And one would need to be sure that the students and the instructors both actually speak AAVE - it wouldn’t be as accurate if it was simply assumed that black students in Atlanta speak the same dialect as black students in Texas.
And compare the AAVE-speakers with speakers of other dialects, and see how they compare.
I think the question of “is AAVE a dialect” is kind of a red herring. It’s a dialect if enough people speak it. Is it a dialect that interferes with learning for those who can’t code-switch more than other dialects, less, or the same?
Regards,
Shodan
I certainly assume nothing of the sort, and I see nothing in the linked article that does either. By your usage of the phrase “proper English” I assume that you believe that any dialects other than standard American English are “improper English”?
From what I understand, immersion is the best technique for learning new languages. If someone experienced 12+ years of immersion in Standard American English at public schools and can’t converse in that language, that’s probably a choice. There is a stigma attached to “talking white”. None of your classes will erase that.
There’s a stigma the other way as well in many places and circumstances. If I understand it correctly, one of the purposes of teaching both dialects as real dialects is to try and de-stigmatize them both.
I grew up in rural areas and often people will go into some local “twang” so to speak. Or speak in some local slang. I once was sitting with some Scottish people and when they got together, their dialect went heavily into some Scottish I had trouble understanding. But they could easily switch back and forth between clear english and Scottish anytime they wanted.
I also notice many of the black people at work will talk different when they are around each other.
But, if one wants to get ahead in life, get a good job, they have to learn to read and write in correct english. What they do among themselves is another matter.
IMO, this sentiment is part of the problem. They are speaking correct English, for their dialect. It’s certainly beneficial for them to be fluent in standard American English as well (the dialect of most offices in America), and that’s what the article link in the OP is advocating for – making sure kids are fluent in standard American English, while recognizing that their native dialect may be different (but no less legitimate or “correct”).
It’s also important that we as a society stop degrading certain dialects as “incorrect English”, “bad English”, “improper English”, and similar. These are not incorrect, bad, or improper – they’re just different dialects.
Are there, in fact, African Americans who struggle in life because they can’t speak English that isn’t heavily accented AAVE?
I’m a white guy, but it’s not as if I haven’t been around and met a lot of black people, and I have NEVER met someone whose “Ebonics” accent was difficult to understand. I have worked with hundreds of African Americans and African Canadians and the number I met in the workplace who struggled with standard English was exactly zero. I’ve literally never heard of direct evidence of this being a problem.
I don’t think anyone has suggested that this is the problem.
This seems like a serious misreading of the article, which states that the majority of children who speak AAVE (and other nonstandard dialects) DO learn to code-switch on their own. The problem is that roughly 1/3 of them do not, and the same 1/3 end up falling behind their peers in other areas as well.
Explicitly teaching these children how to code-switch may or may not solve the problem (it may be the case that failure to learn to code-switch is a symptom of a more generalized learning delay, not the cause), but I don’t for the life of me see how describing the problem and attempting to solve it by direct instruction is in any way insulting.
A language is a dialect with an army and a navy. Language seems to be one of the only remaining areas in modern society where the expression of supremacist attitudes remains socially acceptable.
The phenomenon of linguistic naming and shaming can seem relatively harmless, and can present as little more than a desire for clear and elegant use of the English language. But one of the surest ways to get several thousand comments on a blog or thread is to solicit language gripes, expressed in a censorious and condemnatory manner.
The Social Psychology of Linguistic Naming and Shaming.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004244.html
But these are supremacist attitudes, and they can turn far more ugly than just ignorant prescriptivist griping that the youth of today are wrecking the glorious heritage of our language. A notable recent example was seen in the Trayvon Martin trial, in which witness Rachel Jeantel was subject to grotesque abuse solely because she testified in her native AAVE. (Many AAVE speakers have asymmetric competence in Standard English - they understand it perfectly well, but are not fluent in speaking it.)
As long as their are people who think of AAVE as “not proper English”, or who have negative stereotypoes or prejudices about AAVE speakers, or about monoglot AAVE speakers, then, yeah, being a monoglot AAVE speaker is likely to be disadvantageous.
Are there many monoglot AAVE speakers? No idea, but the fact that you don’t meet them in the workplace doesn’t mean there aren’t. It could also mean that they tend to be excluded from the workplace, or at least from the kind of workplaces that you mostly encounter.
Man, u.o.e.n.o.
I think my time at this particular university I’m going to, which is located in a very predominantly black area, has taught me this is a legitimate problem for some people. It seems to me there’s a disparity between the way they have been speaking/writing their entire lives and the standard they’re expected to adhere to when I proofread/respond to some of their work/papers. I don’t think it’s keeping them from graduating and earning degrees, it’s just an added impediment. There’s lots of support at the university that I think compensates for the difficulty, but still.
I write this knowing I am an ignorant outsider looking in, however.
How many of those scholarly sources were written in AAVE?
My argument here is not about race or the alleged intrinsic superiority of anyone or any dialect. It’s fundamentally no different than when scholarly articles are cited that vehemently defend a wide variety of “non-standard” English usages as wonderful, creative, and ipso facto perfectly correct. It always amuses me to point out that the articles themselves are invariably written in flawless standard English. One could also point out that if they hadn’t been, they would never have seen the light of day.
I see the situation here as no different than kids in Quebec who are primarily being taught French due to an upsurge of franconationalism, with English relegated to ESL status with few exceptions. French is a fine language, but the problem is that these kids are growing up in a world in which English is the predominant language of science and commerce, and they’re being set up to be at a disadvantage.
It’s the same with AAVE. Arguments about whether it’s a “real” or “actual” or otherwise legitimate dialect are pretty much moot because they miss the point. I don’t think AAVE should be disparaged, and when it is it’s probably for deplorable racist reasons. The point is that standard English is the predominant language of science and commerce, not just in the US but internationally, and that’s what should be taught, emphasized, and learned. Just like Quebec kids, African-American kids should not be muddling cultural issues with success factors.
So you agree with the researcher in the linked article – that these dialects should be emphasized, rather then ignored, so that children learn to “code switch” (i.e. be fluent in both dialects) rather than just hope they happen to figure it out on their own?
Probably, but not necessarily. The subhead of the article talks about code-switching, but the big-letter headline talks about the " … Quest to Get Schools to Respect African-American English". I see fluency in standard English as a critical functional competency and a career success factor, while AAVE is part of an old historical cultural legacy. I suspect I would differ with the researcher as to which is more important if the kids are to have fulfilling and successful lives.
I have a question that the article didn’t address. Answering questions in class (in math, or whatever) in dialect is one thing.
But what about turning in papers, like essays, or reports. Surely using anything other than proper spelling and grammar would be inappropriate there? After all, I have a fairly noticeable dialect myself, but I certainly wouldn’t write a book report in it. (Just like we were always taught never to use slang in our essays, for example)
The “respect” part results in children who do not feel marginalized and belittled in school. This helps students be successful in school and be seen as having something of value to contribute.
The “code switch” part teaches them to use standard English in professional and academic settings. It teaches that without shaming them for using the dialect in other settings.
Respect does not mean equal. It means you don’t shame a child and make them feel stupid (or think they are stupid), while you help them learn when it’s critical to use standard English.
I agree. I had a sentence at the end of my previous post that I deleted for brevity that said something to the effect of AAVE potentially being important to make an emotional connection with the kids. You said it much better. I think “banning” AAVE as some school districts have done is counterproductive.
That said, some of my comments were prompted by the attitude of some linguists – who fancy themselves linguistic anthropologists – praising the richness, creativity, structural elegance, etc. of AAVE as if it must be regarded as superior to the standard English of scholarly writing or the Queen’s English. Misinterpreting that academic exuberance as an endorsement of real-world pragmatic value is also extremely counterproductive.