This show frustrates me because the premise - let’s bring on folks we disagree with and hear them out and have a reasonable debate - should make for a great podcast. But in practice, they simply do not bring on people they disagree with. Instead, they bring on people who they do agree with about 99% of the issue with the remaining point of contention almost always being, “I think we should listen to the other side and try to understand them”… A proposal that any reasonable person could get behind, but which the host presents as wildly radical. This latest episode is the perfect example of the pattern. To discuss the tradwife movement, would it not be the obvious move for a show supposedly about being open minded (the host ends the show reminding us to be open minded) to bring in the most articulate defender of that movement they could find? Instead, we bring in a fellow critic of the movement whose supposedly radical premise is, “Maybe these wrong headed women have a point or two.” These are intra ideological quibbles, not any serious attempt to bridge meaningful disagreements… And the fact that the host of a show supposedly about encouraging healthy debate almost always argues against taking the other side seriously is just… I mean, could anything be more ironic?

Impossible to take McWorter seriously after he said he couldn’t teach “4:33” because it was too noisy outside, exposing himself as both an intellectual charlatan and an advocate for the repression of free speech in one fell swoop. What an embarrassing moment for both Columbia and the New York Times, as they both choose to err on the side of genocide rather than live up to their own ideals.

When someone is stupid enough to argue that interracial marriages can still be racist if they don’t hew to radical leftist anti-racism ideology, I won’t waste my time on this show any longer.

I don’t even know where to begin, but Celeste Headlee is such an absurd arguer. Almost all of my positions are very liberal, and I come into every debate on Celeste’s side, but she argues them so poorly and with terrible tactics like cutting off the guests for an ad breaks but only after she gets the last word in, making blatantly false claims, and throwing in unrelated tangents that the guests don’t have a chance to defend. I almost always sympathize much more with the guests by the end of the show. I usually still don't agree with their opinions, but I feel like they at least made an honest effort. Celeste makes such poor and unfair arguments. I think most of the topics are still very important to debate, but not with her as the host. However, I think I get even angrier at the topics she has that should not even be in this feed. Are cruises cool? Christmas should be tacky? These are 100% debates of people’s preferences with no larger policy or society implications. Instead they just makes me hate her more. This is not a good approach to having real debates where people learn from each other. This is just another example of a self important liberal blowhard giving those of us with a sincere desire to understand different opinions a bad name.

I have a deep interest in languages and have been enjoying John McWorters’ podcast Lexicon Valley on Booksmart Studio so was happy to find his earlier linguistic musings here as well as the archive of equally linguistically interesting older (2012 to around 2017) episodes of Lexicon Valley by a couple of other linguists. My gripe is that Slate has thrown these non-political linguistic podcasts together with later commentaries about US partisan issues. Why not separate them into different feeds? People interested in linguistics may or, especially if non-Amrricans, may not be interested in American political issues. And people interested in contemporary American issues may not be particularly interested in linguistics and language issues. Moreover, the title with “debate” is incorrect. The two linguists are not debating each other. They are discussing certain questions— and usually seem to agree with each other. No debates.

I agree with other reviewers that this show is ideologically narrow. The debaters basically stipulate to a leftist worldview and then debate within its confines. To me as an agnostic, it’s like listening to Christian theologians debate in every episode topics that presuppose a god (divine grace, the holy trinity, miracles, etc.).

Waow ! This was an outstanding exchange. Not sure it is about agreeing or disagreeing but embracing the fact that the human mind is unique and that we are creatures of nuance and contradictions that need to be handled so that we can move forward. In the US, we like black & white solutions and placing people and their issues into boxes. It comes as reassuring but real life and real people - whether psychotic or not - are always evolving shades of grey.

Not sure what this is..it isn’t what I subscribed to..so unsubbing.

Then this is the show for you. An absolutely google-free environment

These aren’t true debates. The host clearly favors a certain side from the start. The host has an unfair advantage at steering the conversation compared to the guests. That said, a lot of the conversations show me new sides to these issues. Overall it has a r/changemymind feel to it, not a debate feel.

Let’s be honest, this show is mid at best, not particularly interesting and definitely not what it reports to be. So why am I still subscribed? I’m subscribed because at one point this show was a very interesting linguistics show, called Lexicon Valley. And they still have the backlog of episodes that I enjoy listening to. So why have they put an honestly bad show that is completely unrelated to what it originally was, instead of leaving the backlog of episodes to simply exist. Because they can make more money if they claim they have more listeners than they actually do. This show is nothing but an idiotic and stupid cash graph, which I am subscribed to only because of its backlog of interesting episodes.

Instead, you have "debates." Or, more specially, milquetoast perspectives by people you, as a Slate listener, will likely agree with. The host does little in the way of providing counter arguments or remotely insightful questions. It's a snoozefest.

This is not really a show where people debate. The episodes I’ve heard are two people on the left parsing out what the best leftist position would be. Listening to the newest ep on DEI is just an interview. There is no pushback.

I want to like it. I love linguistics, but I can’t. Too political. I would rate 4 or 5 stars if John Mcwhorter were back. Go to lexicon valley.

I’m enjoying the new hosts and format. I’m learning a lot about linguistics and then getting to have a little fun with the games at the end.

The “play” brings it down from 5 to 3 stars. Be confident enough in your first two segments, commentary and interview, to make that the whole show.

On a podcast about words and language and how they matter, was disappointed with the use of normative language around neurodiversity (e.g. “neuro-atypical”, referring to people as “normal” in comparison to a neurodiverse person) on the 11/10/2021 episode.

I think I gave this a fair chance, but it is so uninteresting. Episodes that are nothing but half-hour advertisements, quizzes that are targeted at guests and not listeners (are we really expected to know what year songs were released?), and just generally dull. How can you make talking about such an interesting subject so boring? I don’t know, but it’s time to unsubscribe.

Latino is already the neuter gender

This podcast is a good addition to the Slate Slate. I find myself listening to it once a month. It has one focus for those who are fans of word games and puzzles.

I was delighted to hear a coverage of Korean language, but the pronunciation of almost every vowels were bastardized by the hosts. Instead of trying to do the bare minimum of comparing their sound against the show’s speaker, they decided to read them as if they are reading English words. For example, the first syllable of “mukbang” is pronounced as “muck-”, not “mook-“. After the third or fourth of these errors, I stopped listening. Instead of clarifying the horrible translation they talk about, they add to the misrepresentation.

There are 5+ years of excellent archives of Lexicon Valley from when it was hosted by Bob Garfield/Mike Vuolo and then the brilliant John McWhorter. Go straight to the archives and skip the lackluster “spectacular vernacular” rebrand. The reboot seems to be a result of the talent leaving to make their shows for a different studio. The new version of the show is uninspired, sounds like sponsored content.

I love the new direction the show has taken. The hosts are personable and engaging. They are a breath of fresh air. It’s time for linguistics to come out of the Dark Ages with new and younger talent with fresh perspectives.

Smart takes grounded in contemporary academic linguistics while still being fun and light.

I absolutely love the changes to this podcast. The new hosts are clearly incredibly well-informed but without any stuffiness. I’ve learned something from every episode and I particularly like playing along with the language games. Two thumbs up, thanks for the fantastic podcast!

This podcast feed was previously John McWhorter’s “Lexicon Valley”, which is no longer carried by Slate. But all of his old episodes until recently are still on this feed, and I recommend digging past the recent “Spectacular Vernacular” episodes and listening to John’s, then subscribing to his new incarnation of Lexicon Valley and following that. The new show “Spectacular Vernacular” comes off as something you’d hear on NPR during a sleepy, runny-nosed morning commute in winter... I would suggest that Slate find a way to be exuberant, bold, intellectually stimulating and exploratory and not just stick to safe tepid niceties ... this review was written at 6am so may rewrite when less grumpy but, don’t say I didn’t warn you!

I have to say that I LOVE the podcast the way it is now, totally refreshed from the previous iteration with that other guy. The new hosts are great, and I particularly enjoy Dr. Nicole Holliday's fun personality and really thoughtful and informed takes on the different topics they cover. Plus the trivia is so much fun! Strong recommend!

A fascinating podcast on a range of language issues, accessible to those unfamiliar with the field yet interesting for professional linguists as well.

Nicole Holliday has been a guest on so many of my favorite linguistics podcasts that it’s about time she got her own! Even though linguistic superstar, Ben Zimmer, and Nicole just got started, the show is off to a brilliant start. Kudos to both of them!

If you enjoy linguistics or are just curious about the oddities and history of the English language, hosts Nicole Holliday and Ben Zimmer and their guests do a fantastic job of sharing cool information that will enlighten and amuse you. And, they even have cool word games you can play along with at home.

Nicole Halliday and Ben Zimmer are delightful (and highly qualified) co-hosts, and this podcast has something to offer for amateur language lovers and professional linguists alike. It looks like Slate switched out the podcast in this feed without warning, which understandably upset some subscribers, but new listeners should definitely give Spectacular Vernacular a try.

Speaking as a linguist, Spectacular Vernacular is the best language-oriented podcast out there. Its hosts are eminently qualified and bring to bear up-to-date scholarship and keen insight on the language issues of our time. They are also fun to listen to. I’m not a big fan of the language game at then end, but you can’t please everybody with everything. While this should be beside the point, one thing I like about the podcast is that both hosts have extremely pleasant voices. Just hearing them makes me happy.

As a linguist and podcast enthusiast, I gave Lexicon Valley a wide WIDE berth due to McWhorter’s politics and really disappointing misinformation spread concerning linguistics. BUT the absolute joy I feel having Spectacular Vernacular to listen to now? Unmatched. Ben and Nicole are both highly qualified, and also bring a great deal of joy and years of experience and knowledge to the podcast. I’m looking forward to continuing to listen to the podcast, and moving forward I’m excited to have another podcast to share with my students who have an interest in linguistics.

I'm really loving this podcast - I know very little about language or linguistics, yet the hosts make learning about these topics seem accessible and fun. I also really enjoy the word games/puzzles that they are doing with listeners. This is one podcast I try to listen to as soon as the new episode comes out.

Outstanding hosts who deal with all sorts of linguistic things. Probably the best language pod ever in the world.

a lighthearted but substantive podcast delving into language-related topics. The new hosts bring with them excellent, complementary qualifications: Zimmer is a language columnist and regular composer of NYT crosswords, while Holliday is a researcher and professor who obtained her PhD at one of the country's top linguistics programs (NYU) and now teaches at another (UPenn). But the tone is casual and friendly, like a fun conversation between nerdy friends.

A must for word freaks, extremely entertaining and informative even if your relationship with language is a distant, troubled one. I always look forward to the next episode.

As a former listener of Lexicon Valley I was impressed by the level of discipline put into each episode of Spectacular Vernacular and the deep cuts for relevant guests. Keeping a light hearted atmosphere helps me to enjoy the podcast at all times of the day during my daily routine. I’m excited to see how they develop the show. Keep up the good work!

It may be a relatively new show, but Nicole and Ben seem like they’ve been doing this for years! Their love of language and expertise shine through in every segment and interview that they do, and they do a fantastic job distilling their linguistic background into information the average listener can understand.

I initially subscribed because as a linguistics nerd I’ve loved and followed Nicole Holliday’s work on Twitter. This podcast is the perfect blend of pop culture, linguistic nerd insights, and the fun word games I’ve loved from the NPR Sunday puzzle.

As a linguistics professor, I have been following Holliday and Zimmer for years. I am so thankful for their expertise and love the exuberance they exude when talking about language.

Really liked the podcast when John was he host. All the sudden he is not the host without any explanation. Thought maybe he was taking a short break. You are being quite disingenuous taking his success and ratings as your own. Why not use a new platform? Fortunately found Lexicon Valley with new episodes.

I am incredibly annoyed that the Lexicon Valley feed has been replaced with another podcast. It’s disingenuous and underhanded, and any inclination I may have previously had to listen to this new podcast has been killed. Do not pay attention to the four star rating. This is not John McWhorter’s Lexicon Valley

Don’t scam the old feed when you cancel a show.

I was optimistic, it would be great to have an additional linguistics podcast from a different perspective. However that is only if the perspective is not just amateur hour. The new hosts show themselves to be lacking basic fundamentals of linguistics. Everyone makes mistakes, but the entire approach of these two is mistaken. The first episode is full of factual errors small and large, including many of the ignorant misconceptions which actual linguists find annoying and tiresome.

The new show doesn’t have any of the joy, energy, charm of lexicon valley. I came to this podcast pretty late, so I’m lucky to have a lot of John’s episodes to listen to still. I don’t believe I’ll stick around after that.

This is ghastly to listen to. Holliday talks like baby snooks! I can’t believe she’s is professor of anything. Time fir some vocal training. Too awful to overcome the intellectual appeal of linguistics. What a waste. Bye bye!

First there were two hosts (forgot their names) and they were pretty good. Then John McWhorter replaced them, and the show got great. But it wasn’t a bait and switch, as the title, form, and substance were the same. This is new hosts, new name, new format, and after listening to the first episode, no thanks. Shame on you for piggybacking off of the success of others. If you make a new show, make a new show, don’t keep the years of great reviews from McWhorter and others. Shame on you.

The new hosts are the epitome of the positive PC voice of death. And I don’t appreciate the bait and switch.

McWhorter does a spectacular job breaking down the elements of human communication.