Which is fake, the standard English, or the non-standard? Standard English being used to assimulate into a white-dominated society vs an ebonics used in an attempt to be loyal to one's perceived heritage. Which one's fake? FranchiseBlade, in your mode of thinking, are other dialects which are not the fruit of this phenomenon less defensible? For example, when a Southerner says a man was hanged and a Yankee (improperly) corrects him to say 'hung'? Both versions are seen as improper by some party and both are appealing to legacies in the same English language. What I'm getting at is are you (a) saying that ebonics has a legitimacy due to its roots in an authentic (African) language while other forms of non-standard English are simply wrong, or (b) that all variations from non-standard English have their causes which must be understood, or (c) have I misunderstood entirely? With this audience, is 'fomfotable' not proper usage?
I'd have to disagree with that. What you say about there being discrimination generally against those using a non-standard English is true. And, if economic success or widespread popularity was one's aim, you're right that a person would be best advised to obey the rules that are set out. But, language moreso than most things is an extremely democratic phenomenon. Words and grammar become acceptable from widespread use. So, instead of bowing down before the rules of proper speech, it is possible through a sort of linguistic insurgency to inject the formerly improper into the proper and make your mode of speaking into something generally acceptable. For example, it was once improper to use first names in arm's-length business associations; now it is so common that using last names is often strange. 'Hanged' as I mentioned before seems to me to be a similar example. I don't know the whole history of it, but I doubt I'm far off base in guessing it is an improper usage that was used to often it is now considered the proper -- though as ignorance of this term increases, 'hung' becomes more popular and may one day reclaim its spot as proper. Similar events are obvious with foreign words that have entered our language (tornado, canyon, tsunami and the like). Terms like bling bling, though faddish, have forced themselves onto the public consciousness. Obviously, that one still carries a stigma. But, what about "y'all" which you've mentioned? I might get a look in New York City, but in my company in Houston no one would think twice about it. No where in the country would I be persecuted for it. What of grammar though? "Hanged" is a minor example. What about using "same" as an example of same. I think it is terrible usage. It sounds stunted and awful. I don't know where the hell it came from. But, some people think it sounds smart, including a local sports writer. What of legal language (Max?) that has its own set of rules, where you can apparently stick a bunch of words together to make new ones and use nouns without leading them with articles. No one complains about legalese being improper. It has carved its niche in the larger linguistic landscape. It has a specialized use and a specialized audience, but enough people have a passing familiarity with it that we can use it in the wider world and be understood. Ebonics is much the same way. Users of the mode of speech -- especially those that have demonstrated proficiency in proper English -- know and intend the picture of themselves that they paint. If they're willing to let you think of them as ignorant, it's either what they're going for or they don't much care what you think of their intelligence.
I was talking about the guy who didn't start speaking eboincs till the age of 16. That is fake. You are trying to completely pass yourself as off as something that you are not. It is fake if you don't normally speak "correct" english then all of the sudden that is all you do. As long as you stay true to yourself it is ok. People in this thread say they have the ability to turn slang talk on and off. Is slang different from ebonic speak? I don't really know anything about it. I thought it was still cool to say "b****in'".
The reason is because you can't stay in a bubble forever, talking only to your parents and people in your neighborhood. The vast majority of people who hire and sign paychecks agree with the "Great and Powerful Coz."
a. Not that others are right or wrong, just that teaching Standard English to people who normally speak Ebonics has it's own set of difficulties. The main group that this is important for are teachers who often misunderstand the problem, and think that people who speak ebonics are either ignorant, unwilling to learn, incapable of learning etc. Yet they are speaking a language or dialect which actually has it's own rules and things that are not allowed just as standard English does. So students may actually be following linguistic rules. So based on the fact there is an existing set of linguistic standards then it does have some legitimacy in as far as that structure goes. b. There are other variations of non-standard English but studies have shown that those groups regardless of economic background, general quality of school, familiy stability etc. have a gap in testing. I'm not saying that the more teachers have an understanding of the dialect most of their students the more it won't help. And even when these groups test equal to other groups they less often selected for honors classes, more often sent to remedial classes etc. Misdiagnoses because of the misunderstanding is a huge problem and then they aren't learning at the highest level possible for them. It's very easy to miscommunicate when people don't understand. The use of 'be' for example. 'Why you be ...' doesn't actually translate to 'Why are you...?' It translates more closely to 'Why are you always...?' That stems directly from the way the verb translates from most of the West African languages to English. Yet often when teachers or others here this, they think it means 'Why are you...?' So, "Why you be yelling?" doesn't mean "Why are you yelling?" But more like, "Why do you always yell?" c. It seems like there are only minor points which I probably wasn't able to communicate clearly, but for the most part it seemed like you understood was attempting to communicate.
Not sure I can buy this. If I could learn relatively proper English as a foreigner who did not really actively speak English much before he came to the US the first time at age 23, why would someone who grew up in the US not be able to learn proper English? Most Scandinavian people I know speak better English than a good number of Americans I know, and they mostly know English from just watching American movies. Just curious - how come?
First of all, we should all agree that legalese sucks and all that use it should be ridiculed. Moving on...I don't think you and I are disagreeing. I'm not advocating excluding words/dialects/whatever from language. Language should evolve and use them if you choose, but like I said, it's all about knowing your audience. I worked on a project in Houston for a long time. I often said "yall" when speaking with management. However, when talking with investors and banks in New York, that word would never pass my lips. I'd rather have people focus on the content of what I am saying and not get distracted by an accent, dialect or colloquilism. If they don't care what people think when you talk a certain way, as I said, it's their perogative, just don't be surprised if it makes it harder to succeed.
Once again it has to do with voluntary and involuntary immigration and whether people feel they have a benefit from learning it. It's why Columbians or El Salvadorians don't have the same gap as Mexican Americans. The four groups that have the most difficulties are Hawaiians, Mexican Americans, Native American Indians, and African Americans. They are all groups who were conquered, or enslaved. They are not people who came here voluntarily to reep the benefits. Again it's not that any of these groups can't learn Standard English. It's just that they already have a structured language which is not understood by many of their teachers. There are countless immigrants who come here and learn standard English relatively quickly. In addition most of the immigrants who learn it best practice with other people who speak standard English more. When one's family friends, and everyone in their locale doesn't speak standard English it's more difficult to master.
Sorry, but if you are three or four or more generations removed from those ancestors who immigrated involuntarily, can you really still use the fact that their immigration was not voluntary as an excuse?
The thing is that legaleese still uses mostly a standard English format for frammer. They may have different vocabulary, and few nouns that can become verbs, but for the most part the structure is the same. However most W. African dialects don't have a 'th' sound. So a play like Bring in 'Da Noise Bring in 'Da Funk isn't Bring in 'the' noise... There are those kinds of differences and letter combinations that simply exist in English that simply don't exist the African dialects.
Ebonics is a godawful dodge for allowing people to butcher the English language under the guise of diversity. I never would have thought that the language of jive from the movie Airplane would become a real language. Anyone who speaks in that manner should realize that no one wants to hire someone who sounds like a mental midget and can not employ the language properly. In other words, speak goddamned normal English! The Cos is entirely correct in all his points.
Of course Ebonics is not just 'Jive' from the movie airplane. Like I said there is a difference between slang and ebonics. Ebonics is also not limited to the U.S. Ebonics doesn't even necessarily mean the same dialect. There is a large population in Brazil that speaks Ebonics, and it isn't an English derivitive. Also you seem to be under the impression that some people advocate speaking ebonics in school or work situations, formal writings etc. That isn't proposed at all. What is proposed is that teachers understand that it has nothing to do with a person being a mental midget as you ignorantly put it, put that there is a linguistic basis for what is being said. Understanding that actually helps people teach standard English more effectively, not prolong people's use of Ebonics in improper situations.
That assumes one voluntarily choses to live in one's bubble. I think the language thing is Cosby's weakest point. The real issue he points to is how poor people don't really embrace education.
Depending on how well your family and past generations were educated or allowed to be educated it certainly can be a reason. This isn't my opinion but the result of linguistics testing. If a group has largely been denied a quality education up until recently it's not likely that they would have 3 generations to ingrain standard English structure as their basis. 3 generations has been shown to be the time for which it takes to make the transformation. Furthermore when people don't see a benefit to learning and transforming because of institutional policies then it's even less likely. I'm not trying to argue that there isn't equal opportunity(nor do I claim that there is), but if even the general perception is that there won't be equal opportunity the incentive to assimilate is less. Where as an someone who immigrates here with a hope of working hard to succeed and change their life for the better then they will try harder to make the changes. I think it's one of the reasons MLK spoke so often of hope etc. People have to believe that the possibility of good things exist.
Thanks for the explanation. I understand what you mean. I just think people should possibly make more of an effort to look less for the excuse or explanation of why something is imperfect or even try to make the imperfect the standard, and instead, they should possibly try harder to improve from the status of being imperfect - in other words, education might need to be stressed more, as a chance and an opportunity.
In other words, these groups feel rejected by the larger society so they, in turn, reject that larger society. If that way of life keeps them further downtrodden, they don't care. Why should they assimilate to what they perceive as a hostile society? Why should they care what some corporate employer thinks about the way they speak when they already believe they have no chance to succeed in an unequal society? Why spend all that effort learning proper American english when they know they'll still get the shaft due to race, ethnicity, class, etc.? What they can't fight materially, they at least try to fight with their culture/way of life. Their actions can be somewhat counter-hegemonic. The problem isn't that people speak a dialect. The problem is that they don't buy into "the system." They aren't buying into the way the larger society does things. So they want nothing to do with that world in which they have no control/influence. To me, the bigger problem is that they are throwing the baby out with the bath water. Yes, the society is deeply flawed. But that doesn't invalidate everything that society has to offer--especially certain forms of education.
It's the other way around. Education doesn't embrace poor people. If you are in an affluent family, education through advanced degrees is forced down every child's throat. I dated a girl in high school that I later found out, she was to be the first in her family to attend college. Do you know how difficult it is to get into college if nobody in your family has ever done it? It is easy to never take an SAT or apply to college at the right time. It is easy to not study hard and have no chance to get into a decent school. It is easy to not find funding if you manage to do every other step. High schools suck at preparing kids...at least they used to. One thing that nobody mentioned here is that black people take pride in their slang. It is often a source of entertainment. How many black comedians have you heard that intentially "mispronounce" words as part of their joke. How many rap songs too? Black folks do it all the time and it is a sense of cultural identity. It's a differentiator from whites. So just keep that in mind next time you see a black person in public and assume they aren't intelligent by their language. But many educated blacks know how to turn it on/off as appropriate. So this is not a black/white issue. This is an education issue. There are as many uneducated whites that can't speak well as there are blacks. Try as you might. This isn't directly a racial issue. I do beleive the is a racial link to why so many blacks are not educated well enough but that is a different issue. It is sad to see, however.
