It’s bad for the same reason that my kids aren’t taught Spanish grammar in English class. And cannot use Korean to answer questions in Science class. If there is an elective in school to learn AAVE, then fine, I’m all for it. Extra classes to make sure speakers of AAVE can adequately code-swap (or whatever it’s called), then yes, I’m all for that. Teaching non-speakers of AAVE anything more than the existence of AAVE is a waste of school time. Probably grouped into Social Studies or whatever class teaches about American English dialects.
They’d be learning English in English class, just learning about the different varieties. But this is quibbling about the details of the proposal – you appear to be on the same page that it’s reasonable to consider teaching, to some degree, the differences between AAVE and SAE in schools in which there are significant numbers of kids who might not otherwise become fluent in SAE.
I’m not sure I oppose the plan. But I’m not sure I understand what the bolded means. I guess the idea is that there are grammatical “errors” but once something reaches “dialect” status then it is no longer objectively wrong? So that when someone who speaks Appalachian English says: “A boy and his daddy was a-huntin’” We should tell him that this is a perfectly proper formulation among his people, but that in my language he should say that “a boy and his father were hunting.” If that would help, then sure.
(Because this principle applies so easily to lower-class or regional white dialects, I have a little trouble with this notion of “SAE” as the White Man’s Tongue and that linguistic prescriptivism is a legacy of white supremacy. But I don’t know).
It’s reasonable to consider teaching, to some degree, the differences between AAVE and SAE to speakers of AAVE. That is what I agree with. I agree that it’s reasonable to expend some extra effort on those students who already speak AAVE if such effort allows them to improve their ability to learn in school.
Is teaching only SAE different from other language immersions, especially for other students for whom AAVE is not their native dialect?
Regards,
Shodan
Language is different from dialects.
I would see something along the lines of teaching - perhaps through middle school - that its perfectly acceptable for kids to write and speak in a manner which is understandable within their community. Introduce more standard American grammar, but don’t punish kids who don’t use it. Ain’t and y’all are perfectly acceptable words in this sort of thinking, and “he ain’t got none” is a correct answer to a word problem where the answer is zero.
As kids move through late elementary and middle school and in high school, you start to teach standard construction - they probably already know it - they’ve watched TV. You, however, only penalize the students who use it if they are on a college prep program - those students need to be told that it will be expected of them on college essays and in the work place to be able to code switch and communicate in SAE.
Now, I’m not a huge fan of this sort of thinking - in part because it was the sort of thinking my kids got in elementary school. Grammar and spelling were not important, what was important was rewarding students for putting ideas out on paper. The problem being that they both developed really bad habits - habits that they both struggled to overcome. We still have to proofread my daughter’s work for her for capitalization and punctuation, she’s nearly incapable of seeing that in her own writing.
On the other hand, my kids didn’t struggle with the material (they struggled, each in their own way, with discipline to master the material). They both started with above average intelligence in a house that values thinking and has conversations in complete sentences about complex topics - they started on second base compared to a kid whose native dialect is AAVE.
Isn’t standard English actually taught in schools? What are schools doing during the day? Are you telling me that black Americans across the nation have one standard form of ebonics that generations of education are failing to overcome?
Sure, if we need extra education to mitigate that particular dialect fine. But I have a feeling that targeting black children for extra proper English education is going to be considered racist.
Have you read the article? I think those questions are answered the article, at least from the POV of the researcher.
I read the article. I think she has a very uphill battle ahead of her. Now, personally, I think taking into account people’s environment and working to mitigate the disadvantages that the environment provides has value. I don’t think we have the resources or political will to fix this at the school level.
If the parents are adept at code-switching, as the article states many are, perhaps if they value their children’s education they’ll suppress their own usage of the vernacular. Otherwise, it seems like the parents and the schools are working at cross purposes. And how is that fair for society as a whole to spend a lot more resources to fix this sort of problem.
It’s a bit like diet. Assume, and this is a big assumption, that parents desired schools to ensure their children’s dietary health. They demanded and actually funded the schools to appropriately nourish their children. The schools did so yet at home the kids were subjected to nothing but Twinkies and hot dogs. At what point do we demand that parents do a better job?
No. Whether you call something a distinct dialect is always going to be somewhat fuzzy. But whether the difference rises to the level of a distinct dialect or not, where variants associated with sub-populations exist, they are just that - variants, not errors. Fighting the misconceptions that Standard English is “correct” and that variants are labeled “errors” is one of the most important issues here in granting respect to people whose native dialect is not Standard English. It’s simply the same respect we grant without hesitation to people whose native language is completely different - Spanish or Japanese, say.
There is a standard language in every country and that is what is taught in their schools, used in their standard communications, print books/papers, newscasters, etc. There are also variations of the standard language that are more socially and regionally based. This is not a new phenomenon!
That’s not a judgement call, it’s the reality of a standard language in a place that has varied regions - which is pretty much everywhere. I speak standard Italian, but can’t understand any of the dialects (with the exception of a few swear words one of my aunts taught me!). But standard Italian is what is taught in the schools and everyone, regardless of their home dialect, is expected to learn the standard. It’s not even a question or concern. Just like there are standards of behavior that are different in different situations. If I go to the library, I"m expected to act differently than I would at a party.
Kids are capable of learning standardized English regardless of what they speak at home. If they aren’t, then there’s a learning issue that should be addressed, regardless of what/how they speak at home. That should go for ANY kids.
I don’t think language is like diet. There always have been dialects and there always will be. Parents will generally speak to their children in their own native dialects. And this isn’t a bad thing, as long as dialects are respected and not denied, dismissed, or repressed.
I think I sort of understand the argument that there is this dialect called ASE; and this other dialect called AAVE; and this other dialect called Appalachian English. And that these are co-equal dialects of American English with regional, racial, and socio-economic features. And that what might not be grammatically correct in AAVE could be grammatically correct in Appalachian English. And that it is problematic to tell the Appalachian English speaker that his formulation is “wrong” because they’re really just speaking two different dialects (perhaps like England English and American English – I don’t know what you call English spoken in England, since “British” English doesn’t seem right given the Scots and Welsh).
But are you saying that there are no grammatical rules even within dialects? (I don’t think you are). I would think that there is a “correct” way to speak these three dialects. My point was that I can sort of understand that there might be sufficient divergence within a dialect to create a new one (I guess Appalachian English may have diverge from Southern American English… maybe not). But I guess that’s not right?
It is a bad thing if it hamstrings you with regards to an effective education and the subsequent increase in economic value. We don’t live in a world where every variable has equal value. Was engineering my first choice to study in college? No. But I went where the economic value was and was projected to be.
Do I wish I could speak and teach octoponics to my children with no negative impact? Sure. But standard English is what is valued. We all have to make choices and at some point personal agency and accountability needs happen. Again, if parents really value a particular educational outcome they will act and not merely make claims.
Yes, of course there are grammatical rules. Take word order for example. Most strings of words are ungrammatical, the sentences below are all obviously errors in Standard English (and in equivalent formulations in all other dialects, so far as I’m aware):
*Dog the ate my homework.
*The dog black ate my homework.
*The black large dog ate my homework.
And these rules are followed so strictly and universally that we’d know without hesitation that somebody was a non-native speaker (or drunk or something) if they used the wrong word order like this.
Whereas here’s a fun regional variant, completely alien to me as I’ve never spent time in this part of the U.S.:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=23505
Of course, that’s an error if you are intending to speak in Standard English and in a context where you prefer to avoid regionalisms. But it’s no more an error in absolute terms than a similar phrase in in Japanese.
Facility at code-switching is does not come from suppression, quite the opposite. When their native dialect with significantly different grammar is perceived as a string of “errors” that should be “corrected”, conflict and confusion ensue in a child’s mind. But when two dialects are recognized and respected as independent and equally valid means of communication that are simply used in different contexts, then the child will learn to switch from one to the other as appropriate according to context, just as someone who speaks an different native language such as Spanish will switch to English when appropriate.
And suggesting that a social group should abandon their vernacular to elevate their social status is (in my opinion) just as offensive as suggesting that they bleach their skin.
After a minute or spent talking to myself (and rejoicing that there is no-one to witness this and call for the men in white coats), it seems to me that one could definitely get three or four meanings out of “He has gone” too.
Oh dear. I should be asleep, but this could be a very distracting new game. :smack:
Your opinion is just that, thankfully. You honestly think that conforming to a relatively broad speaking or writing standard is as bad as chemically bleaching skin? That’s preposterous. And if you don’t think society does demand abandonment or at the very least concealment via so-called code switching how far do you think you’d get in most higher social professions speaking Ebonics, jive, some form of creole, etc.?
And where is it appropriate to speak Ebonics? Are you implying that that form of communication is somehow inherent to the black American community? It’s a learned behavior and if the parents themselves don’t want Ebonics formally taught, according to that article, why do you?
Should we write Ebonics on this forum? Would that be treated as equal to so-called prestige English or how about cis-english?
By what standard did you determine that it is “definitely” a dialect?
Best to teach children a new way of speaking before puberty, when their brains are much more receptive. Wait until Middle School, and you’re fighting against nature.
Where is appropriate to speak Spanish, or Italian, or Yiddish? It’s never inappropriate for Spanish-speaking (or any other) people to speak it in the home. There’s no innate inferiority or superiority for languages in the home, even when standard American English is more useful in most US professional circumstances.
I’m not sure if there’s a bigger characteristic more fundamental to a culture than their language. IMO it’s no more appropriate for advocating that it be eliminated than it is to advocate their cuisine be eliminated, or their manner of dress, or the type of jewelry they wear, etc. These are all part of the rich cultural traditions of humans. Humans tend to resist calls to abandon aspects of their culture – asking people to abandon their language is hopeless, and has always been… the only time languages are lost forever is when cultures and/or peoples are eliminated by force.
Further, it’s entirely unnecessary. As long as home dialects are not routinely belittled, denied, or dismissed (as AAVE is routinely, by my reading), it’s not a barrier to learning, and in fact it’s just another rich ingredient to our society. Plenty of black Americans, perhaps even most, code-switch fluently – but many do not, including many AAVE-first children, and if we’re not teaching them this valuable skill (and thus fluency in SAE) then we’re doing them a disservice, and doing society a disservice, since they’ll have less chance to reach their potential.