The Teeming Mass: Michael Gove and the Value of Non-Standard Forms

Michael Gove, the current Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, has been a prominent governmental figure for more than 10 years, having been elected as Surrey Heath’s MP in 2005. Gove’s most notable role is that of Education Secretary, in which his policies impacted all levels of education. At first glance, he appears to have very little to do with language, but anyone familiar with his reforms and comments towards others is aware of his prescriptive attitudes towards language. Prescriptivism, the belief that there are correct and incorrect ways of using language, manifests as an elevation of Standard English in Gove’s case with his policies and attitudes providing clear examples.

When discussing his proposals for educational reforms, Gove presented grammar as an unambiguous matter. His comments suggest that there is a ‘correct’ Standard English and anything differing from this is ‘incorrect’, an incredibly prescriptive understanding of language. Children’s author and poet Michael Rosen, meanwhile, suggests that “grammar is not a matter of being correct or not. It’s a way of describing how language works”, challenging the simplistic model Gove presents. His language preferences have also been met with criticism. As Lord Chancellor in 2015, he created a list of rules, criticised as eccentric pet peeves, designed to influence the correspondence of his department. The list which included never using ‘impact’ as a verb and using ‘ensure’ rather than ‘make sure’ was an updated version of his ’10 golden rules’, created in 2013 while he was Education Secretary. While everyone has preferences with language, Gove’s rules impose these preferences on others and suggest that these idiosyncrasies are the ideal form of language, elevating Gove’s idiolect above other varieties. Additionally, there is some suggestion that these narrow views on language suit Gove’s political agenda. Conservatism and prescriptive views of language have long been thought to go hand in hand. Linguist Deborah Cameron suggests grammar is useful in symbolising typically conservative values due to “its metaphorical association with order, tradition, authority, hierarchy and rules.”. Michael Gove is just the latest in a long line of Conservative politicians championing Standard English as a superior variety.

Despite only being Education Secretary for four years, Gove’s changes in this role have impacted all levels of education and the majority of my time at school, from SATs to A Levels he left no stone unturned. I first experienced these changes in 2013, where alongside the typical maths and reading SATs, year 6 students were required to sit a Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar test, SPaG for short. Gove’s test aimed to teach children about relative pronouns, modal verbs, prepositions, determiners and the present perfect tense among other grammatical terms, however, upon asking other sixth formers, who would have sat the test the same year I did, very few could identify any of these terms. Why is an 11-year-old expected to identify these when students at the other end of the education system cannot? Those who identified the terms were either studying English Language or Modern Languages A Levels and the majority agreed that they had learned these terms at GCSE or A Level, rather than at primary school. The grammar we learned at primary school remained largely untouched through my time at secondary school, with grammar primarily having relevance in languages lessons. It was in Spanish that I learned about the present perfect tense, not Gove’s ‘reformed’ SAT. Grammar interests me, it has given me ways of describing concepts I previously just accepted and an appreciation of both English and Spanish, a language I have studied for the past 6 years. But this useful, flexible approach in relation to grammar has little to do with Gove’s test, which suggests words have fixed categories and there is a singular ‘right’ answer, again a prescriptive view of language. Additionally, this test disregards other varieties of English, referring to features of non-standard varieties as ‘errors’ and elevating Standard English as a superior form. Linguistically, there is nothing superior about Standard English and its perceived superiority is largely down to historical coincidence. Some varieties of English demonstrate sophistication by making a distinction between a singular ‘you’ and a plural ‘yous’, distinctions which languages such as Spanish make but Standard English does not. Although Standard English has a purpose, as it allows communication between speakers of different varieties of English, it is by no means superior and its promotion in Gove’s test demonstrates, in the words of linguist and contributor to EngLangBlog Dan Clayton, his “very narrow, blinkered view” of how grammar and language works.

Gove’s attitudes often contradict his own use of language. Returning to his instructions to officials in his department, this list included the usage of ‘however’, which Gove stated should not start sentences, yet, when he wrote for The Times, Gove did just this. Equally, while his test disregards non-standard varieties, Gove makes use of these when the occasion arises. During the 2019 General Election campaign, Gove was questioned on the possibility of a second Brexit referendum, to which he responded “there ain’t gonna be no second referendum”, using ‘ain’t’ alongside ‘no’ as a way of illustrating the finality of his answer. Non-standard language is a useful tool for Gove here, as the use of multiple negation allows him to emphasise his certainty, an affordance lacked in Standard English. This language also has power, allowing him to converge and engage with his audience, potential Conservative voters. Also, in this time, Boris Johnson chose not to attend a leaders’ debate, instead sending his father Stanley Johnson and right-hand man Gove to represent him. As Gove was not Conservative Party leader, he was understandably not allowed in. To which he claimed he was ‘a’ leader, even if he wasn’t ‘the’ leader, dismissing the reporter covering the event by saying ‘let’s not quibble over prepositions’, misidentifying these determiners. Importantly, his misidentification of these terms can only be judged in relation to his role in creating the SPaG test, as without this, judging him reflects a prescriptive view much like the one Gove himself adopts.

Gove’s use of non-standard language is not confined to debates and interviews. He also has a presence on social media, responding to Labour MP Angela Rayner and Stormzy, a British rapper, singer, songwriter and speaker of Multicultural London English after Rayner retweeted an article about the two. Stormzy had been urging the public to vote Labour, likely upsetting Gove as a Conservative Politician, who responded with “I set trends dem man copy”, a quote from Stormzy’s 2015 song Shut Up. However, unlike Gove’s previous usages of non-standard forms, this was met with widespread criticism. This usage appears to have mocking intentions, something which Gove’s perceived social status makes deeply problematic. As an Oxford-educated, white, middle-upper class man, he belongs to an elite group in British society. Many questioned Gove’s decision to Tweet this, but rather than focusing on the non-standard nature of the lyrics, as there was some debate over whether this language could belong to Gove, with the suggestion that his quoting sanctioned crass stereotypes. Language offers a way of projecting identity, therefore by mocking Stormzy’s language, Gove is criticising his identity.

Everyone is entitled to preferences and as a result, Gove is able to hold these kinds of prescriptive views on language and remain largely unchallenged. However, his views do not only impact him. Instead, due to his influence on Educational reforms and his power within his department, his views are imposed on others, negatively impacting those who do not conform to his restrictive attitudes. This elevation of Standard English disregards the value and affordances of non-standard varieties while simultaneously ignoring his own uses of these, as well as highlighting wider hypocrisies seen in prescriptivists. Michael Gove’s views do not reflect the reality of language, but even he, an infamous prescriptivist, can find value in non-standard forms, reflecting the vital role they play in our multicultural society.