So, Dob, what’s your opinion of this particular brand of English?
If what you wanted to say was “Despite reading nine pages of discourse regarding the linguistic merits of AAVE, I still regard Ebonics as nothing more than parents making cute baby names for common things.” then…I’ll let your posts speak for themselves. There is, obviously, nothing that I can add to them.
Sorry to bring this up again… but is this actually true? Is there actually research that shows this?
Isn’t it kinda self-evident?
It’s almost like saying: Students learn better when they can actually see the blackboard. -or- Students learn better when they can hear the teacher.
The quote stated that there was research to support this idea. I’d just like to see the research, if it exists. I feel better getting behind positions when they’re factually supported; I’m just funny that way I guess.
Um…that’s “hear, hear”–Miss Language Expert
(oops-it’s GD, there’s not supposed to be humor in GD!) GAck, I banned.
Perhaps I can see the validity of both sides. I agree with both Magellan and Liberty .
Here is my take:
Kids should be taught correct grammar, both spoken and written. Whatever language, dialect or speech is used at home should not be dismissed or mocked in school (or in the schoolyard). Kids should be exposed to the regional differences in speech, as well as entire other dialects, such as AAVE.
But I still come down on the APPROPRIATE USE of language. I think we all, to some degree, use different speech patterns depending on what group we are with. Certainly, I know I will speak to a judge in court differently than I will speak to my kids or to a friend. I certainly speak to patients differently than I speak to doctors. Word choice, sentence structure, humor and gravity all come into play.
I think we all do this. In fact, I know that people who do not scale up and/or back are usually noted quickly by others-heck, it’s a basis for comedy. I think this is true for everyone.
But I think it is also true that for too long, some groups ( for example, those from the South and blacks) have had their own dialects diminished and condemned. (although, in the South I think they get their own back again–and they also have their own pecking order in terms of accents). That condemnation is somewhat silly and should be stopped (if the relentless drive to categorize people thru any means possible, including speech, is possible). I see the point that one dialect is not inherently “superior” to another–but in practical terms, a lingua franca is the best solution. And that for us is pretty much SAE with regional variants.
So, again, I think that AAVE awareness should be taught to teachers. I think it would be wonderful if students had a unit or two where they translated Shakespeare or Albee into Ebonics" (whee!), BUT overall, I think that SAE needs to be stressed somewhat more than it already is in schools today.
Not for any racist reasons–but because we are (if not already) becoming a soundbyte world and our language is suffering. (some would say changing or “morphing”). IMO, we suffer from a lack of accuracy and precision in language.
I don’t mean that we should become fuddy-duddies about syntax and the like. But truly, English has a plethora of word choice out there–and we use almost none of them or so it seems. So, I would stress more language arts, but also include other dialects. But that’s another thread, I suppose.
Must read entire thread before posting.
:smack:
tomdebb --I agree with post # 428 (429?)–especially your last paragraph. If a child is not exposed to enough variety to enable successful code switching, than there is a problem for the child-maybe they need a program at school that shows them how their dialect and SAE work…
So, I have come almost 180 degrees from where I started, so thank you, Straight Dopers!
I really have no wish to de-rail this thread, but just to make my point. The following quote is from the OP on the first page
I answered the OP with my own opinion, not sure what the major malfunction is here. I read what others posted, but what the thread developed into and what the OP was asking were not the same. So bugger off
Not sure what your asking here. The rest of the website except the language section was done in what I would consider standard english. The section you linked was about languages, not sure what you were getting at exactly.
The “malfunction” is that you were apparently confused about something I said. To wit:
-
You answered the OP with your own opinion.
-
I responded with a post disagreeing with your opinion.
-
In that post, I made a remark about a particular related point (namely, we want all students to have language competence in standard English) that everybody in this thread agrees with.
-
You apparently confused that related point with the actual subject(s) of the debate, since you expressed surprise that everybody could be in agreement about it.
-
I pointed out that the related point (about which everybody does agree) is in fact not the same as the issues actually being debated here (about which there’s a hell of a lot of disagreement).
Now do you understand?
No offense, but are you quite sure you’re ready to participate in Great Debates? You seem to have trouble grasping the meaning of fairly straightforward remarks and questions. (And incidentally, you don’t seem to know the forum rules about the use of direct insults and curses such as “bugger off”.)
To spell it out for you, what Monty posted was a link to an official Scottish Parliament webpage which is mostly written in the English dialect known as Scots (“Walcome til the Scottish Pairlament wabsite. The Scottish Pairlament is here for tae represent aw Scotland’s folk. We want tae mak siccar that as mony folk as can is able tae find oot aboot whit the Scottish Pairlament dis and whit wey it warks”, etc. etc.).
He was curious as to whether you would also dismiss the Scots dialect as simply “not speaking English properly” or on a par with “cute baby names”, the way you do with the AAE/Ebonics dialect.
Exactly! Thanks, Kimstu.
And now I find myself wondering if Dob also dismisses this brand of English also in a like manner.
BTW, Dob, do you consider spelling to be part of the standard English language?
Feel free to delete either the first or the second also in my posting just above. 'Twas an accidental reduplication.
/sigh…Did you go to that link? What is your defination of “mostly”? The website was not done in “Scots”. The language example section was done that way, the same section also had Punjabi. So? Again, I ask, what is the point? Are you saying that the entire Scottish language education is done using “Scots”? Scottish students would be able to turn in papers in that language? If so, say that, then we can discuss those merits.
Lets be clear; I am not dismissing anything. The variety in language is the variety of people, and no one dialect is better or worse then another. However, we are talking about what is studied in school. School should have a standard, and in America, that standard should be English. Not ebonics, not scot…english. A standard English accepted by society as the norm. Why is that so bad?
It’s not bad at all. In fact, it’s exactly the point that everyone here agrees with, as I said.
The questions that are actually being debated here are:
-
Should AAE/Ebonics be used in school in order to help schoolchildren learn standard English, and if so, why and how?
-
Is AAE/Ebonics a linguistically “legitimate” dialect of English as opposed to “lazy speech”, “gutter slang”, “baby names”, or other “debased” forms of speech, and if so, why?
Yes. That was how I obtained the sample of its Scots text (“Walcome til the Scottish Pairlament wabsite”, etc.) that I quoted in the post that you were replying to.
Neither of those statements are true of AAVE, but you seem to have no trouble discussing AAVE’s merits.
Sorry…did you go to the REST of the website?
The point, which you seem to be resisting with all your might, was to draw your attention to the language used on that particular page, not to comment on the content of the entire web site.
I am eagerly awaiting your answer to Monty’s questions too. Do you also dismiss the Scots dialect and that Hawaiian pidgin as “not speaking English properly” and “cute baby names”, like you have dismissed AAVE?
Dob,
I didn’t link to the rest of the website. I linked to the particular section provided in Scots. Another part of the website is in Arabic. That has no bearing on the discussion here and that’s why I did not link to that.
As I said before, I am not dismissing AAVE as a dialect. I am dismissing it as something that should be taught in schools. Just as I would if someone wanted to start teaching Hillbilly English.