Thursday, August 27, 2009
Joanne Kilgour Dowdy’s “Ovuh Dyuh” discusses Dowdy’s insecurities concerning her search for the “right” language, and consequently the “right” identity for herself, as she is growing up as a young girl, and later as a young woman, in Trinidad. Dowdy relates her experiences as wearing several different “masks” and “playing” someone else. When Dowdy finally finds the balance between her two languages, and her two “selves”, she describes people like herself as having a need to live in “double realities” and the need to be “in two places at the same time, ovuh dyuh and here too” (11). Another way Dowdy addresses this same topic is by discussing the challenges of switching between the “home language to the public language” (13). But what is Dowdy’s true language? Is it Trinidadian that she speaks privately, or is it English that she speaks publicly? Is it in both? If all the Trinidadians are being encouraged to speak more and more Standard English, what will happen to the Trinidad language? As future teachers, how do we go about approaching students that will have similar conflicts as Dowdy has? Should we encourage both languages and encourage the student to find their “double reality”, or should we tell the student to leave their “home language” at the door and bring their “public language” to class?
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Inquiry 1: Ovuh Dyuh
Joanne Dowdy gives her account of what it was like as an adolescent in Trinidad. Her mother’s wish was for her to become well acquainted with British English. This created a distance between Joanne and her peers. Joanne dealt with the struggle to be herself, or lose herself. This reminds me of using curse words around your friends. In the classroom and at home with your parents, curse words are not allowed (at least in your adolescent years). When students use curse words in front of teachers or elders they are looked at as a “disobedient student”, but yet with your peers you feel the need to use them to fit in and look cool. My question is why is it so hard to accept that people are different from one another? I think with the invention of the internet languages and people have become more and more interconnected and the newer generations are better at recognizing each other’s differences and accepting them. As languages have evolved they have merged with one another. In 1066 French was spread throughout the England. Through this the English language picked up little pieces of French and Latin. So, when, if ever, will it happen that the English language in America starts to pick up little bits of Italian or little pieces of Spanish? Ciao!
Her English May Be Good, But Her Philosophy Isn't
According to Joanne Dowdy, language is not simply a method of communication or a tool that certain sentient creatures have developed but is rather an essential and irrevocable facet of personhood. A person, says she, cannot truly be self-actualized (in a broad sense) if he or she is not allowed the freedom of his or her native tongue. An assertion like this is a bold one and one that demands thoughtful evaluation—perhaps more than Dowdy gave it herself. Inevitably, it leads one to the question: Can someone lead a meaningful, comfortable, fulfilled life identifying with a tongue that is not truly native?
The question, no doubt, has many contrived answers and yet even more questions that it raises. What is one’s native tongue pragmatically, metaphysically, and ethically? Is it the language that one heard when he or she was born? Is it the language in which he or she had the most formal or informal training? Does someone who is raised in a bilingual household have more than one native tongue, or must he or she choose the one which is truly native? Perhaps the problem in the first place is not really one that is specific to language but has much more to do with a general principle of oppression. Perhaps forcing someone to speak a foreign language is no different than forcing him or her to study in a field where there is no interest or forcing him or her to wear a particular garment. The implications that a worthwhile life cannot be come by unless it is lived in an atmosphere of some preferred speech is problematic indeed. The challenges may not be insurmountable, but the precipice of understanding is nowhere in sight.
The question, no doubt, has many contrived answers and yet even more questions that it raises. What is one’s native tongue pragmatically, metaphysically, and ethically? Is it the language that one heard when he or she was born? Is it the language in which he or she had the most formal or informal training? Does someone who is raised in a bilingual household have more than one native tongue, or must he or she choose the one which is truly native? Perhaps the problem in the first place is not really one that is specific to language but has much more to do with a general principle of oppression. Perhaps forcing someone to speak a foreign language is no different than forcing him or her to study in a field where there is no interest or forcing him or her to wear a particular garment. The implications that a worthwhile life cannot be come by unless it is lived in an atmosphere of some preferred speech is problematic indeed. The challenges may not be insurmountable, but the precipice of understanding is nowhere in sight.
Inquiry 1
In Joanne Kilgour Dowdy’s novel The Skin That We Speak, the main character is torn between her native language, Trinidadian, which connects her to her people and British English, which she can use to advance her social status. The “good girl” speaks in two different languages to please different people. When she wants to fit in with her friends and fellow Trinidadians, she chooses to speak in her native tongue, but when she is in a social setting like school, she feels as if she must please her mother and grandmother who have worked so hard to achieve a higher social status. How does this teenage girl know who she is if she cannot identify herself with a language? She uses each language depending on whom she needs to impress. Since she grew up with the each language that each had a particular purpose in life, she never got to choose who she wanted to be. If one were to ask her who she was, could she answer? In the first chapter “Ovuh Dyuh”, the “good girl” did not express which language she liked better or which one she wanted to use. She simply spoke whichever language was necessary. Is this girl loosing parts of her identity when she switches languages, or did she ever have one from the beginning? Will she ever get a chance to choose who she wants to be?
Language as a facet of identity
The main point of the first chapter of The Skin That We Speak seemed to be not necessarily an argument but just an account of the way Dowdy used her language as a point of connection or rejection with not just her academic peers in elementary and secondary school but also with her strictly "right" speaking mother and grandmother. The idea of language as a facet of identity could pose problems to especially young people trying to mold whatever kind of identity they can. I feel the most important lesson learned from Dowdy's tribulations is the fact that if properly honed, code-switching can be an extremely advantageous tool to possess. Code-switching allows whoever masters it to flow freely across many social boundaries constructed by language the same way mastering different languages fluently to the point of accent control allows its masters to act as a native miles away from their homeland. The problem is overcoming the desire to be defined by your language. While taking pride in heritage is important, it should not make others feel excluded. However, we don't live in a perfect world and we do feel a special kinship to those with similar speech traits. We must all find a way to stay on the right side of pride and arrogance if such a thing is possible. In schools especially, diversity of language should be encouraged and teachers should never draw strict boundaries labeling some dialects higher over others. Knibb high football rules.
Dare to Explore?
Language is described as a means of survival in the first chapter of the novel. British English is associated with public success while Trinidadian is associated with the home and family in this chapter. The character in the novel finds it difficult to reach a happy medium between the language she is to speak at home and in the public. The exploration into the double life she is living raises many questions concerning language and identity. At what cost is one willing to give up a native language for the sake of being successful in the public eye? The character finds herself speaking in British English in front of her friends and being laughed at because she pronounced the “th” sound in the word “there”. Each time she uses British English she disconnects more and more with her own language and thus her culture. “The more I succeeded in this role, the more I felt segregated from my peers,” (Dowdy 8). This then raises the question – does a decrease in the use of a native language trigger a loss of identity? As the character disconnects more and more with her family and friends, does she lose a sense of who she is? In the case of the text, the character’s native language was still present, and she demonstrated this when she became the “good girl” in school. When the character was otherwise imitating the English language, the author described it as putting barriers or “chains” on a native language. Do these chains have the power to completely lockup a native language? Once a native language is locked away for some time, is there ever a point when it simply fades away? And at what cost is one willing to explore this?
Inquiry: Speaking Freely
In Dowdy's first chapter of The Skin That We Speak, we are introduced to the fact that our language affects far more than just our means of communication. The language that we speak has to do with our identity, and also how we are seen through others' eyes. She describes in her high school years that she wore "the mask of language" enabling her to blend in and be accepted by her peers. This happens all the time especially at the high school level. We see it we use slang terms amongst our peers. We do it to try to fit into our surroundings, almost in a survival like manner. If we hear someone speaking in a different dialect, we immediately recognize it as foreign, and it is difficult not to distance it from ourselves. We immediately see the unfortunate person as "not one of us." The foreigner has to overcome the "linguistic tension" that will be present before being accepted into his or her new surroundings.
This forceful usage of language seems to complicate things when we are trying to express ourselves, especially in our fits of passion. Dowdy explains this as our common “loss for words.” We have to go through an “act of translation, cooling the passion of the thought.” This diversion from the formal nature of the expected language blurs the line of what is considered acceptable in public conversation. Wouldn’t it be more natural to be able to fully express our thoughts all of the time? …Then again, this might have its repercussions as well.
what would you do?
Joanne Dowdy explores the tension of the two languages spoken in Trinidad, British English and Trinidadian, in the first chapter of The Skin We Speak. British English is spoken as a well-cultivated language, the "right" language, whereas Trinidadian is conveyed as the natives' innermost feelings. With this conflict of right and wrong many in Trinidad are faced with the problem of knowing when and where to speak both languages to suit their lifestyles and desires.
Societies put too much pressure on different cultures to conform to speak the "right" way, but why? What is the "right" way and why is it so important to speak? Many claim if everyone spoke correct English then it would make communication easier and make the speaker sound more intelligent. British English is a well-rounded language that many countries can communicate at a scholarly level. But what is the measurement of intelligence? Is it the appearance of a person, their language or their knowledge and wisdom? Here stems an issue concerning intelligence. How can a person's intelligence be measured and valued based on their dialect? There have been many people in this world that have been noted as geniuses and some did not sound "intelligent". Dialect is a cultural aspect of a person's life. It is their identity of region, not a measure of intelligence.
Is the hidden agenda of society to change a cultures' language to change their regional identity or is it really to make them sound more intelligent?
Inquiry1: Like a Phoenix
In post-colonial Trinidad, Joanna Kilgour Dowdy grows up in a world splintered by language. While the language of English and once Trinidadian oppressors dominates and is held as the educated tongue of the elite, the native Trinidadian language is looked down upon as low class and vulgar. As such it is not used as an official language of business; it is only suitable for “the realm of entertainment” (11). The “good girl” and those in desired positions must learn to speak English and speak it as well as the British, but one must wonder: what does this mean for Trinidadian? Will this language be stamped out and eradicated as settlers have previously done to entire civilizations? Or is it possible that the vigor of people such as Dowdy and her associates could be an unexpected determining factor? They hold the native tongue and culture of Trinidad as something to be embraced because it holds a representation of their country and its proud and glorious ancestry. With these same ideas inspired in others, perhaps the rest of Trinidad will see that it is now free to rule itself in Trinidadian and not English, that the former British rule from which it has been freed is not needed to tell it that it is civilized or intelligent or the good country because it confirms to the British ideology of what a good civilized, intelligent country should be (a reflection of Brittan). In doing this, Trinidadian stands a chance of regaining the throne as the ruling language of its nation. Let it not be forgotten that English was once considered a low class, vulgar language, and Trinidad is living proof that it has risen from such ranks to conquer whole lands and become the elite tongue. Therefore, why should Trinidadian be written off as a language incapable of becoming more that what other people – people not of Trinidad – denounce it to be?
Inquiry 1: Divided Thoughts
“Ovuh Dyuh” is Joanne Kilgour Dowdy’s account of how the two languages of Trinidad, British English and Trinidadian, are viewed in Trinidadian society. British English is spoken as an educated, well-cultivated language that is the “right” language to speak, whereas Trinidadian is the language that expresses natives’ innermost feelings and desires, which can cause a schism in the citizens’ lives. The native language comes more easily, of course, and the idioms that are used in it are more readily available to express what they want to say. English, on the other hand, may come haltingly; the speaker may search in her mind for the “right” phrase or expression, the resulting speech coming off with less emotion, simply because the speaker couldn’t find the words. In order to be the “good girl” one must speak in English, but to be accepted in one’s personal life, Trinidadian is a necessity. Trinidadian society considers its own native language one of a lower class. This stems from the country’s colonial rule, having ended only twelve years prior to Dowdy’s article. The country is still dealing with the transition of freedom and independence from foreign government control. It is understandable that those in power would still consider English the language of power, education, and class. Perhaps as the next generation comes to power, this purview will decline and Trinidadian will no longer be considered a poor choice of language for public communication. The native language may, in time, become the language which Trinidadian newspapers are proud to print.
Would this even become an issue if one of the languages were to die out in the region? Could Trinidadian even prevail as the public language considering the opportunities English poses? Will future generations care about the native language enough to save it, or will they perhaps consider teaching their children English as a first language so as to get rid of this issue altogether? Would that be a terrible thing?
*(Someone let me know I did this right!)*
Posted by KaciElise
Would this even become an issue if one of the languages were to die out in the region? Could Trinidadian even prevail as the public language considering the opportunities English poses? Will future generations care about the native language enough to save it, or will they perhaps consider teaching their children English as a first language so as to get rid of this issue altogether? Would that be a terrible thing?
*(Someone let me know I did this right!)*
Posted by KaciElise
Friday, August 21, 2009
Welcome! Fall 2009
Welcome to our class blog. I can't wait to read and discuss with you here. Although I'm sure you don't need it, here's a reminder about norms:
-Keep it professional.
Remember that the world is your audience, and that you're representing not only yourself and LSU, but the teaching profession. What we may know is intended as a joke could appear to be utterly serious to somebody who's never met you.
-Keep it topical.
This is a forum for discussing articles and issues raised by them related to language development and diversity. Make sure your postings and comments are relevant.
-Protect your anonymity, as well as that of others.
Use either first or last names in posts, but not both.
-Seek to understand before being understood.
Voicing disagreement is productive. In order to keep it that way, make sure you understand the point with which you disagree before offering your alternative. It's always a good idea to ask for clarification.
-Hold each other to high standards.
Push each other's thinking. Don't let assumptions go unquestioned. Ask tough and interesting questions. Make connections to other ideas we've talked about. Challenge yourself to think deeply about these issues, rather than simply getting the grade.
-Keep it professional.
Remember that the world is your audience, and that you're representing not only yourself and LSU, but the teaching profession. What we may know is intended as a joke could appear to be utterly serious to somebody who's never met you.
-Keep it topical.
This is a forum for discussing articles and issues raised by them related to language development and diversity. Make sure your postings and comments are relevant.
-Protect your anonymity, as well as that of others.
Use either first or last names in posts, but not both.
-Seek to understand before being understood.
Voicing disagreement is productive. In order to keep it that way, make sure you understand the point with which you disagree before offering your alternative. It's always a good idea to ask for clarification.
-Hold each other to high standards.
Push each other's thinking. Don't let assumptions go unquestioned. Ask tough and interesting questions. Make connections to other ideas we've talked about. Challenge yourself to think deeply about these issues, rather than simply getting the grade.
Below are posts from past semesters--don't use them as models, because the assignment was different. They are dealing with the same topic, however, so you will probably find them to be interesting reading.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Linguistic Profiling, African American English, Gullah
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EPGx1icFdLQ
In my linguistics class and in English 3201, I have learned that AAVE is considered a grammatical language. However, I was never taught in any detail about its origin or history. Of course, I heard here and there that it came from slavery. But I did not know much beyond that.
In my linguistics class and in English 3201, I have learned that AAVE is considered a grammatical language. However, I was never taught in any detail about its origin or history. Of course, I heard here and there that it came from slavery. But I did not know much beyond that.
Actually, what I thought I knew about the language, I have come to learn, is incorrect.
Growing up, I've always heard this language being called Ebonics. It was not until last year at LSU that I learned it was widely known as AAVE. I always thought it was an ignorant and lazy language used by those of a lower class. I often associated it with gangs, guns, death, drugs, etc.
But this semester, my eyes have been opened to a completely different concept. Though I've met this concept with apprehension, fear, and resistance, I at times find myself understanding.
I wanted to include this video because of my ignorance. I questioned whether others in this course may have the same void of knowledge I have about AAVE.
As I was watching the video, I, for the first time this semester, slightly understood. We speak Standard English because our ancestors spoke it, and they were never forced to change their dialects. Instead, those on the African coast, the African middle men changed their languages to trade with the white Americans. They created a Pigeon language, and they still speak it today. But those who received the most suffering were the slaves. They were placed in groups in a type of reservation setting where they were held until they were shipped to America. While on these destitute reservations, the blacks (who were about to be enslaved) were separated. They were separated by language, to limit revolts. So, in order to communicate, these slaves had to create their own language, a language which is often referred to as Gullah.
What worries me is that while watching the two African Americans speak Gullah, I could barely understand. Though modern AAVE is not the same dialect as Gullah, it does have its resemblances. This made me wonder whether I truly understand AAVE? Throughout watching this video I also wondered why modern-day America is unable to teach African American children Standard English, and the different groups of people in the video came to form a language through which they could communicate? Is it because African American students feel no need to learn the language, unlike the middle men in Africa? Why can't their be a blend of AAVE and Standard English that is more acceptable and not so widely criticized? Why can't we, all as Americans, break barriers that different cultures and regions of people were able to break? Maybe our school system doesn't fail miserably because teachers constantly correct African American students. Maybe it fails miserably because we have two separate cultures and feel no need to come together and blend our cultures in anyway.
I asked my friend because I was curious of another person's point of view, why she prefers not to communicate with the black community. I found her answer very interesting. She said, "It's frustrating because not only do I not always understand them, but I hate to listen to them butcher the language." But what language? I asked her this and she said, "Standard English. In order for African American to maintain this certain identity they mess up the English language." I think I may almost be coming to a turning point, because my question would be, "But didn't we force them to take on this certain identity? And wouldn't you think that modern AAVE is African Americans' ways of trying to take Gullah and transform it into something that is more of a 'Standard English' dialect?"
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Language Issues Prove Challenge to Brown
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119393,00.html
-"It's an issue in every part of the country."
This article discusses the issue of discriminiation today in the classroom. There is a segregation of students who are native English speakers and who are not. Public schools are not fulfilling the Brown vs. Board of Education decision that states that there should be "equal access to education opportunity for all." The problem here is that the students who cannot speak proper English successfully are being separated from the students who can. This is discrimination. Just like we have discussed all semester, students who do not naturally speak proper English should not be denied an education. They should be given just as much, or even more attention by teachers so that they can learn proper English. In the article, a 17-year old student named Jackson Gao said that the high school he attended did not even have an ESL program. Do you all think that this is unfair to him? Why should be be denied an opportunity to learn through the English language?
On the other hand, some non-native English speaking students are completely lost when they are placed in English-speaking classes with no help. Should these students be separated completely in school? Or, should they be a part of English-immersion classes, like the article suggested? There is a need for more teachers who are trained in teaching bilingual classes . Should teachers be responsible for this type of language discrimination? Shound more teachers be able to speak a second language fluently? I know that here at LSU, I will be fluent in Spanish by the time I graduate! Either way, failing to address these language issues in the classroom denies education for students.
-"It's an issue in every part of the country."
This article discusses the issue of discriminiation today in the classroom. There is a segregation of students who are native English speakers and who are not. Public schools are not fulfilling the Brown vs. Board of Education decision that states that there should be "equal access to education opportunity for all." The problem here is that the students who cannot speak proper English successfully are being separated from the students who can. This is discrimination. Just like we have discussed all semester, students who do not naturally speak proper English should not be denied an education. They should be given just as much, or even more attention by teachers so that they can learn proper English. In the article, a 17-year old student named Jackson Gao said that the high school he attended did not even have an ESL program. Do you all think that this is unfair to him? Why should be be denied an opportunity to learn through the English language?
On the other hand, some non-native English speaking students are completely lost when they are placed in English-speaking classes with no help. Should these students be separated completely in school? Or, should they be a part of English-immersion classes, like the article suggested? There is a need for more teachers who are trained in teaching bilingual classes . Should teachers be responsible for this type of language discrimination? Shound more teachers be able to speak a second language fluently? I know that here at LSU, I will be fluent in Spanish by the time I graduate! Either way, failing to address these language issues in the classroom denies education for students.
Free Verse Poetry: My Texas Dialect
Where I come from
We don't ride horses to school
We don't have roaches the size of rats
Even though people who ain't from 'round here think we do
They say everything is bigger in Texas
But that don't mean everything
I ain't from the country, but I'm still a country girl
Houston is a big ole' city, but my country accent still stays
They say you can never take the Texas outta' a Texas gal
No matter what anyone says, Texas is the South for me
I'm always gonna be a Texas girl with a Texas twang
We might not ride horses to school, but we sure 'nuff ride 'em
Either at a ranch, or near Rodeo Houston time, or just for fun
Houston is full of big buildings, roads, and multiple freeways
But that doesn't mean I don't say gosh dern and fixin' to because I do
I will always be a Texas gal, born and raised,
Even if I am in Louisiana for a lil' while!
This is the dialect poem that I wrote for class when Chanclerier "xero" Skidmore came to visit. It basically describes the way that I talk when I am back home in Houston, or just hanging out with friends. I try my best to use proper grammar when I am at school, work, or in any other professional setting. The bold words resemble specific words that show my dialect. As you can see, I am very proud of where I am from, and have a lot of love for my hometown.
Throughout the semester, I have expressed my opinions on the issue of allowing students' home dialects in the classroom. I have stated that I believe that a student should not be criticized for speaking their home language, but to understand the difference between proper English and slang. I know that my Texas "twang" dialect is not proper English, and I would not even think to use that type of grammar in formal essays or papers. However, I think that it is useful to allow students to be able to write in whatever language they wish to in certain free-writing or creative assignments. Does anyone else agree with my views? Does anyone think that students should not be allowed to speak in their home languages in the classroom? There are some teachers who correct students every time they say a word that is not proper grammar. Do you think that teachers should do this? Why or why not? These are questions that I have asked myself after observing a majority of AAVE high school students this semester.
We don't ride horses to school
We don't have roaches the size of rats
Even though people who ain't from 'round here think we do
They say everything is bigger in Texas
But that don't mean everything
I ain't from the country, but I'm still a country girl
Houston is a big ole' city, but my country accent still stays
They say you can never take the Texas outta' a Texas gal
No matter what anyone says, Texas is the South for me
I'm always gonna be a Texas girl with a Texas twang
We might not ride horses to school, but we sure 'nuff ride 'em
Either at a ranch, or near Rodeo Houston time, or just for fun
Houston is full of big buildings, roads, and multiple freeways
But that doesn't mean I don't say gosh dern and fixin' to because I do
I will always be a Texas gal, born and raised,
Even if I am in Louisiana for a lil' while!
This is the dialect poem that I wrote for class when Chanclerier "xero" Skidmore came to visit. It basically describes the way that I talk when I am back home in Houston, or just hanging out with friends. I try my best to use proper grammar when I am at school, work, or in any other professional setting. The bold words resemble specific words that show my dialect. As you can see, I am very proud of where I am from, and have a lot of love for my hometown.
Throughout the semester, I have expressed my opinions on the issue of allowing students' home dialects in the classroom. I have stated that I believe that a student should not be criticized for speaking their home language, but to understand the difference between proper English and slang. I know that my Texas "twang" dialect is not proper English, and I would not even think to use that type of grammar in formal essays or papers. However, I think that it is useful to allow students to be able to write in whatever language they wish to in certain free-writing or creative assignments. Does anyone else agree with my views? Does anyone think that students should not be allowed to speak in their home languages in the classroom? There are some teachers who correct students every time they say a word that is not proper grammar. Do you think that teachers should do this? Why or why not? These are questions that I have asked myself after observing a majority of AAVE high school students this semester.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
A Bit of Scientific Thought for Our English Class
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/19/asia/talk.php
Some would suggest that there’s not a lot to debate about regarding a simple fact, but there are many important things to consider. The world’s languages are going extinct at a faster rate than any mammal, plant, fish or bird species on Earth. I read somewhere that English, Spanish, and Mandarin Chinese are the fastest growing and currently the most abundantly used languages of modern society. So suppose that one day these were the only 3 languages that were in use. What would the world lose from losing languages? With thousands of the current languages only existing in an oral form, should linguists attempt to preserve these cultural identities by converting them into a written form? It seems like somewhat of a waste of time since in some cases there are only 3 people alive who still speak the language. But because language is oftentimes a huge part of an entire culture, is it worth the time to preserve the language in order to conserve a culture of a particular community?
I would imagine that as languages begin to disappear, the number of dialects of a few languages would skyrocket. What if by the end of the century the 6 billion people of the world spoke only 1 of 3 languages? Surely the variety of dialects would out number the current number of languages in the world today. For example, the Australian dialect is very much different than that of America’s New Orleans’s dialect. And the British dialect is a much different dialect than that which would be created from the Pacific Island region.
Most people do not realize what kind of an impact losing languages would have on our globe. Maybe it’s a little extreme, but if the world would conform to only three forms of communication thousands of cultures, customs, and traditions would also disappear. We’ve worried about differences between AAVE and Standard English. Think of the dialect issues that could occur if a third of the world spoke only one language!
Some would suggest that there’s not a lot to debate about regarding a simple fact, but there are many important things to consider. The world’s languages are going extinct at a faster rate than any mammal, plant, fish or bird species on Earth. I read somewhere that English, Spanish, and Mandarin Chinese are the fastest growing and currently the most abundantly used languages of modern society. So suppose that one day these were the only 3 languages that were in use. What would the world lose from losing languages? With thousands of the current languages only existing in an oral form, should linguists attempt to preserve these cultural identities by converting them into a written form? It seems like somewhat of a waste of time since in some cases there are only 3 people alive who still speak the language. But because language is oftentimes a huge part of an entire culture, is it worth the time to preserve the language in order to conserve a culture of a particular community?
I would imagine that as languages begin to disappear, the number of dialects of a few languages would skyrocket. What if by the end of the century the 6 billion people of the world spoke only 1 of 3 languages? Surely the variety of dialects would out number the current number of languages in the world today. For example, the Australian dialect is very much different than that of America’s New Orleans’s dialect. And the British dialect is a much different dialect than that which would be created from the Pacific Island region.
Most people do not realize what kind of an impact losing languages would have on our globe. Maybe it’s a little extreme, but if the world would conform to only three forms of communication thousands of cultures, customs, and traditions would also disappear. We’ve worried about differences between AAVE and Standard English. Think of the dialect issues that could occur if a third of the world spoke only one language!
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
"The Night Before Christmas" in Different Dialects
The following links are to three different variations of "The Night Before Christmas." We are all familiar with the traditional version, and I am sure most of us have even heard "The Cajun Night Before Christmas." However, for those of us who are not familiar, I would like to introduce a new version to think about.
Originial - http://www.christmas-tree.com/stories/nightbeforechristmas.html
Cajun - http://www.wlox.com/Global/story.asp?S=1022468
Ebonics - http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19599
The two variations of the original poem bring insight into two separate regions and cultures. The Cajun poem uses examples of the Cajun French dialect, and the ebonics poem demonstrates use of AAVE. As readers, we find these humorous because they depict a typical stereotype of a particular dialect. However, do some find it offensive? Is it possible that some feel that they are being falsely portrayed? For those of you from Louisiana, do you feel that "The Cajun Night Before Christmas" is amusing because it is an accurate description of your life or of someone you know? Or is it just something you find entertaining overall? As I read the Cajun version , I noticed that it depicts its speakers as overindulgers (mainly with food and alcohol). They also refer to alligators, which is what we are immediately reminded of when we think of the bayou. (When I first became a student at LSU, I remember people asking me if Louisiana residents actually rode alligators.) Moreover, the ebonics version implies that people who speak this way are accustomed to a life of thievery and crime.
I think that taking traditional literature and translating it into another culture can be very helpful when we are trying to understand something we are not part of. The only thing is, we have to be careful not to misrepresent an image or insult a way of life. As I have learned this semester, preserving our diversity is important to our identity and individuality.
Originial - http://www.christmas-tree.com/stories/nightbeforechristmas.html
Cajun - http://www.wlox.com/Global/story.asp?S=1022468
Ebonics - http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19599
The two variations of the original poem bring insight into two separate regions and cultures. The Cajun poem uses examples of the Cajun French dialect, and the ebonics poem demonstrates use of AAVE. As readers, we find these humorous because they depict a typical stereotype of a particular dialect. However, do some find it offensive? Is it possible that some feel that they are being falsely portrayed? For those of you from Louisiana, do you feel that "The Cajun Night Before Christmas" is amusing because it is an accurate description of your life or of someone you know? Or is it just something you find entertaining overall? As I read the Cajun version , I noticed that it depicts its speakers as overindulgers (mainly with food and alcohol). They also refer to alligators, which is what we are immediately reminded of when we think of the bayou. (When I first became a student at LSU, I remember people asking me if Louisiana residents actually rode alligators.) Moreover, the ebonics version implies that people who speak this way are accustomed to a life of thievery and crime.
I think that taking traditional literature and translating it into another culture can be very helpful when we are trying to understand something we are not part of. The only thing is, we have to be careful not to misrepresent an image or insult a way of life. As I have learned this semester, preserving our diversity is important to our identity and individuality.
New dictionary includes 'ginormous'
http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/2007-07-10-dictionary-new-words_N.htm#open-share-help
In class, we are always discussing how to and if we should allow AAVE in the classroom, be it spoken or written. My question is, what if the word that students use outside of the classroom that is not formal is included in the dictionary? This presents a real problem for me. 'Ginormous' is not a word. It is a combination of two words, gigantic and enormous. Either of those words would be appropriate in a paper, when used as an adjective. However, should 'ginormous' be acceptable? In my opinion, no. It is a word that is to be used outside of the classroom with friends or in a text message. I can tell students that are in high school now that they know the difference between formal and informal words. What I worry about is the students who have yet to enter kindergarden and do not know formal from informal or what a dictionary is. When they learn about the dictionary these words, created words, will be in there. Will there soon be a class where students have to learn which dictionary words are appropriate and which aren't? Are teachers going to have to make a list of which words are appropriate to be used in papers?
In class, we are always discussing how to and if we should allow AAVE in the classroom, be it spoken or written. My question is, what if the word that students use outside of the classroom that is not formal is included in the dictionary? This presents a real problem for me. 'Ginormous' is not a word. It is a combination of two words, gigantic and enormous. Either of those words would be appropriate in a paper, when used as an adjective. However, should 'ginormous' be acceptable? In my opinion, no. It is a word that is to be used outside of the classroom with friends or in a text message. I can tell students that are in high school now that they know the difference between formal and informal words. What I worry about is the students who have yet to enter kindergarden and do not know formal from informal or what a dictionary is. When they learn about the dictionary these words, created words, will be in there. Will there soon be a class where students have to learn which dictionary words are appropriate and which aren't? Are teachers going to have to make a list of which words are appropriate to be used in papers?
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
MSNBC Ebonics Debate with Tucker Carlson
http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=&vid=a2e5e2fe-2bfb-4591-9407-2ef77b52ec3e
I find that this video shows many of the controversial sides of the Ebonics or AAVE debate. I think that this video shows the many struggles and thoughts that we have debated over this semester. I don’t agree with many of Tucker Carlson’s views of Ebonics or AAVE. I find that he presents AAVE as a very negative language and stereotypes these students and the language as being ignorant. He commented how Ebonics is “associated with failure.” After our discussions this semester and reading the various articles, I disagree with this statement. I have seen through my observations how many of the students who use AAVE can be very intelligent and insightful. I do agree with his points about how accents in the workforce can hurt or hinder job chances. I think that this discussion shows how language is very important part of our society and the conflicts that can arise from it.
I find myself being very conflicted when taking into consideration Ebonics in the classroom. Should teachers stress Standard English entirely or is there a place for Ebonics to work with education. I think that the opposing views expressed in this discussion present how AAVE can be used to improve test results. I am left with several questions from the discussion in the video. Should results on a test determine what is correct or not correct in the classroom? Should our society and the education field be mainly concerned with students getting jobs? I am very curious to hear other people’s opinions about the comments that were expressed in this discussion.
I find that this video shows many of the controversial sides of the Ebonics or AAVE debate. I think that this video shows the many struggles and thoughts that we have debated over this semester. I don’t agree with many of Tucker Carlson’s views of Ebonics or AAVE. I find that he presents AAVE as a very negative language and stereotypes these students and the language as being ignorant. He commented how Ebonics is “associated with failure.” After our discussions this semester and reading the various articles, I disagree with this statement. I have seen through my observations how many of the students who use AAVE can be very intelligent and insightful. I do agree with his points about how accents in the workforce can hurt or hinder job chances. I think that this discussion shows how language is very important part of our society and the conflicts that can arise from it.
I find myself being very conflicted when taking into consideration Ebonics in the classroom. Should teachers stress Standard English entirely or is there a place for Ebonics to work with education. I think that the opposing views expressed in this discussion present how AAVE can be used to improve test results. I am left with several questions from the discussion in the video. Should results on a test determine what is correct or not correct in the classroom? Should our society and the education field be mainly concerned with students getting jobs? I am very curious to hear other people’s opinions about the comments that were expressed in this discussion.
Flocabulary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT8T0wy2pMw
The Flocabulary website states the purpose of this program is to use "educational power of hip-hop music to foster literacy and promote academic success in the classroom and beyond. Through a range of multimedia products and live performance programs, we bring our concept of music and learning to students and teachers worldwide."
The creators of Flocabulary boast that by using SAT-level vocabulary in their lyrics, they are able to increase the interest of students, as well as improve their test scores. This video clip features inner-city students who actively use AAVE as a standard dialect while being interviewed and filmed. They seemed genuinely interesting in learning new material because it was presented in a fun, creative way. The students were also able to catch on quickly because this type of music was obviously relative to their own lifestyles.
I feel that this program would be a great way to incorporate learning with lifestyle. This has been something we as a class have discussed all semester. It would allow the students to be more comfortable and confident in their classroom. The use of Flocabulary (or similar methods of teaching) would let students know that it is okay - and even encouraged - to bring their personality and diversity into the classroom.
After watching this clip, I wonder if this particular technique is only motivating to urban students, or those who live in an area where rap and hip-hop define their culture. For example, would it be as effective if these lyrics were put to country or rock music? Does it depend on the region? What about their age? The statistics that Flocabulary advertises are impressive, but I would be very interested to see something like this firsthand!
For more information, visit http://www.flocabulary.com/.
The Flocabulary website states the purpose of this program is to use "educational power of hip-hop music to foster literacy and promote academic success in the classroom and beyond. Through a range of multimedia products and live performance programs, we bring our concept of music and learning to students and teachers worldwide."
The creators of Flocabulary boast that by using SAT-level vocabulary in their lyrics, they are able to increase the interest of students, as well as improve their test scores. This video clip features inner-city students who actively use AAVE as a standard dialect while being interviewed and filmed. They seemed genuinely interesting in learning new material because it was presented in a fun, creative way. The students were also able to catch on quickly because this type of music was obviously relative to their own lifestyles.
I feel that this program would be a great way to incorporate learning with lifestyle. This has been something we as a class have discussed all semester. It would allow the students to be more comfortable and confident in their classroom. The use of Flocabulary (or similar methods of teaching) would let students know that it is okay - and even encouraged - to bring their personality and diversity into the classroom.
After watching this clip, I wonder if this particular technique is only motivating to urban students, or those who live in an area where rap and hip-hop define their culture. For example, would it be as effective if these lyrics were put to country or rock music? Does it depend on the region? What about their age? The statistics that Flocabulary advertises are impressive, but I would be very interested to see something like this firsthand!
For more information, visit http://www.flocabulary.com/.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Fox News: Ax or Asked?
http://www.youtube.com/swf/l.swf?video_id=X_KKLkmIrDk&rel=1&eurl=http%3A//video.search.yahoo.com/video/play%3Fp%3DBlack%2BEnglish%26n%3D21%26ei%3Dutf-8%26js%3D1%26fr%3Dyfp-t-356%26fr2%3Dtab-web&iurl=http%3A//i.ytimg.com/vi/X_KKLkmIrDk/default.jpg&t=OEgsToPDskInpzbnpdo6BDzdkIerGFzq
I found that this news story dealt with many of the issues that we have covered throughout this semester. From this story I find myself seeing Standard English as important in society but I do also see how keeping individual cultures and dialect is important as well. Mr. Mcclendon showed a major focus on the students’ future and how their speech will affect job options. Both teachers interviewed showed a real importance for job readiness and the speech that is needed in the professional world. I do agree that speech is a factor in getting a job. I don’t agree with limiting students in their speech and not teaching them to translate. I find that Mr. Mcclendon’s teaching style tends to be very limiting and oppressive.
I definitely did not see Mr. Mcclendon show the student’s own dialect in a positive manner. This style of teaching is very different from the video we watched a few weeks ago. I find that Mr. Mcclendon did take into consideration their families and the roles that they have in the student’s lives. It seems that he is blaming everyone for the students not know Standard English. How much of the student’s own culture and dialect is lost when using this teaching style? Is this style of teaching really efficient and effective for the student’s learning? Should professional teachers correct grammar in this manner?
I found that this news story dealt with many of the issues that we have covered throughout this semester. From this story I find myself seeing Standard English as important in society but I do also see how keeping individual cultures and dialect is important as well. Mr. Mcclendon showed a major focus on the students’ future and how their speech will affect job options. Both teachers interviewed showed a real importance for job readiness and the speech that is needed in the professional world. I do agree that speech is a factor in getting a job. I don’t agree with limiting students in their speech and not teaching them to translate. I find that Mr. Mcclendon’s teaching style tends to be very limiting and oppressive.
I definitely did not see Mr. Mcclendon show the student’s own dialect in a positive manner. This style of teaching is very different from the video we watched a few weeks ago. I find that Mr. Mcclendon did take into consideration their families and the roles that they have in the student’s lives. It seems that he is blaming everyone for the students not know Standard English. How much of the student’s own culture and dialect is lost when using this teaching style? Is this style of teaching really efficient and effective for the student’s learning? Should professional teachers correct grammar in this manner?
Saturday, April 12, 2008
White Voters Attracted to Obama's 'Articulate' Side
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/01/clinton-backer-obama-will-probably-win-white-voters-attracted-to-his-articulate-side/
This article seems to show that in today's time it is assumed that African Americans cannot speak 'proper' English. When an African American takes the stage to give a speach, the first thought in many people's head is "oh boy. I wonder if he can speak correctly". What I did not understand about the article was the comment made by Missouri Rep. Emanuel Cleaver. He said, "If you put him on a level with a lot of other African American public speakers, he may not even measure up." What does he mean? Does he mean that Obama's English/speaking skills really aren't that good and considered not 'proper' or correct? This comment also showed that there are African Americans out there who strive to speak standard English and that they judge other speakers, of their own race or different, in the same way that a Caucasion would judge an African American. Another thing that I find interesting about this article is that it seems to be suggesting that white voters are voting for Obama because he is articulate. Do they think that he is representing the "change" because he is an African American who speaks properly? Do they think that white voters are voting for him because they think that just because he speaks properly he must have had a good education and therefore must be intellegent enough to run the country?
This article seems to show that in today's time it is assumed that African Americans cannot speak 'proper' English. When an African American takes the stage to give a speach, the first thought in many people's head is "oh boy. I wonder if he can speak correctly". What I did not understand about the article was the comment made by Missouri Rep. Emanuel Cleaver. He said, "If you put him on a level with a lot of other African American public speakers, he may not even measure up." What does he mean? Does he mean that Obama's English/speaking skills really aren't that good and considered not 'proper' or correct? This comment also showed that there are African Americans out there who strive to speak standard English and that they judge other speakers, of their own race or different, in the same way that a Caucasion would judge an African American. Another thing that I find interesting about this article is that it seems to be suggesting that white voters are voting for Obama because he is articulate. Do they think that he is representing the "change" because he is an African American who speaks properly? Do they think that white voters are voting for him because they think that just because he speaks properly he must have had a good education and therefore must be intellegent enough to run the country?
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Melody of Home
Melody of Home
To my brother on his departure to college
Cotton candy colored skies
Early to bed, early to rise
Fixin’ to melt into the bay
Suggestin’ the end to yet another day
Forty five minute never ending goodbyes
Chocolate, cherry, chestnut pies
Stretchin’ seas of southern snow
That summer smell of grass just mowed
Friday nights the high school game
Teenage boys and their four year fame
Tractor travelled gravel roads
At 5 AM the rooster crows
Right up the road or just down the street
An hour drive pendin’ on who ya meet
Sippin’ on lemonade, “Well I declare”
Sighs the Old Magnolia in her front porch rockin’ chair
“Ya’ll come back real soon, ya hear”
A friendly neighbor always near
Time to get out, no time to be naïve
Hafta see the world, believe, achieve,
Here comes that chance
To run wild and roam
The future - a dance
Set to the melody of home.
I’m not really sure if I need to explain the above poem. It’s not very difficult. Probably more corny than anything else. Basically, it is a poem mostly describing where I am from. Each line depicts a different detail. The end of the poem is just a suggestion that urges one not to forget his or her roots, no matter where the future takes you. As to some of the particulars, “Right up the road” and “Just down the street” are phrases we use to describe distance when asking directions. They can either mean a few blocks or 15 miles depending on who you talk to and where you are going. “Southern snow” is often what people call cotton fields in fall. An “Old Magnolia” is a very elderly, elegant, well respected southern woman who has been pampered and taken care of with the utmost attention her entire life. The other bold words are simply contractions that I just find myself and the people of my area constantly saying as if the real word doesn’t exist. Also, in case you didn’t catch it – alliteration is my favorite literary device when dealing with poetry, so there’s a little of that thrown in.
To my brother on his departure to college
Cotton candy colored skies
Early to bed, early to rise
Fixin’ to melt into the bay
Suggestin’ the end to yet another day
Forty five minute never ending goodbyes
Chocolate, cherry, chestnut pies
Stretchin’ seas of southern snow
That summer smell of grass just mowed
Friday nights the high school game
Teenage boys and their four year fame
Tractor travelled gravel roads
At 5 AM the rooster crows
Right up the road or just down the street
An hour drive pendin’ on who ya meet
Sippin’ on lemonade, “Well I declare”
Sighs the Old Magnolia in her front porch rockin’ chair
“Ya’ll come back real soon, ya hear”
A friendly neighbor always near
Time to get out, no time to be naïve
Hafta see the world, believe, achieve,
Here comes that chance
To run wild and roam
The future - a dance
Set to the melody of home.
I’m not really sure if I need to explain the above poem. It’s not very difficult. Probably more corny than anything else. Basically, it is a poem mostly describing where I am from. Each line depicts a different detail. The end of the poem is just a suggestion that urges one not to forget his or her roots, no matter where the future takes you. As to some of the particulars, “Right up the road” and “Just down the street” are phrases we use to describe distance when asking directions. They can either mean a few blocks or 15 miles depending on who you talk to and where you are going. “Southern snow” is often what people call cotton fields in fall. An “Old Magnolia” is a very elderly, elegant, well respected southern woman who has been pampered and taken care of with the utmost attention her entire life. The other bold words are simply contractions that I just find myself and the people of my area constantly saying as if the real word doesn’t exist. Also, in case you didn’t catch it – alliteration is my favorite literary device when dealing with poetry, so there’s a little of that thrown in.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
sample post
Here's something I wrote on my own blog last year, which offers an example of the kind of posting you might do here. Don't consider this a recipe that you need to follow, just a sample to consider.
Key components:
1) Links to articles (in this case, audio clips)
2) My own reflection on those texts
**Note that at no point do I summarize either text: I expect readers to follow the link and read/hear for themselves.
3) Questions posed for readers to consider.
Virigina Woolf delivered this gorgeous "Eulogy to Words" in 1937. Part of the reason that words are dead (or at least are lacking the power they once had), she claimed, was that "we refuse to allow words their liberty, we pin them down to one meaning, their useful meaning...the meaning which makes us pass examinations."
Anna West, a local poet, educator, and mother of a son in public school, describes the same problem in our age of state standards and standardized tests in a poem that speaks for itself, beginning with the title: "Battle for the Board of Ed." She describes what often happens in classrooms, evocatively, as "the castration of the tongue." I love the double-meaning of the word "tongue:" on one hand, it's a physical part of us, the loss of which would leave us unable to speak. At the same time, it's our language, often our home language, our "mother tongue."
So this problem isn't new; maybe it's even one of the few things about English that hasn't changed over the past hundred years. The accents and diction are so different it's hard not to laugh at Woolf's ultra-proper sounding speech, but she and West have homed in on the same problem: education is at odds with powerful, artful, personal language. Tests are easy to blame, and we often do blame them, but I think we all know that the issue is more complex than that.
It's a truism in anthropology that the act of observing a thing changes it. Perhaps it's become a truism in education that the act teaching language dries it up and hollows it out. It's frustrating to imagine that we've known about this problem for nearly a century but haven't made a dent in it.
As a teacher, I'm pained to think that I'm harming what I love most (students and language). What if we're asking kids to write expressively and powerfully even as we're undermining their ability to do just that? No wonder so many of them are fed up, frustrated and totally resistant to school. Not much that we've done since 1937 seems to have altered this, so what do we do next as we try to build a system that lives up to its promises? Can it be done by individual teachers in the current system (and if so, how do we enable more teachers to do it)? Alternatively, is it going to require a radical overhaul of that system? If so, what can we do for students while we wait for (and work on) that long-term reform project? How do we educate them in a way that enlivens and empowers them and their language?
Key components:
1) Links to articles (in this case, audio clips)
2) My own reflection on those texts
**Note that at no point do I summarize either text: I expect readers to follow the link and read/hear for themselves.
3) Questions posed for readers to consider.
Virigina Woolf delivered this gorgeous "Eulogy to Words" in 1937. Part of the reason that words are dead (or at least are lacking the power they once had), she claimed, was that "we refuse to allow words their liberty, we pin them down to one meaning, their useful meaning...the meaning which makes us pass examinations."
Anna West, a local poet, educator, and mother of a son in public school, describes the same problem in our age of state standards and standardized tests in a poem that speaks for itself, beginning with the title: "Battle for the Board of Ed." She describes what often happens in classrooms, evocatively, as "the castration of the tongue." I love the double-meaning of the word "tongue:" on one hand, it's a physical part of us, the loss of which would leave us unable to speak. At the same time, it's our language, often our home language, our "mother tongue."
So this problem isn't new; maybe it's even one of the few things about English that hasn't changed over the past hundred years. The accents and diction are so different it's hard not to laugh at Woolf's ultra-proper sounding speech, but she and West have homed in on the same problem: education is at odds with powerful, artful, personal language. Tests are easy to blame, and we often do blame them, but I think we all know that the issue is more complex than that.
It's a truism in anthropology that the act of observing a thing changes it. Perhaps it's become a truism in education that the act teaching language dries it up and hollows it out. It's frustrating to imagine that we've known about this problem for nearly a century but haven't made a dent in it.
As a teacher, I'm pained to think that I'm harming what I love most (students and language). What if we're asking kids to write expressively and powerfully even as we're undermining their ability to do just that? No wonder so many of them are fed up, frustrated and totally resistant to school. Not much that we've done since 1937 seems to have altered this, so what do we do next as we try to build a system that lives up to its promises? Can it be done by individual teachers in the current system (and if so, how do we enable more teachers to do it)? Alternatively, is it going to require a radical overhaul of that system? If so, what can we do for students while we wait for (and work on) that long-term reform project? How do we educate them in a way that enlivens and empowers them and their language?
Monday, January 14, 2008
welcome!
Welcome to our class blog. I can't wait to read and discuss with you here. Although I'm sure you don't need it, here's a reminder about norms:
-Keep it professional.
Remember that the world is your audience, and that you're representing not only yourself and LSU, but the teaching profession. What we may know is intended as a joke could appear to be utterly serious to somebody who's never met you.
-Keep it topical.
This is a forum for discussing articles and issues raised by them related to language development and diversity. Make sure your postings and comments are relevant.
-Protect your anonymity, as well as that of others.
Use either first or last names in posts, but not both.
-Seek to understand before being understood.
Voicing disagreement is productive. In order to keep it that way, make sure you understand the point with which you disagree before offering your alternative. It's always a good idea to ask for clarification.
-Hold each other to high standards.
Push each other's thinking. Don't let assumptions go unquestioned. Ask tough and interesting questions. Make connections to other ideas we've talked about. Challenge yourself to think deeply about these issues, rather than simply getting the grade.
-Keep it professional.
Remember that the world is your audience, and that you're representing not only yourself and LSU, but the teaching profession. What we may know is intended as a joke could appear to be utterly serious to somebody who's never met you.
-Keep it topical.
This is a forum for discussing articles and issues raised by them related to language development and diversity. Make sure your postings and comments are relevant.
-Protect your anonymity, as well as that of others.
Use either first or last names in posts, but not both.
-Seek to understand before being understood.
Voicing disagreement is productive. In order to keep it that way, make sure you understand the point with which you disagree before offering your alternative. It's always a good idea to ask for clarification.
-Hold each other to high standards.
Push each other's thinking. Don't let assumptions go unquestioned. Ask tough and interesting questions. Make connections to other ideas we've talked about. Challenge yourself to think deeply about these issues, rather than simply getting the grade.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)