Zwicky's Trifecta of Illusions

thomblake

Linguist Arnold Zwicky has named three linguistic 'illusions' which seem relevant to cognitive bias. They are:

Frequency Illusion - Once you've noticed a phenomenon, it seems to happen a lot.
Recency Illusion - The belief that something is a recent phenomenon, when it has actually existed a long time.
Adolescent Illusion - The belief that adolescents are the cause of undesirable language trends.

Zwicky talks about them here, and in not so many words links them to the standard bias of selective perception.

As an example, here is an exerpt via Jerz's Literacy Weblog (originally via David Crystal), regarding text messages:

Text messages aren't full of abbreviations - typically less than ten percent of the words use them. [Frequency Illusion]

These abbreviations aren't a new language - they've been around for decades. [Recency Illusion]

They aren't just used by kids - adults of all ages and institutions are the leading texters these days. [Adolescent Illusion]

It is my conjecture that these illusions are notable in areas other than linguistics. For example, history is rife with allusions that the younger generation is corrupt, and such speakers are not merely referring to their use of language. Could this be the adolescent illusion in action?

So, are these notable biases to watch out for, or are they merely obvious instances of standard biases?

Linguist Arnold Zwicky has named three linguistic 'illusions' which seem relevant to cognitive bias. They are:

Frequency Illusion - Once you've noticed a phenomenon, it seems to happen a lot.
Recency Illusion - The belief that something is a recent phenomenon, when it has actually existed a long time.
Adolescent Illusion - The belief that adolescents are the cause of undesirable language trends.

Zwicky talks about them here, and in not so many words links them to the standard bias of selective perception.

As an example, here is an exerpt via Jerz's Literacy Weblog (originally via David Crystal), regarding text messages:

Text messages aren't full of abbreviations - typically less than ten percent of the words use them. [Frequency Illusion]

These abbreviations aren't a new language - they've been around for decades. [Recency Illusion]

They aren't just used by kids - adults of all ages and institutions are the leading texters these days. [Adolescent Illusion]

So, are these notable biases to watch out for, or are they merely obvious instances of standard biases?

Many people seem to think virtually any kind of language trend is undesirable. They perceive practically all change as degeneration. Needless to say, this attitude is considered completely baseless by actual linguists.

But to what extent is the value judgment of linguists about language change more important than that of other language users?

1thomblake17y

There are different kinds of linguists, and in my experience your generalization is incorrect. France, for instance, has an entire government agency of linguists devoted to resisting change in the French language.

4dclayh17y

If true, this is sad. Personally I applaud language changes that increase complexity (e.g. neologisms) and disparage ones that reduce it (words or grammatical constructions falling out of use; two words that mean different things being used to mean the same thing).

23

Zwicky's Trifecta of Illusions

23

23

23

Zwicky's Trifecta of Illusions

23

23