 |
Daniel Kies Department of English College of DuPage |
|
 |
||
| Modern English
Grammar English 2126 |
Contact Form | |
Discussions about Ebonics: The American Dialect Society Debate
Starting in late December 1996, the American Dialect Society's email listserv hosted a lengthy and feisty debate on Ebonics. The American Dialect Society is one of the oldest scholarly organizations devoted to the study American English.
Below is the text of that discussion. It begins with Dennis Baron simply posting a few paragraphs from a newswire to the discussion list. It builds considerably from there.
Current work:
Days remaining this term:
Notes:
Add Note |
Log in? | Privacy | Change Name & Email
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 11:56:51 -0600 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Dennis Baron <debaron@UIUC.EDU> Organization: English Department Subject: Oakland schools accept Black English To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> > > OAKLAND, California, Dec. 19 (UPI) -- A California school board has > approved a policy that recognizes Ebonics, or Black English, as a > primary language of its black students. > A spokeswoman for the Oakland school district says Thursday that the > resolution makes it the first district in the United States with a > policy to respect the Ebonics language as distinct from standard > American English. > Oakland School Superintendent Carolyn Getridge says educational > reasons, not the possibility of federal bilingual funding, are behind > the recommendation made by the Task Force on African-American Students. > So far, the federal government has turned down requests for bilingual > money for Ebonics programs. > Getridge said, ``Our African American students are performing poorly > across the board, regardless of the indicators.'' > Although some urban districts address the needs of black students who > speak Ebonics, Oakland is the first school district to commit to > creating an educational program accessible to all its black students. > About 53 percent of Oakland's 52,000 students are black. > The policy passed unanimously Wednesday night, and educators say it > is still unclear how the district will pay for the programs and teacher > training. > --- > Copyright 1996 by United Press International. > All rights reserved. > -- Dennis Baron debaron@uiuc.edu Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 02:31:48 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: "Barry A. Popik" <Bapopik@AOL.COM> Subject: School Board OKs Black English (AP story) To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> >From AP and AOL: School Board OKs Black English by Michelle Locke (The Associated Press) OAKLAND, Calif. (Dec. 19)--Black students in Oakland's public schools who use double negatives or say "She be at the store" won't be told they're not following the rules of English anymore. Instead, teachers will be trained to recognize that they're using Black English, and will translate it into standard English, like they do with Hispanic students or others for whom English is a second language. The change follows the unanimous vote by the Oakland school board on Wednesday night to recognize Black English, or "Ebonics," as a second language. Backers say the district is the first in the nation to recognize Ebonics (a term combining "ebony" and "phonics") as the language of many blacks. ... Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 08:28:39 -0400 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: "Dennis R. Preston" <preston@PILOT.MSU.EDU> Subject: Re: School Board OKs Black English (AP story) To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Unfortunately some responses to this reveal our continuing inability to supply the general public with even the slightest information about language. If the article had been qouted further, it would have been found to have contained the following: 'Some criticized the approach as underestimating black students. "It is an affront," said Steven Gooden, a black man who served as honorary youth chairman of the 1996 Republican National Convention in San Diego. "This cuts to the heart of the issue, I think defining us a genetically deprived."' All this linguistics, and people still going around suggesting that the variety of human langauge one learns is innate. Dennis (the one born with basketball and moonshine genetic structures) >>From AP and AOL: > > School Board OKs Black English > by Michelle Locke (The Associated Press) > > OAKLAND, Calif. (Dec. 19)--Black students in Oakland's public schools who >use double negatives or say "She be at the store" won't be told they're not >following the rules of English anymore. > Instead, teachers will be trained to recognize that they're using Black >English, and will translate it into standard English, like they do with >Hispanic students or others for whom English is a second language. > The change follows the unanimous vote by the Oakland school board on >Wednesday night to recognize Black English, or "Ebonics," as a second >language. > Backers say the district is the first in the nation to recognize Ebonics >(a term combining "ebony" and "phonics") as the language of many blacks. ... Dennis R. Preston Department of Linguistics and Languages Michigan State University East Lansing MI 48824-1027 USA preston@pilot.msu.edu Office: (517)432-1235 Fax: (517)432-2736 From - Fri Dec 20 12:16:55 1996 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 09:04:14 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: "David A. Johns" <djohns@PEACHNET.CAMPUS.MCI.NET> Subject: Re: School Board OKs Black English (AP story) To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> At 08:28 AM 12/20/96 -0400, Dennis Preston wrote: > "It is an affront," said Steven Gooden, a black man who served as >honorary youth chairman of the 1996 Republican National Convention in San >Diego. "This cuts to the heart of the issue, I think defining us a >genetically deprived."' > >All this linguistics, and people still going around suggesting that the >variety of human langauge one learns is innate. Pardon me if I misunderstand your point, but isn't Mr. Gooden accusing the supporters of this new policy of attributing black English to genetics? David Johns Waycross College Waycross, GA Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 09:55:36 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: TERRY IRONS <t.irons@MOREHEAD-ST.EDU> Subject: Re: School Board OKs Black English (AP story) To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, David A. Johns wrote: > Pardon me if I misunderstand your point, but isn't Mr. Gooden accusing the > supporters of this new policy of attributing black English to genetics? > Of course Mr. Gooden is making this attribution. But he's also a Republican. More of the AP story "Supporters say the idea is to catch those students who don't fully comprehend mainstream English or tune out because they feel the language of their community is being ignored. "'African-American students do bring a language to the classroom that's different,' said McClymonds High Principal WIllie Hamilton, a member of the task force that recommended the change. "He said the idea is to train teachers to communicate better with black students and teach them mainstram English. "'It's not to have the teachers teach Ebonics. It's to have the teachers understand the language,' he said. 'It happens with other non-English speaking or limited English proficient students, and we felt the same should be done for African-American students.' Much of this language sounds like what was articulated in the federa lcourt decision involving the MLKing school in Ann Arbor about two decades ago. The phrase "language of their community" sounds to me clearly to be a cultural attribution, not genetic. I would ask, how is asking educators to understand the speech code of a group of students as a performance following from an underlying competence rather than a degenerate version of a standard viewing this group as "genetically deprived"? Sounds "Farrell"y ridiculous to me. Mr. Gooden is obviously not familiar with aspects of an identifiable sub-culture in America, which can be partially characterized by language difference. Whether an understanding on the part of teachers of "home language" will help them teach students "mainstream English" and whether that should be the goal for the educational system are, however, separate questions. The declaration of Ebonics as a language, I suggest, will do no more to stigmatize this group of students in Oakland than does their current poor performance in the school system there, which probably has to do with much more than simply a language difference. Virtually, Terry (*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*) Terry Lynn Irons t.irons@morehead-st.edu Voice Mail: (606) 783-5164 Snail Mail: UPO 604 Morehead, KY 40351 (*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*)=(*) Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 12:33:05 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: "Jeutonne P. Brewer" <jpbrewer@HAMLET.UNCG.EDU> Subject: Re: School Board OKs Black English (AP story) To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199612201328.IAA29272@wally.uncg.EDU> The text of what I assume is the complete AP article was published in our local paper this morning. The article discusses "Black English or 'Ebonics'" as both a second language and as a second dialect. Unfortunately, the writer (and evidently the school board) did not distinguish between the two. In part the Oakland school board decision is an Ann Arbor type decision: "The vote also creates a program to train teachers to understand Black English in order to help them teach students proper English." Later in the article the high school principal is quoted: "It's not to have the teachers teach Ebonics. It's to have the teachers understand the language," he said. "It happens with other non-English- speaking or limited English proficient students, and we felt the same should be done for African American students." I hope this event doesn't get distorted like the Ann Arbor case. I fear that will happen, however. ********************************************** Jeutonne P. Brewer, Associate Professor Department of English University of North Carolina at Greensboro Greensboro, NC 27412 email: jpbrewer@hamlet.uncg.edu URL: http://www.uncg.edu/~jpbrewer *********************************************** Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 15:33:07 -0800 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Andrea Kortenhoven <andrea@TURING.STANFORD.EDU> Subject: Re: "Ebonics" To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> At 01:08 PM 12/27/96 -0600, Salikoko Mufwene wrote: >The reality is that AAVE >speakers interact perhaps more often with speakers of white nonstandard >vernaculars (especially in rural areas) than with those of standard >English--if educated colloquial English is what is meant by "standard >English" in the same literature. This is certainly my experience. I grew up in a predominately African American working-class neighborhood, which bordered a lower-working class largely Appalachian white neighborhood. In my 50-50 black/white high shcool, African American students dominated the top of the class, student government, and sports. Our Appalachian white peers were seen as the smokers, the drop-outs, the druggies... Nevertheless, there was a thing called 'acting white' and 'talking white' which did not refer to our classmates or neighbors. There was a clear understanding that speaking 'proper English'--not speaking like the white kids around us--was among activities seen as attempts to separate oneself from other African Americans. The language of our teachers (for the most part), our doctors, our newscasters, etc., we were well aware, was not our language. But IT (some 'educated' variety) was still out there and we knew it was 'more correct' than our own. andrera Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 08:34:10 -0400 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: "Dennis R. Preston" <preston@PILOT.MSU.EDU> Subject: Re: "Ebonics" To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Salikoko is exactly right. Every introductory linguistics book (or at least any worth anything) tells us that languages (except in extreme cases, e.g., Chinese versus English) can't be identified on the basis of linguistic features alone. Hence, 'a langauge is a dialect with an army and a navy.' Behind all this cleverness, however, might lurk the presupposition that dialects are identifiable (perhaps by linguistic means?) Of course, what needs to be added is something like 'a dialect is a variety with a social identity,' not necessarily one with a unique array of linguistic features. Dennis (the one who speaks a dialect) >At 09:22 PM 12/26/96 -0500, you wrote: > >>Sali, your comments about the problems in referring to standard >>English are certainly appropriate. However, I think there is a >>double bind here. We cannot escape reference to a standard, and >>yet to refer to a standard complicates matters. I think all of >>us face this problem with classes each semester as well as in >>answering questions from students, colleagues, and the media. >> > What concerns me is not reference to standard English; it is rather what >is identified as "standard." The term has too often been misused in the >literature generally in reference to varieties spoken by white Americans. >This is perhaps more obvious in the literature that tries to account for the >development of AAVE by decreolization: as African Americans interact more >and more with whites, who speak standard English... The reality is that AAVE >speakers interact perhaps more often with speakers of white nonstandard >vernaculars (especially in rural areas) than with those of standard >English--if educated colloquial English is what is meant by "standard >English" in the same literature. To non-native speakers like myself, >standard English ends up being an elusive, ill-defined variety. (On the >other hand, AAVE itself--like presumably other vernaculars-- is an elusive, >ill-defined variety itself, isn't it? The problem may lie in part in >attempts to "defining" language varieties by linguistic features--who knows?) > >Sali. >****************************************************** >Salikoko S. Mufwene s-mufwene@uchicago.edu >University of Chicago (773)702-8531 >Department of Linguistics Fax: (773)834-0924 >1010 East 59th Street >Chicago, IL 60637, USA >http://humanities.uchicago.edu/humanities/linguistics/faculty/mufwene.html >******************************************************* Dennis R. Preston Department of Linguistics and Languages Michigan State University East Lansing MI 48824-1027 USA preston@pilot.msu.edu Office: (517)432-1235 Fax: (517)432-2736 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 22:43:56 -0600 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: "Marcyliena Morgan (by way of Salikoko Mufwene <s-mufwene@uchicago.EDU>)" <mhmorgan@UCLA.EDU> Subject: Ebonics To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> I am happy to share the following information which I received on the Oakland School Board's decision. Sali. I found this at http://www.west.net/~joyland/Oakland.htm. Please forward to anyone who needs it and/or hasn't seen it. Marcy ----- Oakland Policy on Ebonics OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SYNOPSIS OF THE ADOPTED POLICY ON STANDARD AMERICAN ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT On December 18, 1996 the Oakland Unified School District Board of Education approved a policy affirming Standard American English language development for all students. This policy mandates that effective instructional strategies must be utilized in order to ensure that every child has the opportunity to achieve English language proficiency. Language development for African American students, who comprise 53% of the students in the Oakland schools, will be enhanced with the recognition and understanding of the language structures unique to African American students. This language has been studied for several decades and is variously referred to as Ebonics (literally "Black sounds"), or "Pan-African Communication Behaviors," or "African Language Systems." This policy is based on the work of a broad-based Task Force, convened six months ago to review the district-wide achievement data (see Appendix 1) and to make recommendations regarding effective practices that would enhance the opportunity for all students to successfully achieve the standards of the core curriculum (see Appendix 2). The data show low levels of student performance, disproportionately high representation in special education, and under-representation in Advanced Placement courses, and in the Gifted and Talented Education Program. The recommendations (see Appendix 3), based on academic research, focus on the unique language stature of African American pupils, the direct connection of English language proficiency to student achievement, and the education of parents and the community to support academic achievement (see bibliography in Appendix 4). One of the programs recommended is the Standard English Proficiency Program (S.E.P.), a State of California model program, which promotes English-language development for African-American students. The S.E.P. training enables teachers and administrators to respect and acknowledge the history, culture, and language that the African American student brings to school. Recently a "Superliteracy" component was added to ensure the development of high levels of reading, writing, and speaking skills. The policy further requires strengthening pre-school education and parent and community participation in the educational processes of the District. The recommendations of the Task Force establish English language proficiency as the foundation for competency in all academic areas. Passage of this policy is a clear demonstration that the Oakland Unified School District is committed to take significant actions to turn around the educational attainment of its African-American students. Oakland's Standard: English The Board of Education adopted a policy on teaching English, not Ebonics. Unfortunately, because of misconceptions in the resulting press stories, the actions of the Board of Education have been publically misunderstood. Misconceptions include: *Oakland School District has decided to teach Ebonics in place of English. *The District is trying to classify Ebonics (i.e. "Black English,") speaking students as Bilingual *OUSD is only attempting to pilfer federal and state funds *OUSD is trying to create a system of perverse incentives that reward failure and lower standards *Oakland is condoning the use of Slang *Oakland has gone too far *Ebonics further segregates an already racially divided school district *There is no statistical evidence to support this approach or that this approach will improve student achievement Nothing could be further from the truth. 1. The Oakland Unified School District is not replacing the teaching of Standard American English with any other language. The District is not teaching Ebonics. The District emphasizes teaching Standard American English and has set a high standard of excellence for all its students. 2. The Oakland Unified School District is providing its teachers and parents with the tools to address the diverse languages the children bring into the classroom. 3. The District's objective is to build on the language skills that African-American students bring to the classroom without devaluing students and their diversity. We have directly connected English language proficiency to student achievement. 4. The term "genetically-based" is synonomous with genesis. In the clause, "African Language Systems are genetically based and not a dialect of English," the term "genetically based" is used according to the standard dictionary definition of "has origins in." It is not used to refer to human biology. APPENDIX 1: FINDINGS *53% of the total Oakland Unified School District's enrollment of 51,706 is African American. *71% of the students enrolled in Special Education were African American. *37% of the students enrolled in GATE classes were African American. *64% of students retained were African American. *67% of students classified as truant were African American. *71% of African American males attend school on a regular basis. *19% of the 12th grade African American students did not graduate. *80% of all suspended students were African American. *1.80 average GPA of African American students represents the lowest GPA in the district. APPENDIX 2: CORE CURRICULUM STANDARDS AT BENCHMARK GRADE LEVELS Grade 1: All students will read and perform mathematics at grade level. Grade 3: All students will read at grade level, have mastery of mathematical operations, and compose written works on a computer. Grade 5: All students will meet or exceed the fifth grade standards for the core curriculum in Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Science. Grade 8: All students will be able to read and engage with complex and diverse literature, conduct a research project and write a scholarly paper on that research, perform mathematics at a level required to enroll in Algebra, organize and participate in community service and social events, and utilize technology as a tool for learning and work. Grade 10: All students will successfully complete college required coursework in English, Math, and Science, and will enroll in a career academy or program. Grade 12: All students will successfully complete courses required for entrance into a college or university, meet the requirements for an entry level career position, and develop and defend a senior project. APPENDIX 3: OVERVIEW OF RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations, based on identified conditions and outcomes, are aligned with the Content Standards adopted by OUSD, pre-kindergarten -12th grades, 1996-1997. It is the consensus of the African American Task Force that the African American students' language needs have not been fully addressed. This report addresses the language needs of African American students as one of the nine major areas of recommendations to be implemented by OUSD. African American students shall develop English language proficiency as the foundation for their achievements in all core competency areas. All existing programs shall be implemented fully to enhance the achievements of African American students. The Task Force on the Education of African American Students shall be retained in order to assist OUSD in developing workplans and implementation strategies. Financial commitments shall be made to implement the Task Force on the Education of African American Students recommendations during the current fiscal year. The district's identification and assessment criteria for GATE and Special Education Programs shall be reviewed. The community shall be mobilized to partner with OUSD to achieve recommended outcomes. OUSD shall develop a policy which requires all categorical and general program funding to be used to ensure access to and mastery of the core curriculum. All resources of the district shall be applied and used to ensure that these recommendations be implemented. OUSD shall develop recruitment procedures that facilitate the hiring of administrators, teachers, counselors and support staff that reflect the culture of African American students composition of the student population. "Black children are the proxy for what ails American education in general. And so, as we fashion solutions which help Black children, we fashion solutions which help all children." The Honorable Augustus F. Hawkins APPENDIX 4: BIBLIOGRAPHY Alleyne, M. C. (1971). Linguistic Continuity of Africa in the Caribbean. In H. J. Richards (Ed), Topics in Afro-American Studies (pp. 119 - 134). New York: Black Academy Press. Chomsky, Noam (1972). Language and Mind. New York: Harcourt Brace,<Br> Janovich. California Language Arts Framework (1987). California Department of Education. De Franz, Anita (1994). Coming to Cultural and Linguistic Awakening: An African and African American Educational Vision. In Jean Frederickson (Ed) Reclaiming Our Voices: Bilingual Education Critical Pedagogy and Praxis. Ontario (CA): California Association for Bilingual Education. Delpit, Lisa (1988). "The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People's Children." Harvard Education Review, Vol. 58, No. 3. Dillard, J. L. (1973). Black English: Its History and Usage in the United States. New York: Vintage Books. Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman (1978). An Introduction to Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Greenberg. J. H. (1966). Essays in Linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hale-Benson, Janice (1994). Unbank the Fire. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Hilliard, Asa (1987). Testing African American Students: A Question of Validity. A Special Issue of The Negro Education Review. Hilliard, Asa (1995). The Maroon Within Us. Publishers Group West. Hoover, Mary (1990). Successful Black Schools. Oakland California: NABRLE Publications. O'Grady, W., M. Dobrovolsky, and M. Arnoff (1993). Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction. New York: St. Martins Press. Ogbu, John (1978) Minority Education and Caste. New York: Academic Press. Smith, Ernie A. (1994). The Historical Development of African American Language. Los Angeles: Watts College Press. Smitherman, Geneva (1994). Black Talk. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Turner, Lorenzo D. (1974). Africanisms in the Gullah Dialect. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Vass, Winifred K. (1979). The Bantu Speaking Heritage of the United States. Los Angeles: Center for Afro-American Studies, University of California, Los Angeles. Welmers, W. E. (1973). African Language Structures. Berkeley: University of California Press. Williams, Robert L. (1975). Ebonics: The True Language of Black Folks. St. Louis: Institute of Black Studies. Marcyliena Morgan UCLA Department of Anthropology 341 Haines Hall Box 951553 Los Angeles, California 90095-1553 mhmorgan@ucla.edu 310-206-7898 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 10:05:54 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: ALICE FABER <faber@HASKINS.YALE.EDU> Subject: Re Ebonics To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> In response to William King's question about why the American Speech Language and Hearing Association was cited with regard to the dialect question, I can only surmise that their Maryland office issued some kind of statement. At least since I've known people associated with ASHA, they've had curriculum initiatives requiring that Speech-Pathology and Audiology students have some course work in multiculturalism. These courses must be offered in order for a program to be accredited (and students in non-accredited programs aren't eligible for ASHA-sponsored licensure, though they may be eligible for licences in some states). Also, and this is something I haven't seen anywhere in the discussion of the whole Oakland question, the National Institute for Deafness and Communication Disorders (part of the National Institutes of Health, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services) has had several requests for proposals regarding minority language. The most recent one that I've seen involves long-term contracts for studying normal phonological development in VBE speakers as well as in Spanish-dominant children, and, following that, development of clinical assessment instruments for diagnosing various sorts of speech and language disorders in these populations (pardon my clinical-speak). There's a very real concern that children with phonological features characteristic of VBE (eg, substitution of /f/ for /th/) might get referred to the school speech pathologist, not to mention the possibility that a well meaning teacher or speech pathologist might attribute *any* phonological difference between a VBE speaking child's speech and "standard" English to the phonology of VBE and *not* refer a child who really does have a problem for intervention. What this really boils down to is: are the right kids getting referred for the right kind of help? And, I suspect (without having actually read the text of the Oakland resolution) that this is exactly what the Oakland school board is concerned with as well. Alice Faber faber@haskins.yale.edu Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 10:36:59 -0600 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Salikoko Mufwene <s-mufwene@UCHICAGO.EDU> Subject: Re: "Ebonics" To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> At 10:48 AM 12/26/96 -0500, you wrote: > >Does anyone know where I can get the text of the Oakland School Board's >complete statement on the subject? My local newspaper published a highly >negative editorial in which they asserted that the Board actually advocated >"teaching ebonics in the schools." This seems mistaken to me, but I'd like to >see the full text before I comment in public. > Ron: I was traveling when the whole thing started. When reporters from the Chicago Tribune and the New York Times called me and started with a similar comment, I retorted that what they said could not be true because it would imply that the Oakland School Board would deprive Oakland African-American kids of their right to be competitive in the American business world. I urged them to make a distinction between talking about AAVE (or paying attention to its features) and teaching AAVE. It takes some ground work before discussing the real issues with these journalists. I found the New York reporter who called me rather silly, interested more in whether or not AAVE is a separate language than in the real issues behind the decision, once put in perspective. She was not very much interested in my telling her that the problem should be "de-ethnicized" so that we may see what proportion of underprivileged American children may be in the same kind of situation, regardless of their ethnic background. I hate to think how my comments to her may be distorted--a big danger with telephone interviews. The Chicago Tribune reporter called me back to read to me how he cited me but warned me that his editors may change things--which still terrifies me, but we cannot be silent. Somebody told me that Jessie Jackson protested against the decision. I asked, "what decision?" Answer: not to teach standard Engish to African-American kids. I replied: Jackson is intelligent and I would protest against such a decision too. The issue is sensitive and different people are reacting to different reports. Ron, I am assuming that the Oakland School Board would not be stupid enough to refuse to teach standard English to African-American kids and that they simply want a different approach. This may also be the time for us to clarify to journalists dialects of the same language need not operate by the same grammatical rules and that differences do not lie only in lexical and phonological features. Oops, I made this statement to the New York Times reporter and I had to paraphrase myself more than twice. (What do you know, I ask for a "Z-Tejas" Restaurant and I am directed to a steak house!) Sali. ****************************************************** Salikoko S. Mufwene s-mufwene@uchicago.edu University of Chicago (773)702-8531 Department of Linguistics Fax: (773)834-0924 1010 East 59th Street Chicago, IL 60637, USA http://humanities.uchicago.edu/humanities/linguistics/faculty/mufwene.html ******************************************************* Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 13:25:21 -0700 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: William King <wfking@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU> Subject: Re: "Ebonics" To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199612261713.KAA16444@listserv.ccit.arizona.EDU> Does anyone know why AP used the American Speech and Hearing Association as the source for dialect information in their coverage, or are they just sloppy? Bill King University of Arizona Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 21:22:39 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: "Jeutonne P. Brewer" <jpbrewer@HAMLET.UNCG.EDU> Subject: Re: "Ebonics" To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199612261638.LAA03937@wally.uncg.EDU> I really appreciated the comments about Ebonics. Thanks to Dennis, Ron, and Sali for timely comments and reminders. If I remember correctly, Ebonics as a term (and idea) appeared in the 1980s (perhaps the late 70s). Does anyone remember a good reference or two about Ebonics? I'll be doing a search soon to refresh my memory because I am boing to include a discussion of the subject in my undergraduate course next semester. Sali, your comments about the problems in referring to standard English are certainly appropriate. However, I think there is a double bind here. We cannot escape reference to a standard, and yet to refer to a standard complicates matters. I think all of us face this problem with classes each semester as well as in answering questions from students, colleagues, and the media. ********************************************** Jeutonne P. Brewer, Associate Professor Department of English University of North Carolina at Greensboro Greensboro, NC 27412 email: jpbrewer@hamlet.uncg.edu URL: http://www.uncg.edu/~jpbrewer *********************************************** Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 13:08:21 -0600 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Salikoko Mufwene <s-mufwene@UCHICAGO.EDU> Subject: Re: "Ebonics" To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> At 09:22 PM 12/26/96 -0500, you wrote: >Sali, your comments about the problems in referring to standard >English are certainly appropriate. However, I think there is a >double bind here. We cannot escape reference to a standard, and >yet to refer to a standard complicates matters. I think all of >us face this problem with classes each semester as well as in >answering questions from students, colleagues, and the media. > What concerns me is not reference to standard English; it is rather what is identified as "standard." The term has too often been misused in the literature generally in reference to varieties spoken by white Americans. This is perhaps more obvious in the literature that tries to account for the development of AAVE by decreolization: as African Americans interact more and more with whites, who speak standard English... The reality is that AAVE speakers interact perhaps more often with speakers of white nonstandard vernaculars (especially in rural areas) than with those of standard English--if educated colloquial English is what is meant by "standard English" in the same literature. To non-native speakers like myself, standard English ends up being an elusive, ill-defined variety. (On the other hand, AAVE itself--like presumably other vernaculars-- is an elusive, ill-defined variety itself, isn't it? The problem may lie in part in attempts to "defining" language varieties by linguistic features--who knows?) Sali. ****************************************************** Salikoko S. Mufwene s-mufwene@uchicago.edu University of Chicago (773)702-8531 Department of Linguistics Fax: (773)834-0924 1010 East 59th Street Chicago, IL 60637, USA http://humanities.uchicago.edu/humanities/linguistics/faculty/mufwene.html ******************************************************* Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 09:36:10 CDT Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Randy Roberts <Robertsr@EXT.MISSOURI.EDU> Subject: Ebonics 1973- To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> The following publication might help date the early use of the term ebonics. Ebonics: the true language of Black folks. Edited by Robert L. Williams. Published St. Louis: Institute of Black Studies, 1975. "Essays selected from papers submitted to a conference held January 1973 in St. Louis." Randy Roberts University of Missouri-Columbia robertsr@ext.missouri.edu Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 20:04:24 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Dennis Baron <debaron@UIUC.EDU> Subject: Oakland's Ebonics Comments: To: wpa-l@asuvm.inre.asu.edu, LINGUIST@TAMVM1.TAMU.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> FYI. Comments and suggestions on the appended essay are welcome. Dennis _______ Dennis Baron 217-333-2392 Department of English fax: 217-333-4321 University of Illinois email: debaron@uiuc.edu 608 South Wright Street Urbana, IL 61801 Oakland's Ebonics by Dennis Baron In November, 1986 California began a new wave of language legislation when it passed a voter referendum making English the official language of the state. Ten years later, the Oakland, California, School Board reversed the English-only trend and drew national attention by declaring Ebonics, or Black English, the speech of many African Americans, to be a language in its own right, not a dialect of English. The School Board justified this by citing research into the West African origins of some aspects of Black speech. Someone once said that a language is a dialect with an army and a navy. The schoolchildren of Oakland, California, who are predominantly African American, do not have the kind of might that brings with it linguistic prestige. The School Board tried to do something to change the negative image of Black language by calling it Ebonics and asking teachers to learn something about the speech of their students. But the American public reacted to the School Board's declaration of linguistic independence as it would to any act of secession. Black leaders and intellectuals condemned the Board's action. They denounced Black speech as slangy and non-standard, unworthy of the classroom, despite the fact that many of Oakland's students were bringing it to school. Commentators white and black condemned the separatism that would result from any recognition of Black English. They warned that Oakland's Ebonics would give schoolchildren a misplaced sense of pride. Their continued use of Black English would surely exclude them from higher education and the corporate boardrooms of the nation. Cynics saw the move as yet another gaffe of political correctness, an overzealous Afro-centric reflex, or a disingenuous ploy for Oakland to get its hands on more bilingual education dollars, though the federal government ruled years ago that speakers of Black English did not qualify as bilingual for funding purposes. But a quiet minority wondered whether Oakland was simply trying to question why a preponderance of African American schoolchildren wind up in remedial and not gifted programs. Suddenly thrust into the national spotlight, Oakland school board members too have been trying to figure out just what they did mean by their vote. They didn't want to teach Ebonics, they wanted to teach about Ebonics. They wanted their students to learn standard English. Perhaps approaching it as a foreign language might help where other methods have failed. And one or two people have asked, just what is a language anyway, and why do people get so upset about language that they feel compelled to vote it in or out? We can say that two people use the same language if they can understand one another's speech. If they can't understand one another, they are speaking separate languages. But we define languages politically and culturally, as well as by degree of comprehension. Mandarin and Cantonese are not mutually intelligible, yet both are Chinese. They are held together on the mainland by an army and a navy and a common writing system, and they are held together internationally by a cultural definition of what it means to be Chinese. Serbian and Croatian are mutually intelligible, though they use different alphabets, but because of their armies they now live apart as separate languages. Noah Webster once argued that American and British English were separate languages. Language both shapes and reflects reality. A few years ago the sociolinguist William Labov warned that despite the unifying forces of mass communication and public education, the speech of American Blacks and whites was diverging, a sign that the social distance between the two groups was increasing rather than decreasing. The Oakland School Board's action draws our attention to this uncomfortable fact. The linguistic differences that exist in the United States are symptoms of separateness, not its causes. If Oakland is prepared to characterize its students as strangers in a strange land, in need of training in English as a Second Language, it is doing so out of a fear that we really are drifting farther apart. Making English official, as California and twenty-five other states have done, will not ensure that everybody speaks English. I doubt that elevating Ebonics to the status of a language, and employing ESL methods will get Oakland's students to use standard English or score higher on standardized tests. But even if minority students use the majority dialect, they may find that it takes a lot more than speaking standard English to get accepted into the mainstream. Sometimes it takes an army and a navy. Or the Supreme Court. Or the Civil Rights Act. Or perhaps a school board waking us up to a long-neglected problem. _______________ Dennis Baron is professor of English and linguistics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. _____________________________________ Dennis Baron debaron@uiuc.edu Department of English office: 217-333-2392 University of Illinois fax: 217-333-4321 608 S. Wright Street home: 217-384-1683 Urbana, IL 61801 Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 15:21:47 -0500 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Ron Butters <RonButters@AOL.COM> Subject: Re: Oakland's Ebonics Comments: To: dennisbaron <debaron@uiuc.EDU> To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Good article Dennis, EXCEPT for the following passage: "A few years ago the sociolinguist William Labov warned that despite the unifying forces of mass communication and public education, the speech of American Blacks and whites was diverging, a sign that the social distance between the two groups was increasing rather than decreasing. The Oakland School Board's action draws our attention to this uncomfortable fact." Linguistic divergence is scarcely a FACT--it was Labov's OPINION, and it brought forth a good deal of criticism (see, e.g., my book, THE DEATH OF BLACK ENGLISH) from other linguists. There is a lot of evidence that contradicts the divergence hypothesis. At best it is a simplistic THEORY, not a scientific "fact." Please don't confuse the public any more than they already are confused! Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 21:24:36 -0600 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Salikoko Mufwene <s-mufwene@UCHICAGO.EDU> Subject: Re: Oakland's Ebonics To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> At 03:21 PM 12/25/96 -0500, you wrote: > >Linguistic divergence is scarcely a FACT--it was Labov's OPINION, and it >brought forth a good deal of criticism (see, e.g., my book, THE DEATH OF >BLACK ENGLISH) from other linguists. There is a lot of evidence that >contradicts the divergence hypothesis. At best it is a simplistic THEORY, not >a scientific "fact." Please don't confuse the public any more than they >already are confused! > Thanks, Ron, for your comment. I hesitated whether or not I should say something abou the same observations of Dennis Baron's. I also hope that linguists will recognize the Oakland situation the extent to which our scholarship on AAVE may have contributed partially to confusion of issues. I have had a hard time extricating things to reporters from the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune who were more interested in whether or not Ebonics/AAVE is really a separate language, as if this was the end of the story. I did not mind most of your essay, Dennis, but would like to note that African-Americans, even among the most successful, know that "it takes a lot more than speaking standard English to get accepted into the mainstream." I think the main concern here is getting the language excuse out of the way. One particular tragedy in this situation is the fact that the language problem has been "ethnicized," as it is discussed as an African-American problem. It would be wiser to present it as a general problem likely to be experienced by speakers of nonstandard vernacular varieties of English in general, regardless of their ethnic background. However, if we could re-examine the linguistic literature and see how many times the term "standard" has been misused in opposition in AAVE and in reference to varieties spoken by Whites, can we blame the media for confusing the issues? Sali. ****************************************************** Salikoko S. Mufwene s-mufwene@uchicago.edu University of Chicago (773)702-8531 Department of Linguistics Fax: (773)834-0924 1010 East 59th Street Chicago, IL 60637, USA http://humanities.uchicago.edu/humanities/linguistics/faculty/mufwene.html ******************************************************* Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 17:04:23 -0800 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Leanne Hinton <hinton@VIOLET.BERKELEY.EDU> Subject: ebonics To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> As requested by a member of ADS, I am forwarding a missive I sent to the linguistic anthropology newsgroup about ebonics. (The editorial to the SF Chronicle I refer to below has not yet been published; they may have decided to ignore it.) Sincerely, Leanne Hinton ================================== There has been so much misinformation being promulgated about the Oakland Ebonics resolution that I felt compelled to respond. Here's a short editorial I wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle. What I did not approach in the editorial is the issue of whether Black English Vernacular should be called a different language or a dialect of English. While we linguists may feel compelled to use our own technical definitions of "dialects" and "languages" based on tests of mutual intelligibility, we are also aware that politics plays a big role as well in whether linguistic varieties are defined as separate languages or as dialects of a single language, and often the political issues hold sway over the technical. Whether Black English is defined as a dialect of English or a separate language can have important political and financial implications, but it would not change the pedagogy that Oakland has decided to adopt. Leanne Hinton =================================== The furor over Oakland's recently-adopted resolution regarding Ebonics is based in large part on these issues: (1) there is a misunderstanding that the Oakland school system wants to teach Black English in the schools; (2) there is a sense of outrage among some that a stigmatized variety of English would be treated as a valid way of talking. When I attended the school board meeting where the Ebonics resolution was adopted, all discussion in support of the resolution, by board members, parents, and teachers, was centered around the importance of teaching standard English to children. This resolution is not about teaching Black English, but about the best way of teaching standard English. The children the board is concerned about have learned Black English at home, a linguistic variety that has many differences from standard English. In order to teach them standard English, the board has rightfully concluded that teachers need to understand and be able to teach children the differences between these two linguistic varieties. It has also rightfully concluded that Black English is not just some random form of "broken-down English" that is intrinsically inferior to standard English, but is rather a speech variety with its own long history, its own logical rules of grammar, discourse practices that are traceable to West African languages, and a vibrant oral literature that is worthy of respect. Black English has also been one of the major contributors of vocabulary to American English in general. The notion that there is something just plain "bad" about nonstandard varieties of English is so deeply imbedded in the minds of many people that they tend to believe that children speak Black English out of contrariness, and need to be corrected by punishment. Educators have known better than that for a long time now, and don't want to be disrespectful of African American childrens' way of speech; but that very respect has left them without a way of teaching standard English. The method being embraced now by the Oakland School Board fills that void. By escaping the trap of thinking of nonstandard Black English as a set of "errors," and instead treating it as really is, a different system, not a wrong one, standard English can be taught by helping children develop an awareness of the contrast between their two speech varieties, and learn to use one without losing their pride in the other. We should applaud the Oakland School Board for a sensible decision, and stop bothering them with all this bad-mouthing, jive, guff, and hullaballoo (four calques and loanwords that come to American English from African languages via Black English); and let them get on with the task of implementing their new policy. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Leanne Hinton, Professor Dept. of Linguistics University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-2650 email: hinton@violet.berkeley.edu fax: (510) 643-5688 phone: (510) 643-7621 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 23:43:21 -0600 Reply-To: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> From: Salikoko Mufwene <s-mufwene@UCHICAGO.EDU> Subject: op-ed/EBONICS Comments: To: hel-l@ebbs.english.vt.edu To: Multiple recipients of list ADS-L <ADS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> Message-ID: <1360133439-538973@wi.net> X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 7785 Dear friends: I'd like to share with you the text of an Op-Ed article that the New York Times invited me to write last Thursday, after I had expressed my dissatisfaction, through the University of Chicago's News Office, about an interview I had had with one of their reporters. I submitted the article on Friday, mid-day, and was told today that it will appear some time after New Year's. I understand it will be trimmed. So you may as well see the original text. Sali. Ebonics Or African-American English: What's In A Name And Can School Systems Ignore It? By Salikoko S. Mufwene* The Oakland School Board's decision to recognize African-American English, called "Ebonics" by some African-American scholars, as a separate language from American standard English should force us to look at a deeper question. Linguists have learned that there are other nonstandard American vernaculars. There are also many equally underprivileged children among whites in various parts of the country and other ethnic groups whose problems also need to be addressed. We must come up with a more general educational reform for all students who speak nonstandard English. And if African-American youngsters are the majority of those who wind up in special needs programs, this may reveal some negative aspect of our society that in itself deserves attention. School boards alone may not be able to resolve the social class problems. The more we focus on ethnic background and not educational needs, the more we may be hurting those we want to help-perhaps stigmatizing them even more. According to the Dec. 20 New York Times, "Blacks make up 53 percent of the (Oakland) district's enrollment. But they are 71 percent of special education students and only 37 percent of students in gifted and talented classes. Blacks' 1.8 grade point average on a 4.0 scale is the lowest in the district." These are sickening statistics, and one cannot dismiss the contribution of language offhand-even though it may not be the only relevant factor. The city, the state and the nation should do whatever they can to avoid failing such an important proportion of our youth, on whom the future depends. The name "Ebonics" is not necessary. The variety itself is not a separate language any more than are other nonstandard American English vernaculars. Neither need it be stigmatized any more than the other vernaculars. However recognizing African-American English as a legitimate dialect of English does not mean that it operates by the same grammatical rules or that it differs from standard English only by its vocabulary and its phonetic system-including its distinctive pronunciation of words and intonations. African-American English is not lazy speech or the result of some inherent inability of descendants of Africans to acquire English "adequately." There is plenty of evidence against such fallacies. Perhaps overemphasis on the influence of African languages in the development of African-American English has not helped dispel these myths. Although we know little about how African-American English developed, the fact is that every variety of American English is the result of language contact in a new social environment. All of them have some nonstandard British English influence, which is in part why all American varieties of English are different from British varieties. On the other hand, it is not by accident that nonstandard vernaculars in both North America and the United Kingdom share several features. For instance, multiple negatives that do not undo each other (e.g., "I ain't seen nobody nowhere"), usage of "done" before a verb to show that a state of affairs has been obtained already (e.g., "he done gone and took it"), and lack of subject-verb agreement in the present tense or in the past tense of "be" (e.g., "he don't care" and "we was beat"). Many of the British who brought English to America were speaking nonstandard vernaculars of their language themselves. This fact doesn't deny the role of Niger Congo languages in determining the patterns of African-American English. One must, however, be cautious about attributing every peculiarity to this group of languages. Still, regardless of the factors forming the African-American English system, the tragic reality remains that American schools are failing a large proportion of the speakers of this vernacular. Shouldn't something be done? This is the question that the Oakland School Board is addressing, and board members should be praised for doing so. The main issue is whether the proposal to teach standard English to African-American English speakers by using techniques for second language teaching is justified. Here I think the Board needs more constructive advice than criticism. The idea of teaching standard English as a non-native variety is certainly a good move; after all, standard English is native to very few. This educational approach might also work well with other groups of students who speak nonstandard American English. However, my concern with teaching standard English as a second language is that it may fail simply because speakers of African-American English, like those of other nonstandard vernaculars, know that they are being taught another variety of their language. While the linguistic problems they face are due largely to structural differences between standard English and African-American English (as in cases of second language learning), one need not specifically teach standard English to African-American English-speakers the same way English would be taught to speakers of Chinese, Swahili or Spanish. Such an approach to the problem may become counterproductive, because it disenfranchises African-American English-speakers, making them feel like foreigners in their own country. Teachers should be trained to identify their students' problems correctly and use better techniques to teach standard English more successfully. It is useful to get inspiration from second language teaching, but one should not apply those techniques literally, because the conditions of teaching and learning are not the same. One question that concerns me is whether the problem the Oakland School Board is addressing is an ethnic problem. Are African-American kids the only ones in the predicament that has been debated? Are we right in ethnicizing the problem or should we rather treat it as a general social class problem-to the extent that African-American English is typically associated with the lower stratum of African-American society and with the ghetto? (I will ignore the fact that not everyone in the ghetto speaks African-American English as stereotyped in academia.) Some have speculated that the Oakland School Board embraced the term "Ebonics" to clear the way for state and federal funding. It is a shame that state and federal investments in school programs are so rigidly legislated that a school system would have to resort to this kind of strategy. If they really calculated things this way, can we really blame them? On the other hand, is it not embarrassing that it may be more difficult to obtain funds to address problems of American citizens in school than to secure funds for the linguistic needs of immigrants? Both groups are entitled to equal chances of success in a society where beating the competition is almost a motto. * Salikoko S. Mufwene is Chairman of the Department of Linguistics at the University of Chicago
Take Note! | Table of Contents | Syllabus | eForum | Search
The HyperTextBooks | The English Main Page | The Composition Links