I guess I agree, but I'd probably reply that placeholders and meaningless interjections have been apart of speech ever since the larynx dropped. Speech has its own natural flow, and trying to discipline the tongue interrupts the natural consistency of speech. Steven Pinker demonstrated in The Language Instinct that people assumed to be speaking naturally (for instance, kids talking with their friends) are generally more grammatically consistent and internally correct than people who are thinking a lot about what they are saying (a college professor giving a lecture, for instance).

I don't mean to say that dropping 'likes' and 'umms' and 'you knows' from speech isn't a good thing, but only that these things are a natural part of speech, and that they generally have nothing to do with intelligence or sophistication. I realize the guy in the video is a comedian, and is, to some extent, being facetious, but if I took his argument seriously, I would disagree with most of it.

This is a somewhat difficult question, because the word used (logos) has so many nuances, it could mean a host of different things. The word for "sound" (ugin) also has a few shades of meaning. I believe that this is one of those areas where we have to rely on context and then have a measure of freedom in our translation.

I think there are two main options here. "Sound speech" can refer to the micro-content of what is said, (the words chosen to form sentences) or the macro-content of what is said (the thoughts chosen to form arguments/messages). I tend to think that the phrase refers to Timothy's overall message to others, not necessarily micro-word choice.

Before looking at the actual words of the phrase "sound speech," it may be a good idea to include verse six, since it very well could begin the sentence in the original Greek. It reads, "Likewise, urge the younger men to be self-controlled." The NA27 Bible, the latest Greek Bible released by Nestle-Aland, shows the sentence finished in verse eight beginning in verse six. While this isn't definitively true, and there are minor issues with this decision, it may help discern the meaning of "sound speech."

The difficulty with incorporating verse six in the thoughts is that Paul turns to the 2nd singular pronoun in verse seven ("yourself"). It is very possible that verses 7-8 outline how Timothy is to model self-control to the younger men. If this paradigm is correct, then verse six has direct bearing on the meaning of "sound speech."

Without doing full-on word studies, we know that logos can mean word, saying, speech, message, etc. Additionally, "sound" (ugin) can also mean whole and healthy. This gives us quite the set of combinations we can throw together here.

Once again, it seems to me that the phrase could refer either to word choice or, on a more macro level, it could refer to an overall "sound message." (The difference here being the nuts and bolts of sentences versus the nuts and bolts of an argument.)

One argument that I think favors Doug Wilson's comments would be to see verses seven and eight through the lens of verse six's self-control. Self-control seems, to me, much more associated with smaller things like word choice and intonation. Of course, this view of self-control isn't always the case. Still, if one was to take the alternative meaning of crafting an overall sound message, it would seem less a case of self-control and more a case of clear thinking. Additionally, pairing "sound speech" with something like "dignity" certainly seems to indicate speaking in a dignified manner - dealing with the how and not the what of the message.

On the other hand, Paul also uses the word "integrity" which indicates less of a how issue and more of a what issue with regard to one's teaching. If seen through this light, then going with "sound message" seems ideal, moving away from the technical words used and paying attention more to the overall integrity of an argument or declaration. Integrity seems to deal less with sound word choice and more with presenting a whole, healthy message. Bringing up the question of whether we should speak with authority and conviction, as the spoken-word poet suggests we should, deals much more with our overall argument/message than our simple, like, word choice.

So, it is hard to say what "logon ugin" specifically means - whether the micro-meaning or the macro-meaning. I tend toward the "sound message" translation and less toward the "good words" translation. (i.e., I tend to disagree with the main thrust of Doug Wilson's take on the passage). Still, I don't know if it is possible to present a sound message without good words. Additionally, I don't know if good words amount to anything if they do not present a proper argument. We've all known someone who can say a whole lot of nothing really well. Likewise, I've seen less-intelligent people say things with deep conviction and passion that communicated volumes, even though their word usage was lacking.

So, to your question, "Does this sort of youthful manner apply to Paul's words on sound speech?": My answer would be, yes, at least, indirectly. The larger point of these verses, if we use the paradigm of self-control in verse six, is that the way that we exercise/develop/model self-control is to corroborate our actions of faith (modeling good works) with our words of faith (teaching with integrity, dignity and a sound message). A little bit of James in Paul, methinks.