words.” So that makes them stupid?nOr crazy? Listen, it’s Englishn—American EngHsh at that—thesenkids are having to learn. Maybe theynthink their way is a nifty shortcut.nAfter all, no one ever proposed that thenauthor of Winston Tastes Good Like anCigarette Should was learning disabledn—though he bent grammar to his ownnmeaning and usage. I do, however,nremember snide remarks about thendestruction of the language wreaked bynad-speak.nThe author of the primer does pointnout that labeling a child LD is tantamountnto saying he has a dread diseasenwhich can only be treated by thensupertrained. And this, she adds, isnuntrue. Her prescriptions for the preventionnof LD look to me like commonnsense that used to be, as little asn25 years ago, how children were ordinarilynraised. For example, the guidenrecommends, among other things:nSpeaking to your infant so that he ornshe will begin to recognize humannspeech. (Anyone for raising the kidnwith wolves?)nProviding your child with paper andncrayons in ample supply, as well asnpuzzles and other amusements of earlynyouth.nAvoiding encouraging “baby talk”;nrather, she says, one ought to repeatnsemi-gibberish in complete sentences,nso the child will learn.nMaking sure the child has gamesnthat foster coordination. (Hint: ThenNew York child’s parents did not playnball, or much of anything else, withnhim. They did hire an “occupational”ntherapist at $80 an hour at the taxpayers’nexpense.)nWatching the child’s diet; he may bensensitive to sugar (hyperactive kids, itnhas been known for more than 20nyears, usually are) or something else,nparticularly chemical additives innfood. In other words, feed the kidnfood, not chemicals, and limit sweets.nThis used to be the most common ofncommon sense.nDeveloping a program to controlnbehavior. (I assume this might includenliberal use of the word No. Modernnmommies appear to need their ownnremedial course in this simple Anglo-nSaxon syllable.)nIgnoring tantrums is also recommended.n(Think about it. How manynmodern mommies have you seen buy­ning off Junior with a toy when he wasntrying out for the Eddie Munsternaward in the supermarket?)nBelatedly, I don’t mean to implynthat learning disability doesn’t exist. Itnpossibly does, in a few extreme cases.nThe rest, as far as I can tell—and asnfar as the few traditional good teachersnI know can tell me—is all fluff designednfor the parents who like to feelntheir child is “different.” If they can’tnhave a genius, a learning disabled willndo. This in itself smacks of the parentsnbeing rational discrimination disabled.nAt its heart, then, is learning disabilitynanything more than the kids’nbrains and bodies developing at differentnrates? Must we make a “disease”nout of what is a completely ordinarynprocess? A book editor I worked withnonce told me she was dyslexic. But shenhad managed to graduate from MountnHolyoke before anyone ever thoughtnup the term. Her dyslexia, however,ngot her out of a lot of proofreading.nShe chose this excuse-path in adulthood—kidsndon’t have that choice.nHowever much we may natter aboutnkids having rights, the one fundamentalnright they do unarguably havenis to their own selfhood. Denigratingnthat selfhood for adult conveniencenis unwise at best and immoral at itsnbase.nI argue for simplicity, commonnsense, and good teaching. I argue for anreturn to a world in which smart kidsncould do it all, whereas other kids werenmagnificent at math and poor at poetrynand vice versa, while still others werenaverage, and a few, just a few, needednextra help to reach their potential.nThat, after all, was what teaching wasnall about.nBryce Webster is author of In Searchnof Modern Ireland: An AmericannTraveler’s Odyssey (Dodd, Mead).nLetter From thenLower Rightnby John Shelton ReednFightin’ WordsnPerhaps you heard something of thenfuror evoked down here a couple ofnyears ago when it was reported that annnspeech pathologist in Chattanooga,none Beverly Inman-Ebel, was conductingna class for those who wished tonshed their Southern accents. (That’snhow the news stories put it. One couldnas well say, of course, that they wantednto acquire a Northern — or, as it’snknown in the speech biz, a “standardnAmerican”—accent.) On investigation,nit turned out that Ms. Inman-nEbel’s course was just one of many;nsuch courses were available in severalnother Southern cities.nAlas, despite ridicule and abusenfrom regional chauvinists like me, thenabomination continues to spread,nshowing how irresistible is even a badnidea whose time has come. Now mynown university has gotten into the act:nOur department of “speech communication”noffered such a course last fall.nWhen I ventured to inquire whethernthe taxpayers of North Carolina knewnthat their money was being spent tonderacinate their children, the department’snchairman tried gamely to putnthe best face on it. She offered thenpragmatic argument that actors andnmedia personalities and businessfolknneed to be able to speak in “standardnAmerican.” (A friend observes that it’sntoo bad our alumnus Andy Griffithndidn’t take such a course. No tellingnwhat he might have amounted to if hencould speak properly.)nPeople should take these courses, innother words, for the same reason thatnpeople teach them: because there’s anmess of pottage in it. Or, if “mess” isnon the list of condemned Southernisms,nwe can say: because it will helpnthem make a buck. My colleague thenchairman did not venture to saynwhether it is right that there are occupationsnwhere this is so, or whethernstudents should be encouraged to enternthem. She just offered it as a fact ofnlife.nAnd, unfortunately, she’s correct.nSome non-Southerners—prospectivenemployers, customers, clients, andnvoters among them—simply findnSouthern accents unpleasant. BillienSue Knittel of Atlanta, for example,nenrolled in a lose-your-accent coursentaught by an Ohio migrant namednShelly Friedman, and told a UPI reporternthat the Yankee dentist shenworks for made her do it. “I talked toonSouthern for him.” This jerk didn’tnwant her answering his phone untilnSEPTEMBER 1987 149n