Standard English ‘Oppressive’ to Minorities; Teach Ebonics Instead

[Dug]

You're conflating dialect and spelling again. Dialect is primarily spoken.

Right which is the point. What teacher spells out on the board

"Ain't" instead of "Am not"

[Katchii]

And again, languages evolve all the time. I don't think what's spoken int he boardroom is as important as what's spoken in the commercials. Business owners know they have to speak to their audience.

Depends on which side of the commercial you're on. If you're one of the people who works IN the boardroom, then that dialect is just as, if not more, important than what's spoken to the audience. Knowing your audience is critical, and if your work life puts you more firmly or frequently in one audience or the other you become more and more savvy in that environment 1) as a direct result of you simply being exposed to it but also 2) as a survival type thing if you want to continue working in that environment.

[jimboa24]

You seem to be conflating two entirely different concepts. Personal religious freedom should be protected. Organized religion should not, as it falls under the entire "establishment" tenet.

Thank you for demonstrating that you don't understand the entire concept of the "establishment" clause. The clause means that there cannot be an official government-promoted religion of the United States. This was set up as a direct refutation of the Church of England, Britain's official religion established by and promoted by the government. It DOES NOT mean that organized religion is forbidden. You need to retake your American Government class that you should have taken in high school or college (assuming you are an American). Basic Bill of Rights 101, dude.

[Bodakane]

Absolutely they do change how they speak to their audience, but your average business isn't going to higher people who speak like that because it ultimately makes top to bottom interactions more difficult. And if this is what they're taught in school it's going to create even more friction than there has ever been.

Additionally I'd contend that 99% of business owners probably couldn't lower their language THAT much to the level of ebonics.

It's a self perpetuating philosophy, though. The language of business is kept static in that regard to weed people out...but not in a survival of the fittest way. It's all about playing the game.

Dialects form due to isolation. New dialects are by defitnion, the evolution of language. Groups with strong dialects need to welcomed into society not homogenized by turning into the society that already exists. We are shrinking the culture gene pool.

[Vanyali]

Exactly. The way you pronounce a word is based on where you are, a regional dialect. But the dialect does not affect the spelling of the word. It's a subtle nuance, but a stark line - dialects are not taught. Pronunciation is taught.

AAVE is trying to get their dialect, their separate use of words and spelling of same words, to be taught - or that's what the study in the OP is advocating. Not going to happen.

Except in AAVE, the words are spelled correctly. You complaining they're not the correct form for proper english is like complaining i said quesadilla instead of cheese wrap. Same concept, different word. The spelling of the word is correct in English or AAVE. Which word you pick is reflective of your dialect, but not bound to it.

- - - Updated - - -

Right which is the point. What teacher spells out on the board

"Ain't" instead of "Am not"

My Texas classes...

Corpus Christi, if you know it. Basically a ghetto large town.

[cubby]

Except in AAVE, the words are spelled correctly. You complaining they're not the correct form for proper english is like complaining i said quesadilla instead of cheese wrap. Same concept, different word. The spelling of the word is correct in English or AAVE. Which word you pick is reflective of your dialect, but not bound to it.

Then it's not a dialect, but a separate language. In the United States, and I'll say this again, dialects aren't taught. Courtyard in Boston is spelled the same way as in Houston and Minneapolis.

[Mangusei]

Let's all speak monkey language and use words like THICC

[Dug]

My Texas classes...

Corpus Christi, if you know it. Basically a ghetto large town.

I'm here in Texas too right by the border. Along with Texas dialect we have to deal with Texmex slang (which Corpus should too since it's close enough). None of that is taught in school. The teacher is never going to write out on the board "I ain't going to do that" if it's a formal course in English and grammar. Sorry but I have a hard time believing you. Especially so in our class rooms that are 9/10 Hispanics with Hispanics

[yoma]

I'm all for improving on language education. But why pull the racist card? Are the French being racist against me if I travel to France and can't perfectly understand them? Learning a language, especially the nuances and deep grammar of said language, takes time and patience. Let's improve on the methods to learn those finer points, but let's not throw them in the trash under the ridiculious claim of "racism."

[Vanyali]

Then it's not a dialect, but a separate language. In the United States, and I'll say this again, dialects aren't taught. Courtyard in Boston is spelled the same way as in Houston and Minneapolis.

it's really, really not.

You're taking a common word in English and saying "well it's always spelt this way!".

So is Si. It's spelt that way in English and Spanish (we're putting aside that I'm too lazy to put necessary accents). Does that make it an English word, or does using it make you have a Spanish dialect? AAVE words are spelt the same in english OR in AAVE. Which language the rest of the sentence is made of doesn't change the spelling of the word. Would that make it a borrowed word? Yup. We have plenty of those in English (Quesadilla........). Spelt the same from Houston to Minneapolis too.

you're still making a distinction of word choice and trying to force it into dialect. I could write "I ain't gonna do that cuz it's against the law" in a letter to my boss. It'd be perfectly acceptable in English, it'd be perfectly acceptable in front of friends, it's 100% english.. but it's not formal writing, and would be deemed inappropriate due to word choice, not dialect, even if i used the words because they were my primarily dialect.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm here in Texas too right by the border. Along with Texas dialect we have to deal with Texmex slang (which Corpus should too since it's close enough). None of that is taught in school. The teacher is never going to write out on the board "I ain't going to do that" if it's a formal course in English and grammar. Sorry but I have a hard time believing you. Especially so in our class rooms that are 9/10 Hispanics with Hispanics

My teachers would use it. Public schools, smh. The private school I had to transfer to (mold allergy in south texas, LOLOLOL) was completely different an annoying.

[melodramocracy]

Then it's not a dialect, but a separate language. In the United States, and I'll say this again, dialects aren't taught. Courtyard in Boston is spelled the same way as in Houston and Minneapolis.

Incorrect. In Boston it's courtyahd.

[cubby]

it's really, really not.

You're taking a common word in English and saying "well it's always spelt this way!".

So is Si. It's spelt that way in English and Spanish (we're putting aside that I'm too lazy to put necessary accents). Does that make it an English word, or does using it make you have a Spanish dialect? AAVE words are spelt the same in english OR in AAVE. Which language the rest of the sentence is made of doesn't change the spelling of the word. Would that make it a borrowed word? Yup. We have plenty of those in English (Quesadilla........). Spelt the same from Houston to Minneapolis too.

That's a different animal altogether. Borrowed words from other languages isn't a matter of dialect or not. It's a matter of bringing new words into common usage. It's not about replacing current words with different spelling (such as AAVE would have us do).

you're still making a distinction of word choice and trying to force it into dialect. I could write "I ain't gonna do that cuz it's against the law" in a letter to my boss. It'd be perfectly acceptable in English, it'd be perfectly acceptable in front of friends, it's 100% english.. but it's not formal writing, and would be deemed inappropriate due to word choice, not dialect, even if i used the words because they were my primarily dialect.

The sentence you use above isn't 100% English. "Cuz", "gonna", and "ain't" aren't English. They are informal contractions (or outright non-words), and any English teacher will tell you that. They may work just fine, but they aren't what you are claiming them to be. Dialect isn't word choice. Dialect is the pronunciation of words. Or the informal, NOT taught, slang or local words used.

But again, dialects aren't taught.

- - - Updated - - -

Incorrect. In Boston it's courtyahd.

Lol, exactly my point.

[Dug]

My teachers would use it. Public schools, smh. The private school I had to transfer to (mold allergy in south texas, LOLOLOL) was completely different an annoying.

I mean maybe you're confusing their speech with what they actually taught in class but I digress, I don't know your teachers. Either way I disagree with the notion that dialects should or rather could be taught in place of standard grammar. My own regional dialect does come through in my writings on forums and games but when it comes to academics I stick with formal writing.

The only people I see this being a problem with is actual non native speakers. Anyone who grows up speaking english and in american schools shouldn't be that disadvantaged and teaching with uh... "easier" form of the language seems counter productive to me.

[Vanyali]

That's a different animal altogether. Borrowed words from other languages isn't a matter of dialect or not.




The sentence you use above isn't 100% English. "Cuz", "gonna", and "ain't" aren't English. They are informal contractions (or outright non-words), and any English teacher will tell you that. They may work just fine, but they aren't what you are claiming them to be. Dialect isn't word choice. Dialect is the pronunciation of words. Or the informal, NOT taught, slang or local words used.

But again, dialects aren't taught.

Saying they're not formal words doesn't make them English.

What makes a word? Mutual intelligibility. You knew what that sentence meant. Ergo, they are words.

Dialect encompasses pronunciation AND word choice;

"a particular form of a language that is peculiar to a specific region or social group.
"this novel is written in the dialect of Trinidad"
synonyms: regional language, local language, local speech, vernacular, patois, idiom; More"

It's not just spoken. It's not just written. It's word choice, it's spoken, and it can inform how you write.. which is in itself a vastly different dialect than how most people speak. Listen to (and write down) how people speak sometimes - it's full of non-sentences, contradiction, and strangeness you can't pass in formal writing. But it's undisputably english, it's just not following written rules. And dialect is very certainly taught in schools and at home by how people around them are speaking... or not speaking.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean maybe you're confusing their speech with what they actually taught in class but I digress, I don't know your teachers. Either way I disagree with the notion that dialects should or rather could be taught in place of standard grammar. My own regional dialect does come through in my writings on forums and games but when it comes to academics I stick with formal writing.

The only people I see this being a problem with is actual non native speakers. Anyone who grows up speaking english and in american schools shouldn't be that disadvantaged and teaching with uh... "easier" form of the language seems counter productive to me.

Well, formal writing is it's own beast. Nobody speaks like that. You write like that, because that's just how you do it. If you're writing a note to someone, you won't use formal writing.. and if you're speaking, you sure as fuck don't. English isn't JUST how to speak and write formally. it isn't JUST how to write for formal academics. And adjusting things regionally to take note of the fact that you use x grammatic formation or y vowel isn't harmful at all.

AAVE also isn't an easier form of a language - it's just different. That's like saying English is an easier form of German, since it came from German.

[petej0]

Incorrect. In Boston it's courtyahd.

reminds me of this:

[Mistame]

No, I'm not conflating anything. Religion on a personal level still has the power to influence individuals. In fact, it would be worse if it was decentralized than if it is centralized.

And people running around claiming the world is flat have the power to influence people. And while they're absolutely wrong, they still reserve the right to do so. That's how freedom works.

Thank you for demonstrating that you don't understand the entire concept of the "establishment" clause. The clause means that there cannot be an official government-promoted religion of the United States. This was set up as a direct refutation of the Church of England, Britain's official religion established by and promoted by the government. It DOES NOT mean that organized religion is forbidden. You need to retake your American Government class that you should have taken in high school or college (assuming you are an American). Basic Bill of Rights 101, dude.

Except that's not what I said. I was pointing out that government protection of organized religion, especially a particular religion, is a violation of the establishment clause. Reading comprehension 101, dude.

[A dot Ham]

U of Wisconsin Researcher: Standard English ‘Oppressive’ to Minorities; Teach Ebonics Instead

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/u-of...onics-instead/

An undergrad researcher at the University of Wisconsin-Madison has entered the public limelight with research indicating that standard English is “oppressive” to minorities, essentially stating that grammatically correct speech is too hard for them to learn.



Erika Gallagher argues that schools must allow for minority students to speak in ebonics, just weeks after the University of Washington-Tacoma endorsed a similar campaign declaring standard grammar racist. The Daily Cardinal reports that Gallagher’s research was chosen for presentation at the Collegiate Conference on Composition and Communication in Portland, Oregon this semester, where her work to erase the stigma against ebonics attained national attention.

Gallagher’s research focuses on a theory called “code switching,” which means that individuals adapt their speech and mannerisms to those around them. She believes that minorities with poor language skills feel marginalized by having to adapt to those who speak proper English. To mind their sensitivities, Gallagher intends to end the stigma of ebonics—also known as African-American Vernacular English—a dialect spoken by some black people in the United States—and encourage its use in schools.

“I want to center the voices of the people who need to be centered,” said Gallagher. “As a Writing Fellow, as a white-passing person, I have a lot of power and privilege that should be shared.”

Gallagher says she based her research on three interviews with student leaders at UW-Madison from minority groups. She asked them how they felt about code switching, and says that the persons she interviewed “overwhelmingly” said they felt oppressed, one of whom called it “the biggest form of cognitive dissonance that exists.”

Yes, you read that correctly: her research is based wholly on interviews with three college students who, like many special snowflakes, would feel oppressed if you looked at them the wrong way. Apparently, the three students are now the primary spokespersons for every minority to ever live in the United States.

As a writing fellow, she says that the focus on teaching students how to use proper English causes minorities to feel excluded, and she wants to change that. “Just because you speak a different way doesn’t mean you’re not smart, but there’s a huge stigma around it,” Gallagher said. “I want to teach [educators] a different rhetoric, teach them to be more accepting.”

Gallagher has expressed her intention to funnel her research into a nonprofit organization that encourages teachers to allow students to speak in any way that makes them feel comfortable—even in broken English.

After all, why should colleges be places of learning when they can serve as nurseries for overgrown infants, instead?

Wait let me see if I understand this shit?

So in college we are required to learn a second language. Sign language, spanish, french, russian... but some people are having a hard time learning English... a language taught in every American school from K-12? Is there an ebonics version of "see spot run"? If you aren't learning English... its your own damn fault. We expect immigrants to learn English to attend our schools... but we're going to give a fucking pass to people WHO FUCKING LIVE HERE, because they're too stupid to learn it?

Essentially this research is the same disservice as any other narrative about oppression. By allowing this shit the limelight you are setting up Black kids to fail. By spreading lies that as a Black person the white man will always keep you down. Doesn't inspire kids to outperform, it teaches them to hate, and to be satisfied with the status quo because "No matter what you do, you'll NEVER be good enough." Bullshit. Absolute and total bullshit. We need to be teaching kids to learn proper English because that is what educated people speak, that is what the business world speaks. Because they CAN regardless of color, learn ANYTHING they put their minds to.

Furthermore, a greater injustice being perpetrated here is claiming that "ebonics" is actually a dialect of the English language, "African-American Vernacular English" should not be dignified with its own classification. I know kids, SMART kids that can turn it on, and turn it off... its a choice. Its ignorant, its a type of speech that only comes from trailer parks and people on welfare. It is NOT some culturally defining language that unites all Black Americans. Neither is this "rap culture" as if being in a gang, doing drugs, and committing crimes is somehow culturally defining. That might describe life for people below the poverty line, the uneducated, but by no means is "culture".

[cubby]

Saying they're not formal words doesn't make them English.

What makes a word? Mutual intelligibility. You knew what that sentence meant. Ergo, they are words.

Dialect encompasses pronunciation AND word choice;

"a particular form of a language that is peculiar to a specific region or social group.
"this novel is written in the dialect of Trinidad"
synonyms: regional language, local language, local speech, vernacular, patois, idiom; More"

It's not just spoken. It's not just written. It's word choice, it's spoken, and it can inform how you write.. which is in itself a vastly different dialect than how most people speak. Listen to (and write down) how people speak sometimes - it's full of non-sentences, contradiction, and strangeness you can't pass in formal writing. But it's undisputably english, it's just not following written rules. And dialect is very certainly taught in schools and at home by how people around them are speaking... or not speaking.

and

Being an informal contraction doesn't mean they aren't English. All three of those are words and can be found in English dictionaries, though all three will certainly be flagged as informal. I mean, honestly, the entire idea that "ain't" is somehow not an English word is just bizarre and is a product of stigma and blind prescriptivism more than any coherent or sensible understanding of language. All three of those words can be used in both spoken and written English just fine and will be readily understood by other English speakers, whereas words that actually aren't English that aren't popular loanwords or loanphrases would not be.

I agree with what you're saying - and serious kudos for how you laid it out. Very solid argument.

However, and not to beat a dead horse, but dialect isn't taught in schools. It's not formally taught. AAVE wants that to change - they want it taught. I have no problem with AAVE being used as a dialect (in fact, I have no choice if it is used as a dialect or not), it seems like a natural thing, but it's not something that's going to enter any formal teaching apparatus.

[prwraith]

It's a self perpetuating philosophy, though. The language of business is kept static in that regard to weed people out...but not in a survival of the fittest way. It's all about playing the game.

Dialects form due to isolation. New dialects are by defitnion, the evolution of language. Groups with strong dialects need to welcomed into society not homogenized by turning into the society that already exists. We are shrinking the culture gene pool.

Is it harmful for business though to have 10 different versions of ebonics?

In my business for instance, I manage a call center. How am I supposed to train people for 10 versions of ebonics? Could I hire people from each dialect / language sure, but then my efficiency goes down because they can only do XYZ. Rather than hiring 600 people during christmas who can speak english now I've got to hire 200 ebonics 1, 200 ebonics 2, 100 ebonics 3, and 100 english. But my overall service level sucks because they can't do more than 1 or 2 languages at the most. The notes they leave on various orders will be in their language rather than a universally understood english because they weren't taught that. So now the other 400 suffer.

Let alone the customers, It's bad enough when people call a call center and get indian people but now they get americans but they can't understand them because the guy calling from florida speaks regular english but the person he got on the phone speaks ebonics 2. Now there's a demand for regular english again but because it's now a specialized language like french I have to pay them more which hurts my bottom line even more than all the language nonsense already has.

It's a disaster, it has nothing to do with me being elitist or weeding people out. I just need to meet the bottom line.

I'm all for cultures having their own dialects, words, and languages. But that can't become something that's standard education wise unless it's universally accepted otherwise we shoot ourselves in the foot. And if we universally accept ebonics 1, we run into issues with ebonics 2 and 3 as to why we think they're not good enough despite being equally as established.

[Dug]

Well, formal writing is it's own beast. Nobody speaks like that. You write like that, because that's just how you do it. If you're writing a note to someone, you won't use formal writing.. and if you're speaking, you sure as fuck don't. English isn't JUST how to speak and write formally. it isn't JUST how to write for formal academics. And adjusting things regionally to take note of the fact that you use x grammatic formation or y vowel isn't harmful at all.

AAVE also isn't an easier form of a language - it's just different. That's like saying English is an easier form of German, since it came from German.

Yes but as far as academics/education in concerned formal is the way to go. As far as "allowing" people to speak in a certain dialect then yes by all means I think people should be allowed to. Just as I speak in my every day life a mix of spanglish and texas slang, I can understand stuff like AAVE but if you're giving a "formal" speech or a "formal" written assignment then that should be used.