tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post114823407003339300..comments2024-01-03T05:23:36.046-08:00Comments on The Citizens: The Language Policy DebateUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-9914990899098795932022-02-10T01:39:49.679-08:002022-02-10T01:39:49.679-08:00Conversely, there will be even greater national at...Conversely, there will be even greater national attention on teaching English. Because guess what? It ain't just about the language, it is about proficiency in the language. This means the ability to take in information, understand it, and critically analyze it on the fly.<br /><a href="http://www.thecollectionmarts.com/product-category/high-quality-bedsheets/" rel="nofollow">pure organic cotton sheets</a><br /><a href="http://www.thecollectionmarts.com/product-category/high-quality-bedsheets/" rel="nofollow">single bedsheet pure cotton</a>zippered couch cushion covershttp://www.thecollectionmarts.com/product-category/cushion-cover/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-1148400208603695372006-05-23T09:03:00.000-07:002006-05-23T09:03:00.000-07:00Sorry, I forgot to close my link and to write the ...Sorry, I forgot to close my link and to write the name of the website which is . "Do you Speak American". I thought I had. Weird. Must be the falt of the mystery computer that contains stolen data!<BR/> <BR/><BR/><A></A><A></A>// posted by<A><B> </B></A>USWestAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-1148391308566812432006-05-23T06:35:00.000-07:002006-05-23T06:35:00.000-07:00I think of Ebonics as being just one of many diale...I think of Ebonics as being just one of many dialects. But I don't think it is unreasonable or unfair to follow a norm of insisting on some standard dialect for professional interactions. A kind of English counterpart to Hochdeutch. <BR/><BR/>Ebonics is no worse OR BETTER than the upper midwest's "ja sure, you betcha, dontchaknow" stuff or the deep South drawls and twangs or the stereotypical Californians' inability to form declarative sentences (you know, the ending all statements as if they were questions) or the New Englanders' "Hahvad yahd in Bahstan".<BR/><BR/>All this underscores US West's remarks about an overall language policy. But it beggs the question of whether we really want to open that particular can of worms. <BR/><BR/><A></A><A></A>// posted by<A><B> </B></A><A HREF="http://thecitizens.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow" TITLE="">Raised By Republicans</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-1148362904247144252006-05-22T22:41:00.000-07:002006-05-22T22:41:00.000-07:00Thank you Dr. S for you remarks. I am glad that yo...Thank you Dr. S for you remarks. I am glad that you found them useful! <BR/><BR/>Bob, I don't really have an opinion on Ebonics itself because I haven't read the literature. I revisited my comments and realized that it does sound like I am leaning to one side of the debate. Perhaps I am because my general opinion about language, dialects, accents, and jargon, etc. is that there is a time and a place for all things. In the biz, we call it "tailoring", using the correct form of a language for the audience at hand. This, by the way, is a major indicator of proficiency in spoken language and you'd be surprised how many native speakers of a language are unable to perform the task. I know because I have tested them. And you find that there are some common characteristics among those who can tailor, namely: age/maturity, education, critical thinking ability. My 14 year old niece is very smart. But for the moment she talks like a "Valley Girl" . This will pass as she ages and her education improves, or so I hope. If not, Auntie will be doing some serious coaching because the facts of life are that you have to speak standard English to get ahead.<BR/><BR/>The Ebonics debate is a perfect example of how political the question of "language" can be! It is wrapped up in status, ethnic pride, discrimination, etc. As a white person with little knowledge of Ebonics, it appears to be a way of legitimizing and affirming an ethnic identity, which is what language does.<BR/><BR/>Dialects (a complete system of verbal communication which can be oral or signed but not necessarily written, with their own vocabulary and/or grammar spoken by people from a specific geographic area); sociolects ( a variety of language spoken by a certain social class); standard languages, jargons, and slang. There are also standard and non-standard dialects. There is a fun website called <A HREF="http://www.pbs.org/speak" REL="nofollow"/> . American English is largely neglected as a field of study, yet it is as rich and varied as that found in the UK and Ireland. And, while we aren't as serious about attaching social stigma to accents as the British, we aren't completely innocent of such a trait either.<BR/><BR/>How do you tell a dialect from a language? Good question because that determination is subjective depending one which "paradigm" of linguistics you buy into, and there are many. I don't have a preferred paradigm because I am not a linguist and I haven't studied that field. What I can say is that many people call Ebonics a dialect because it is not recognized as having a defined territory of state, it lacks status, and it isn't written or used in a literary fashion. <BR/><BR/>I have also heard that you can trace Ebonics back to Gullah, a creole dialect spoken on some islands in South Carolina whose roots go back to Africa. So I would be interested in hearing the views of any of our African American readers on the issue.<BR/><BR/> <BR/><BR/><A></A><A></A>// posted by<A><B> </B></A>USWestAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-1148344502909588012006-05-22T17:35:00.000-07:002006-05-22T17:35:00.000-07:00Thanks for the insightful post.This is my biggest ...Thanks for the insightful post.<BR/><BR/><EM>This is my biggest problem with most of what Congress has done. There seems little consideration of the consequences, and no real explanation of any serious goal behind such a move.</EM><BR/><BR/>I completely agree with this. In the past, I have often seen the House adopt bills as knee-jerk responses without thought of any "serious goal" other than getting some sound bites to play to the folks back home. Usually, the Senate has acted as a voice of moderation, but not always, and not lately. <BR/><BR/>It seems to me that the instances of one party in the White House and another on Capitol Hill may be indicators that many people would like the government to change things as little as possible, since their changes are usually bad.<BR/><BR/><EM>There have been debates about Ebonics, studies done on how the non-standard dialect of many African Americans (i.e. poor English) prevents them from getting loans, jobs, building permits, voting ballots, etc. </EM><BR/><BR/>This may be a clever way to hide your opinion by using terms from both sides of the issue. It seems to me that either Ebonics is a "non-standard dialect" (with a comparable amount of meaning attached to it), or it's just "poor English" (not conveying meaning in a new way, but conveying less meaning).  <BR/><BR/><A></A><A></A>// posted by<A><B> </B></A><A HREF="http://thecitizens.blogspot.com/2006/05/language-policy-debate.html#comments" REL="nofollow" TITLE="bob dot wieman at bris dot ac dot uk">Bob</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6762928.post-1148334181950918702006-05-22T14:43:00.000-07:002006-05-22T14:43:00.000-07:00What a detailed, thoughtful post, USWest! For a n...What a detailed, thoughtful post, USWest! For a non-poli-sci person like me, your discussion of public policy types and objectives--both the general discussion and also the more specific one concerning linguistic policy--was illuminating. It also really clarified a lot of the little ideas that were bubbling around in my mind--put them into a much larger context. Also very interesting discussion of ESL and our cultural attitudes toward learning foreign languages. Thanks!<BR/><BR/>As far as the portion of your post that dealt specifically with English as an official language of the US... you wrote that the current drive to make English our "official language" is not part of a coherent language policy--it is just a "soundbite." You listed a few plausible objectives for such a law--to protect English from being "overrun", to move to an English-only system, to build national unity. Then you noted that the sponsors of the law had not addressed a couple of key questions: (1) can the proposed law accomplish any of these objectives, and (2) how would the law fit within a larger language policy (which does not yet exist) that addresses the needs of non-speakers and speakers of regional languages?<BR/><BR/>I would argue that English is not in danger of being overrun. And most people realize that a pure English-only system is infeasible and unfair; allowances should be made for non-speakers or non-native speakers. Finally, there's a good argument that such a policy would be divisive rather than unifying. But though these are my opinions, I have little data to point to... and that was also a key point of yours: policy like this ought to be based on data. And right now there's not much data being tossed around regarding English as an official language. <BR/><BR/>My favorite quote, "It ain't just about the language, it is about proficiency in the language." You also said, "We have tacitly accepted that it is more important that people have knowledge than English." I hope so, anyway! <BR/><BR/>I'll end with a story. There was a time when I was helping teach scientific writing practices, and I remember I used to tell my students that (at least in that context), "learning how to write is learning how to think." Because 99 times out of 100, if a paper was muddled or unclear, it was because the author did not understand what he was trying to say. The process of learning a first or second language is probably different, and both are valuable in and of themselves to develop the mind.Dr. Strangelovehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14407042105777411150noreply@blogger.com