Spoken language in schools, now often branded as oracy, is seeing something of a resurgence of interest. This is well-founded and to be welcomed. Nevertheless, the policy-level coopting of oracy, as a concept open to various interpretations, raises questions concerning the desirable degree of prescription and conformity to be promoted in pupils' spoken language. Though often encompassing talk as pedagogy, oracy is strongly associated with developing the skills of spoken language. Such skills rest on a number of assumptions and norms around participation in talk that merit examination. This article explores common classroom orthodoxies in terms of who speaks, when they may speak and how they must speak. As a way of examining these orthodoxies, the article proposes a greater acknowledgement of "orality" alongside, and as a precursor to, oracy. Using an illustration from a real lesson, it argues that raising the profile of orality is a reminder of the importance of understanding and appreciating specific and diverse oral traditions before bringing to bear the generalities and possible standardisation of oracy.