Ugh

[textualdeviance]

But forcing me to learn how to speak properly is KILLING MY CULTURE, MAN.

I fucking hate that. It usually comes from the same people who like to pretend that being a violent, misogynistic gangbanger is some sort of legitimate subculture.

For the record, I support bilingual education for immigrants. There's no sense in shortchanging a child's learning in other fields just to bang English into their heads. It's entirely possible to teach someone to speak English at the same time they're learning math and science in Spanish, Russian, Tagalog or whatever. And whatever someone wants to speak at home is fine with me. I also don't have a problem with immigrants or tourists speaking in their native language in public. No one is entitled to eavesdrop on someone else's conversation.

However, those things are not the same as someone who deliberately misuses English when their family has been in an English-speaking country for six generations. Accents? Regional or subcultural colloquialisms? Whatever. But bad grammar and spelling ARE NOT A CULTURAL THING. They are a symptom of several problems: poverty, poor education or a cultural lack of respect for education.

I understand that the school system is part of a larger "The Man" morass that a lot of oppressed subcultures fear and mistrust, but it's not going to do them any good to encourage that fear and mistrust. Legitimizing crappy language skills by slapping a Culturally Protected label on them is only fucking over people who really don't need to be fucked over any further.

This isn't about assimilation--there are plenty of legitimate cultural and subcultural distinctions. Improper use of the language is not one of them.

Ugh. This sort of cultural relativism is why I could never go into anthropology. And why I'm working my ass off to correct the problem of "all opinions are equal" in the media. Education, empiricism and expertise have to count for something, or we are well and truly fucked as a species.

Comments

(frozen)

[pixxelpuss.livejournal.com]

I get where you're coming from here, but I absolutely can't agree with it. You keep using words like "legitimate" and "correct". But the quality of culture is subjective, and prescriptive grammar is not the basis of language. These are judgements you're making. Which is fine, you're entitled. But just as Emily Post is not the ultimate arbiter of social norms, Proper Grammar handbooks are not the ultimate arbiter of English. Language is fluid and is functioning "properly" so long as it meets the needs of those using it. The fact that African-American Vernacular English isn't recognized in the corporate world is a social issue, not a linguistic one. We're just not on the same page, here.

(frozen)

[textualdeviance.livejournal.com]

Sorry, but I'm far too practical to go into linguistic relativism (or much of any relativism, to be honest.)

The fact that white kids who fuck up grammar don't get a cultural pass when black kids do is evidence enough that this is just something someone dreamed up to keep people from having to actually pay attention in school. I'm sure I could argue that my halfwit relatives who think "I done got me" is a legitimate English phrase have some sort of valid cultural reasons for thinking that way. I also hope people would laugh their asses off if I tried to argue that.

I'm a bleeding heart enough that I often need transfusions. But I'm not going to support something that's purely essentialist cultural theory when the practical effects of it is to keep screwing over a community that doesn't need that screwing over.

"Standard" languages, though they may be constructs, are still very real, and will be for the forseeable future. They are the currency of every economy and formal social situation. Without a thorough understanding of that currency, people get left behind. The practical effects of embracing Ebonics (or the euphemistic acronym of AAVE) are to keep people from succeeding.

Kids whose culture already invites them to disregard education aren't going to understand the point of linguistic cultural theory. All they know is that they now have an excuse to blow off paying attention in class. Sorry, teacher. You can't tell me to speak correctly because it's MY CULTURE to speak like this.

Just because something is traditional in an identifiable subculture doesn't mean it's a good thing. It's traditional in the subculture I came from to down a half rack and beat the shit out of your wife and kids. That doesn't mean I should argue that that behavior is valid.

Poor grammar is a cultural thing in that it represents a group who have had little access to (or interest in) education. That should be cause for alarm, not celebration.

(frozen) A Question About Ebonics

[miyaunna.livejournal.com]

Hello,

I'm not here to flame your journal or anything, I just wanted your honest opinion on this subject. I was browsing the community that we're both in and I saw your comments. While they did put me off as an AAVE speaker, I respect your right to believe in certain theories about language and language acqusition, dialects, etc.

I just wanted to know if you think African languages had any part to play in Ebonics. For example, there were many creolized versions of West African languages that some say contribute to certain grammatical aspects of AAVE. Is this just something that you believe is an unproven theory? Also, what do you think about "switching". Those of us who speak AAVE usually have conversation in AAVE, then switch back to SE when there are non-AAVE speakers around. You state that you don't think embracing it is a healthy step, but what if these AAVE speaking youngsters are taught that Ebonics isn't bad WHILE learning SE at the same time. So they can still have the dialect they are comfortable with while being completely fluent in SE as well? Do you think that would be an even more positive step?

Once again, I really would like to hear your opinion, because I usually don't see many people still stating that embracing Ebonics is embracing "bad english" and such.

So, if you would reply, that would be cool. If not, then that's fine as well.

Thanks.

miyaunna

(frozen) Re: A Question About Ebonics

[textualdeviance.livejournal.com]

For me, it's strictly an education issue. Poor grammar and spelling represent a lack of education--not a cultural pride issue.

There are plenty of language quirks that are cultural--accents, regional and cultural colloquialisms, slang--but a failure of the basics of grammar and spelling has nothing to do with that. It isn't ancestry that causes a person to put apostrophes where they don't belong.

My people--the Irish and Italians--came to this country 100-150 years ago. My great grandfather spoke nothing but Italian when he came here. My grandmother had an odd accent--Italian combined with the Scandinavian inflection common to where she grew up in Wisconsin. On my father's side, the folks speak with Oklahoma and Texas accents, with a slight hint of Irish diction. My mother grew up in Southern California, and has an interesting mix of her mother's Italian/Scandinavian diction with a slight SoCal tinge.

But this describes how they speak, not what they know about language itself, and as far as that's concerned, most of my family ranges from functionally illiterate to inept, at best. The few of us who do have a grasp on proper grammar were fortunate to have access to good schools and encouragement to learn.

I'm not going to make an excuse for my family's lack of grammar skills by blaming their ancestral heritage. They've been here for several generations, now. Whatever language quirks they had due to having spoken a different language (or different form of the language) originally are erased by time.

Instead, what has caused my family's poor grasp on language is lack of access to (and in some cases a cultural disregard for) good education. Part of this is because both Irish and Italians were discriminated against when they first came to this country. They were bare-bones working class, making a living as best they could. It took several generations of hard work to get to the point where my generation--and it is only my generation--could actually manage to get to college. Most everyone else was lucky to graduate from high school, and many didn't even do that.

The same is generally true for your ancestors. Once freed, they had to start with nothing and work their way up, and that meant a lack of access to education. Add in racism and segregation, and it's no wonder that language skills had a hard time developing.

This isn't a cultural issue, in other words, but a class issue. Poverty and discrimination block access to good education, and lack of good education results in poor language skills.

If poor grammar really is a racial thing, then black folks who have lived middle to upper class lives for the past century or so would still be using it and poor white folks would have a solid grasp on standard grammar. Clearly, this is not the case.

Embracing the vernacular--regardless of the race of people using it--as a valid form of formal communication only sets back progress in improving education for the poor. I see nothing wrong with cataloging subcultural slang and accents, but it must be understood that those things are separate from formal standardized language.

Neither Ebonics nor the vernacular used by poor white folks are foreign languages used by recent immigrants. We don't need to teach classes in those languages the way we teach classes in Spanish to new immigrants from Mexico. They are, rather, evidence of a serious problem with education among the poor. I think it's vitally important to recognize it as a that, or we risk creating another generation of kids who can't get good jobs because they sound uneducated, thus perpetuating the poverty cycle.

(frozen) Hello!

[keeni84.livejournal.com]

I read a post from another community and I had to comment here.

The fact that white kids who fuck up grammar don't get a cultural pass when black kids do is evidence enough that this is just something someone dreamed up to keep people from having to actually pay attention in school. I'm sure I could argue that my halfwit relatives who think "I done got me" is a legitimate English phrase have some sort of valid cultural reasons for thinking that way. I also hope people would laugh their asses off if I tried to argue that.

Whites who speak an Appalachian English as well as whites who speak Creole are often seen as stupid--just as you see black people who speak AAVE, Appalachian English or Creole are seen as stupid and uneducated.

AAVE, Appalachian dialects and Louisiana Creole didn't begin because of a lack of education. It began when groups who spoke 2 separate languages blended together creating a pidgin. The children of these people used the pidgin, adding grammar to create a stable creole. This has nothing to do with one group being uneducated or not. Creoles have nothing to do with education.

This is not just something unique to black or white Americans--this is something that happens all over the world, regardless of education (or lack thereof). Creoles of English exist on every continent, in places where English colonies existed.

I learned how to speak AAVE from my parents. They learned AAVE from their parents, and so on. I learned to speak Standard American English before I entered primary school, when my mother made my siblings and I read from dictionaries to learn how to speak Standard American English.

Why should I be forced to speak it at home, where I feel comfortable? Or around my friends?

American English is a creole of English.

"Standard" languages, though they may be constructs, are still very real, and will be for the forseeable future. They are the currency of every economy and formal social situation. Without a thorough understanding of that currency, people get left behind. The practical effects of embracing Ebonics (or the euphemistic acronym of AAVE) are to keep people from succeeding.

There is nothing wrong with AAVE. The only problem would be if AAVE replaced Standard American English, which has not happened. Most speakers of AAVE speak or can understand both Standard American English and AAVE.

And just to let you know: the term "ebonics" is not a standard way to refer to AAVE, and is actually one of the later terms used to describe AAVE.

Kids whose culture already invites them to disregard education aren't going to understand the point of linguistic cultural theory. All they know is that they now have an excuse to blow off paying attention in class. Sorry, teacher. You can't tell me to speak correctly because it's MY CULTURE to speak like this.

Black culture invites black children to disregard education? Where do you see this? You say you are a "bleeding heart" but all I see is someone spewing more stereotypes about a people you don't really want to understand.

Just because something is traditional in an identifiable subculture doesn't mean it's a good thing. It's traditional in the subculture I came from to down a half rack and beat the shit out of your wife and kids. That doesn't mean I should argue that that behavior is valid.

I don't understand the comparison between beating your wife and kids and speaking a valid dialect.

Poor grammar is a cultural thing in that it represents a group who have had little access to (or interest in) education. That should be cause for alarm, not celebration.

It is not poor grammar. AAVE grammar pulls from various sources to create its own unique grammar.

(frozen) Re: Hello!

[textualdeviance.livejournal.com]

All I see there is more justification for allowing people to believe that slang is as valid as standard language.

In casual communication, sure. But not in formal communication. And considering how hard English is in the first place (considering how bastardized it is from several other language roots) I don't see any reason to confuse kids about what is and isn't correct.

Black culture invites black children to disregard education? Where do you see this? You say you are a "bleeding heart" but all I see is someone spewing more stereotypes about a people you don't really want to understand.

Where did I call it "black culture?" The culture I'm referring to is a subculture created by poverty and poor education. That crosses racial lines.