett, I will say this, I was very careful in the wording of that,

because I thought, especially because she's 40 and a bit, and I'm about to be 60, I'm male, I have an imperious demeanor, I don't think that she did anything that was absolutely sinful. And so, honestly, in the editing of that, we were very careful with the words. And so near the end of it, I say that her explanation for why she made fun of the man in the wheelchair

was, what did I call it, clever but hopeless. There was an idea that I was supposed to say clever but cowardly, and I said no, that's too mean. I don't want to call her a coward. I want to say that the explanation just doesn't work. So I think part of it, but the fact that I wrote that at all, I don't know if I would have written that one 20 years ago, or if I did, it would have been read as, John just likes to criticize black people

and he does that every week when I actually do it very rarely. But I think what you're talking about is that I'm getting a little older and therefore feel like I can say things that I couldn't when I was Coleman Hughes' age, like 30, where if I would say things, even if I thought I was right,

it would be, you're too young, how dare you? And I really felt at the time time I need to respect my elders. I would try very hard to do that. Especially in black American culture, you don't sass your elders, you don't sass your parents. Well, now I'm my parents. And so I'm going to start doing some constructive sassing. I think that's part of it.

Part of it is, well, I think there's other layers. Well, one is that as a linguist, as someone who pays as much attention to language as you do, you're better at it. By which I mean that just the example you just gave on parsing the difference between cowardly and hopeless That someone who was not as attuned to the nuances of language might have said cowardly with a Quite a you know, there's quite a dramatic difference in the way that would be perceived and read. Yeah And you're but you are professionally alert to those nuances and that permits you a great deal more freedom.

I think that most people dramatically underestimate how important word choice is and how acutely sensitive we are to the word, the words that are used, particularly if they're directed at us. I wanna talk about my favorite chapter in the book. What's the favorite? It's the chapter about you.

Thank you for it not being about they and them. Okay, you. Yeah, that was the one that was the funnest to write. It's the fun it is. So just to explain briefly to everyone, the structure of the book. The book is it's not just a book about they mean there. I think there already is a book just about they I couldn't have sustained anyone's attention for that long. It's each pronoun. So there's I, there's you, there's he, she, it, there's we, and there's they. So that's seven chapters.

Notice that it's compact. And the idea is to give the history of each one of those little words, and then to discuss some controversy that is connected with them. We kind of resist controversy. That chapter was a challenge, because I was thinking nobody fights over we,

but I got a chapter out of it anyway. But that was the point. And of course, when I was writing it in 2023 on a Sun porch upstate, I was thinking ha ha, happy linguistic pronouns because the book before this was called Woke Racism and it was a bourbon fueled angryueled, angry little screed that needed to be written in 2020.

But it's this book where I'm screaming on every page. And books like that are not fun to write. So after that was over, I thought, I want to do one of the happy language books. And I thought, what about the pronouns? The last thing I was thinking was all of this debate we're having now about trans identity, et cetera. I was just writing about pronouns.

So the book has fallen into a different atmosphere than I was expecting But really it's just me enjoying pronouns like in nine nasty words. I enjoyed profanity That's what this book is but you so tell me tell us tell us the problem with you. You is a problem I don't mean that you all are a problem. So there was some black English You is a problem. I don't mean that you all are a problem. Oh, there was some black English, too. Yes, though, okay. We will get there.

That was silly. That was the problem. So it used to be, yeah, exactly, exactly. Thou, Malcolm, as opposed to you in the audience. That's how English is supposed to be. Thou art sitting in a chair. You are sitting, to be honest, with the lighting. I can't tell what you're sitting in,

but I presume they are chairs. And so, thou and you, you're supposed to have singular and then a plural one. In early Middle English and before, there was a dual. So if it's just you two, then it was yeet. And so, thou, yeet, and you. And then they had case forms. Thou, if it's subject, thee, if it's an object.

You was the object form, yee was the subject form, like hear yee, Thee, if it's an object. You was the object form, Ye was the subject form, like hear ye, and then Yeet didn't do that. But the possessive of Yeet, if you wanted to say U2's book, ink book, get that. And so, got it wrong, no, ink was the object form. Yeet and then ink, so I've done it all for U2, my children, I've done it all for ink, Inker was the possessive. So you had all of these you forms

and everything's chugging along and today all we have is you. Not even ye and you, just you. Thou is gone, no thee, just you. It all just falls away. Thou is the one we miss. It's like it had the disease, yeah. Thou is the one we miss.

We need thou. We need that. We need it back right now. But we can't do it. So let's convince us about why we need to have thou back. Well, if you think about it, if you're going from English to almost any language you're likely to learn,

notice the first thing you learn is that there's something like do, and then there's some plural form. You never learned that the word for you is the same both in the singular, if there's a chart in front of you, the singular and the plural. That's not how languages work. And so all over Europe, this is preserved.

This difference is preserved. There are different spheres of influence that it has in different languages and at different times, but if it's Russian, it's supposed to be ty and vi. You don't have vi used for everything. You don't have vi used for everything You don't have the use for everything English is different in that way English is a very odd language in certain corners of Its being and to tell the truth It's it's obscure we need a singular versus a plural form and we try to create a plural form by saying y'all or use

Or yin's and we're told that that's just funny, it's just slang, it smells like fish or bubble gum or marijuana, it's not a real word. And yet all we're trying to do is be a normal language. So what's your preference here? There's two parallel strands of argument here and I wanna figure out which side you're on. So you originally is the plural. Mm-hmm. Thou is the singular singular

What has happened is that you has come to encompass both and we but we developed these colloquial forms y'all Etc to take up the plural position and we've moved you to the singular Do you think you should remain the singular or should you be moved back into the plural position? Take a stand. I'd like to see thou come back. I think we need thou, there was nothing wrong with it. It's just like German, du, we need thou.

The problem is that thou sounds antique. Thou sounds like somebody in a periwig who's about to die of yellow fever because it's so far back. But if we bring in you, then we have to accept y'all as legitimate. Or yous. Or you guys, or yous.

And that's really tough too because of the aforesaid odors of those words. Why did, I was thinking of, you know, so if someone wrote the hymn, How Great Thou Art Today, it would be How Great You Are. How great You Are. How great you are. And sings my soul.

It's not as good. My savior God to thee, how great you are. How great you are. It doesn't work. That was great for art. Yeah, but art thou, but it would be hard to use out on the street. I think, do I say it in the book?

No, that was about something else. You could not say thou naked You know it just it wouldn't seem quite right it was I You but no you've said this problems with both positions, but come on you're not answering my question trying Well, if you had to if I make you language, Tsar, and you get to push you to the singular apparel position and either reinstate thou or establish yous and y'all, which move are you making?

If I were the Tsar, like if I could do an executive order, yeah, I would, you would be in the singular and I would enforce that you all was more widely accepted. I would say that the Wall Street Journal has to start allowing you all and it has to start being taught in school with a teacher with a stick and a blackboard.

That's the way I would do it. Already when I teach about language, I say it's gonna be I, you, he, she, it, we, y'all, they. I always say that because you need a y'all in that sense. One of the things that did not occur to me until I read that chapter was that in the South, y'all is only, is the plural. That is to say, and if it's addressed to a person,

you're invoking unseen others. I hadn't realized it. So if I go to the South and I say, well, that's what y'all think, and I mean just you, I've committed a violation. Yeah, because they don't use it to mean the singular. But when they say, it's one person, you're at a 7-Eleven, and somebody says, y'all come back,

that doesn't mean y'all that one person right there It means it's implying that there's somebody out there in the car or something, which is it's the following Yeah, it's a politeness strategy So with do and who you can address a single person is who as if they're two people and so you're not Hitting the person like this if you say y'all come back now, you're kind of saying, woo, come back now. You're taking away the directness. To say, you, you one individual,

I hope you come back and buy another Slim Jim. It's a little direct as opposed to y'all come back. It's a very courtly thing, that y'all. I wanna go back to something. You said, well, we need to distinguish between the plural and singular you. What problem does it create for us when we can't? Is it just a lack of specificity?

It's just that you need to pause and clean something up. And you'd rather not have to. Imagine never having to say, I don't mean you all. I mean just you. Or I mean just you, not you all over there. There are larger tragedies but nevertheless that is one of those things where oh that is one of those things where we have we have a ding like for example in French you're driving a

rental car and you're in a big hurry and then all the other cars are parked in a line and you pull into a space and you don't really park it right and the butt of the car is kind of pushing out so you run down into the little hut and you pull into a space and you don't really park it right and the butt of the car is kind of pushing out. So you run down into the little hut and you say, I'm sorry, but my car is sticking out. There's no way to put it that way in French. Nothing can stick out. You can say, I didn't park properly.

You can say that the row is uneven. But if you try to say, the car is sticking out and I'm sorry, they don't have it. Now, does that mean that it's hard to be French? I doubt it, but it would be nice if they had that word. It would be nice if we had a thou, or if we could use y'all in the same way. Yeah, so what I would like to see

is the country divided on this question. So there's a, there would be thou districts, and then there would be y'all districts. Oh, that would be adorable. And then, because I don't like y'all, to be honest. I do like thou. I would like thou to come back. Thou, thou art.

Thou art reading. It just sounds like somebody who died 150 years ago, but I could get used to it. But is that, this is another sort of interesting language question though. Is that because, is that gonna be as true for our interesting language question though, is that because, is that gonna be as true for our children? Will our children have the same associations with thou?

I mean, once, why do I think, I sang that hymn for a reason. I grew up singing that hymn. All of my associations with thou are biblical. If we move into a world in which people's association with religious practice is vanishing. Then doesn't that free us up to go back and pick up a lot of that stuff? It's possible.

It's funny you say religious because I forgot something, which is that I went to a Quaker school, Friends Select in Philadelphia in the late 70s, and back then there was the last cohort of teachers, Quaker teachers, who were still using the and thy, and in natural speech, the ones who were super Quaker as in dressing Quaker. And I remember there was this one teacher

who would come and look at your paper and say, don't forget to put thy name on thy paper. And he meant it straight, he didn't mean it ironically. And you know part of why I don't like thou, I never thought about this. You're making me think about a lot of things I haven't thought about. Because one day he decided to take a long trip in a canoe

and he happily pulled out into the Delaware River and was talking about when he was gonna come back and no one ever saw that man again. And I must admit that I associate thou with that man. And that is much too arbitrary. So I can't… The last thing is this man's demise. But I need to stop that. I would enjoy there being thou, but I'm trying to imagine it imposed on a whole society. And I cannot see my 10 and 13 year old feeling differently about it, but then again, there are aspects of them that I may never know.

I'll ask them next time I see them. And what about the, you mentioned this in, I believe, in passing, the English use of one, you do, yes. One, do the English upper crust resolve this problem by, if I say one in the way that English, one doesn't think that, does one? What am I doing? Am I explicitly freeing up you to be in the plural form?

Is that what I'm doing? Well, in that case, we use you colloquially. Well, why suddenly can I not talk? And he had a stroke that night. You colloquially. But we would actually say, you can't do that, can you? And so you gets dragged even into that one? Usage which ended up replacing it was originally a word man

Which was not man, but it was mon and then mon just dropped away everything drops away in English like autumn leaves for some reason But you have the one and you're saying does that allow is that why they're doing that why? Why are the why does the English upperclass use one instead of U? Because U is overstretched, because not only is it used in the singular and the plural, but you also use it for this indefinite. Real Germanic languages, normal European languages, have some dedicated pronoun, as we call it,

for the indefinite. That's one thing that a pronoun should do, that book should have an extra chapter. In Old English, it was mon, then mon shortened to me and so you would say you know you got to do it and you would say me gotta do it that's not very accurate Middle English but you get my point and then it just that me flew away and you ended up being dragged in for that too we work that little word so hard it's a miracle that we don't trip over our linguistic shoelaces with it more, but languages aren't usually like that. There's one I know of in New Guinea,

it's called Beric, and all they have is I, we, then you, and then there's one word that means he, she, it, and they. One word like quack. It's not quack, but it's just one thing. But we're more like that than we are like the European languages that we're actually related to. John, sorry to be a dog with a bone here, but why don't we all use the English one? In order to give you a break? Yeah.

Because if it says, should I say, In order to give one a break. In order for us to see, but we can't because if you use one in that way, you sound like you have a big mustachio and you walk with a cane and you're in black and white in an old movie played by an actor named C. Aubrey Smith. One mustn't do that.

It's too high. As a kid, we would make fun of this because my father would, I think he would use this locution and then he abandoned it. Because you're trapped once you start with the one. One doesn't think that one should do that, does one? And then you realize this is an endless stream of ones in your future.

Or Fats Waller saying, one never knows, do one. But that was arch. He was saying that while he's knocking back the gin. That was funny. In his real life, he certainly wouldn't have said, you know, one never knows. And so one, for arbitrary reasons, is marked. And so it has that

upper crust meaning and most of us are only upper crust on occasion. And so we need something more casual. And it ends up being, yuh, poor little you all the time. Yeah. It's a heartbreaking chapter. It is. Yeah. It's a heartbreaking chapter. It is. We'll be right back with more of my conversation with John McWhorter. We have questions.

Some of these questions are really good. The questions are always fun. How does English compare with other languages in terms of words on the move, the shifting of words meaning over time? Words are on the move. That was the title of one of my books actually. Words are on the move all the time in all languages. Some of them are moving faster than others,

but there's no such thing as a language where the words just stay where they are. And it can be hard to process that the words are on the move because it usually, not always, but usually, happens very slowly. But words meanings are always kind of morphing. Obnoxious used to mean vulnerable to harm. And so don't render yourself obnoxious used to mean vulnerable to harm and so don't render yourself

obnoxious by wearing too few clothes to the jousting tournament or that's not the, you take my point. So it only came to mean noxious because it sounded like noxious and so we now use it to mean that. If you look in a grammar guide in about 1900 there's always some person, the kind of person who says one and has that mustache, who is complaining. People are using obnoxious to mean annoying when really it's supposed to mean subject to harm, sniff, sniff, we're going to have to deal with this, this is a sign of the lack of education. And so that is what happens to all words and that's true in Japanese, Hungarian, Tahitian, there's

no language where that's not happening. Someone once told me, I don't know if this is true as a Canadian, that in Japanese, Hungarian, Tahitian, there's no language where that's not happening. Someone once told me, I don't know if it's true as a Canadian, that in Quebec, the French that is spoken is archaic French. So why is Quebecois French not moving at the same pace as French French? So that does suggest that different languages move at different rates.

That's a very good question question and the answer to it is that Parisian French is one thing, the French of Quebec, and it's actually very similar to Cajun French, is a different grouping of dialects. And so you can say that these things are older. But the thing is that those dialects have changed a great deal since they were moved over

to Quebec, and the Quebec dialect is very different than what it would have been in, say, the late 1600s and the 1700s. It's just that you can still see the likenesses. It's not that Quebec stayed the way it was. And so all languages move along, and the truth is, I have not done a study of the joual spoken in, for example, Montreal. I'm sure that that variety has changed more in the past 300 years than

standard French in Paris because written languages change more slowly. So if a language is just allowed to do what it wants to do, like some language in a rainforest spoken by indigenous people, it's never written down, that language moves along considerably such that you might even have a little bit of some language in a rainforest spoken by indigenous people, it's never written down. That language moves along considerably such that you might even have a little bit of a problem understanding your great-great grandparents. Once it's on the page and your brain is kind of on writing, as I put it, and you think that the real language is written, then it tends to slow language change down. So what we know is how language changes, where when the new they comes in,

we're thinking, good lord, what happened? That would not shock people as much if this were an unwritten language. Language changes very quickly until it's yoked to the page, which is true of only about 200 of the 7,000 languages that there are. The idea that you think of the language in writing

and then you think of speaking as just a sloppy way of how it's done on the page. That's only a very few languages and we happen to be speaking one. Normal human language gets to mind its own business. And so it's faster for them. What are your thoughts on black American English

being adopted by younger generations in the slang they use? I'm assuming this question is about by younger, and in some cases, non-black generations. I think it's great. And I know that there is a strain of thought that says that non-black people are stealing black English features and appropriating them,

and that there should be a line. But for one, there could never be that line. That line couldn't happen, especially with the mainstreaming of hip hop. And it's getting to the point where you can be a thoroughly mature person and not really remember when rap was listened to by basically all kids.

That happened really in the 90s. But once you've got that, and you've got that music in people's ears, and just in general, I think that it's a sign that there is less of a color line than there used to be, and we all know that we still have work to do. But there was a different time. There was 1950, and then there was 1980,

which was very different from today. And I think that this business of supposing that non-black people aren't going to borrow what is probably the most vibrant slang in the United States, it'll never happen. It's actually a good sign that it is happening. And it really is at the point where if you're going to look at how modern English is changing,

which is mostly the words, two times out of three, it comes from either black slang or gay black slang. That's a major source of our new words. And really it's a word I try to avoid two words. Holistic because it just makes everybody happy to hear the word holistic. And also the word dynamic. It's dynamic.

What the hell does that mean? But I think that black English jumping into mainstream English is quite dynamic, and I enjoy watching it. So yeah, I'm not giving the right answer, because I know there are people who think that it's appropriation. That's complicated though, and I think that's an over-application of the appropriation concept, I think.

Yeah, we have to end, sadly, but I want to ask you one last question, and that is one of my, it's my favorite question for someone like you. Let's imagine you were made, language czar, of America, with absolute powers. I want you to tell me the three language fixes you would impose on all of us. We've done you, we want the, you want y'all,

we've given that to you. I want three new ones and then we're done. I want people to stop saying it is what it is because I find that the chilliest, most dismissive expression, that's got to stop. There's something pickier. You can't just walk into this room and start yelling. That's how the sentence should be.

You can't simply walk into this. You can't just walk. But everybody says, you just can't walk into this room and start yelling. That is now ordinary American English, and I have no right to have any problem with it. But it's kind of like you wanting the order in the monopoly directions.

It doesn't make any sense. You can't just walk in, but people say, just can't all the time. There was an episode of The Lucy Show where somebody did it, and so I know that it's not new, but it really, it hurts me. And then, let's see what else. This is one that I didn't like when I started hearing it in

the 90s. Yeah, yeah, yeah. People say when they're having a conversation they'll say oh yeah, yeah, yeah, but they also make it in an orange color. You're trying to say something. They say yeah, yeah, yeah, but and it sounds pushy to me kind of like you shut up and that's not what they mean but to me it's just one do they mean one yeah would do. What they're trying to do is take their turn in the conversation and they say, yeah, yeah, yeah, in the same way that now both you and I probably use exclamation points in our emails

when we're not exclaiming anything. It's kind of, be there in a second, ding! And so that has become... And so now if you want to really exclaim, if you want to say something like, the tangerine is the best flavor Then you have to use two exclamation point. Yeah, so yeah Yeah, yeah is kind of long for what used to be just yeah, but it's just this kind of natural

It's kind of like, you know sections of DNA replicating. Yeah, and you know, that's that was a weird analogy But yeah, no one uses more exclamation marks points in email than me, you know this. Are you really doing this? Oh, it's so excessive. That's a read. It's to the point now where I think that with people I'm regularly corresponding with, if I only use two,

they'll think that I'm mad at them. And so, why is Malcolm so cold today? He's cut back to two exclamation. So I got to do like three and four. That's the way it is now. And all that is, is that you're being cheery and polite. Yeah. That was not the way we wrote emails 30 years ago, or even 20. But now I'm doing the exclamation points because I'm thinking if I just have a period,

it makes it look like I'm angry. And that's how punctuation changes. Well you might be angry, you might well be angry John. I have my days but I would disguise it by using a meaningless exclamation point. All right one last one for the road. So it was you just can't. It was yeah, yeah, yeah. And then there was the, what was the first thing I said? And it is what it is. People have got to stop that. So I would have those three.

And then maybe y'all. It's the correct response to it is what it is. It isn't what it is. Is that what? Yeah, but yeah, yeah, yeah, but it isn't what it is. In this case. See, you can't say that. What they're really saying is stop. It's kind of like, yeah, yeah, it's stop talking about that.

Like it is what it is and therefore there's no point in dwelling on it. And now let's talk about RFK Jr. or something. And what I wanted to talk about was the tangerine ice cream. So that's that's how that goes. John, this has been great fun. This is a wonderful book. You should all go and get it and give it to your friends as well. And thank you for joining us tonight and thank you, John. Thank you, Malcolm. Thanks for listening. Coming up on Revisionist History, an episode about faces, an episode on raccoons, and another on English muffins. Revisionist History is produced by Nina Byrd

Lawrence, Lucy Sullivan, and Ben Nadav Haferi. Our editor is Karen Shakerjee, mixed and mastered by Sarah Bruguier, engineered by Nina Byrd-Lawrence, original score and music by Luis Guerra. Our executive producer is Jacob Smith. Special thanks to Sarah Nix and Greta Come. I'm Malcolm Gladwell. you