This TEDtalk really melds with the concept of rhetorics in writing. I most certainly believe that everyone self-censors and self-authors. Ms. Scott presents the various dialects and vernaculars that an individual may posses and make known in a given day. There is a seamlessness to the presentation that I think emulates what the original presentation of Not (Necessarily) a Cosmic Convergence was capturing although via a singular personage. By speaking with different accents, with different vernacular/slang, Scott emphasizes how much our language defines us, but to a similar degree, to what extent we are able to wield language so that it reflects a given attitude or persona. The way one speaks with their father is assuredly quite different from the way that they speak with their “homeboys.” The biggest argument here is that context defines language–which may sound obvious, but it is something that is so often taken for granted.
In writing this has a multitude of applications ranging across many different genres. In creative writing, language and dialect are perhaps most closely linked to character identity, in technical and academic writing perhaps the “spoken” language–the written work–will attempt for a more professional tone and incorporate more jargon.
Reading or listening to even brief excerpts of a piece are revealing as to who the work’s intended for, but also doing so has the capability of revealing the greater context surrounding the work. I’m not referring as much to content as much as to the method of delivering the given content. That content can be seen as a package being delivered and depending on who it’s being sent to different couriers or delivery services may be called upon–just as language and its choice implementation are tuned to get things to where they need to be in a manner that aligns with its greater context.