Chapter five of Lisa Delpit’s, The Skin That We Speak focuses on the stereotypes that we often place on people who speak a different dialect than our own. If we speak the same language, and we think our dialect is the “correct” way, then we often feel that the other speaker is inferior. When we say that the other speaker is inferior, we are saying that their dialect is inferior; however, according to the novel, no language or dialect is inferior.
If no language or dialect is inferior and each is complex in its own way, who decided how to distinguish between what’s right and what’s wrong? The features of AAVE described in the article, “Phonological and Grammatical Features of African American Vernacular English,” seem as complex as the features of Standard English; however, AAVE is not accepted in the classroom because someone decided it was “wrong.” Why was this decided if, again, no dialect is inferior?
If these stereotypes didn’t exist, would SE exist? That is, if we weren’t taught a “correct” way to speak, would Nonstandard English be the accepted SE? On the other hand, could both AAVE and SE be spoken in the same classroom? And if the two were spoken, would the lessons still be as effective? If students understand the grammatical rules of SE, should they be required to speak and write SE in the classroom or only write it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen Lisa Delpit’s daughter came home from school speaking AAE, she was horrified at her daughter’s words. The question that immediately ran through her mind was, “What was it about her language that evoked such a strong response?” Lisa decided in order to answer this question and gain a deeper understanding of her reaction, she needed to answer another important question. If her daughter could acquire another dialect so easily, then why was it such a struggle for other African American children to grasp and utilize Standard English?
ReplyDeleteLisa’s daughter turned out to be one of her best resources in finding out more about this phenomenon. One day, Lisa asked her daughter if she knew why her mother corrected her speech, and if she understood that people would judge her intelligence based on her language. Maya understood why and responded by saying, “Well, that’s their problem!” Lisa admitted this was true, but told her daughter that it would matter if they decided whether or not she got into college or the job she wanted. Maya saw her point, but told her that she didn’t have to worry about her because she knew how to code switch. Lisa was astounded by her response and questioned further. She came to realize that, “acquiring an additional code comes from identifying with the people who speak it, from connecting the language form with all that is self-affirming and esteem-building, inviting and fun.
In short, students are rarely being given the opportunity to talk in the classroom and practice the language; and when they speak incorrectly, they are reprimanded. In this inquiry Gabrielle asks, “Could both AAVE and SE be spoken in the same classroom? And if the two were spoken, would the lessons still be as effective?” In my opinion, the answer is yes. Delpit explains that students are not interested in the curriculum because they are not connected with the language and don’t see the use in learning it. It is our job as teachers to “find out the students’ interests and build an academic program around them.” Another question raised in this inquiry asked if students should be required to speak and write in SE in the classroom, as opposed to just writing it. I think that it’s a good idea to model speaking in “SE” in the classroom, but also speak in a way that students can understand and can relate to. Teachers will most likely require writing to be in SE, but unless they plan to never hear from their students they might want to allow a little room for expression.