"Standard" English?

“Critical Thoughts on Teaching Standard English”

Speicher and Bielanski.  Curriculum Inquiry. 2000 (147-169)

Speicher and Bielansky argue against four assumptions that most people have about Standard English (SE).

1.       Spoken English equates to written English

2.       Spoken and written English are equally amenable to standardization.

3.       SE is the language of the workplace and essential for social mobility.

4.       SE is the language of the classroom.

This is a pedagogy piece which deals with theory more than pedagogical practice.  The audience is teachers or education professionals.  The authors’ main point is that spoken English and Written English are very different, despite the assumptions of many people, including teachers , education professionals, and even some language professionals. The authors want to make this point to raise awareness about this difference and to make some suggestions for further study, specifically the use of prototype theory to help define Standard English. Perhaps the most compelling idea presented in this piece is Standard Ideology, which is described at a set of attitudes about language that assumes that standard English is either better or more pragmatic than non-standard varieties of English; it is so powerful that even non-standard speakers believe in SI.

Below is my detailed outline of the article (more for my own use, but I thought I would include it.

1.       Spoken English equates to written English

a.       Written English has become a prescriptive code for spoken English.

b.      Much of the information passed in spoken English does not appear in written English (tone, pitch, gestures, facial expressions, context, etc)

c.       Are acquired differently

d.      Grammars are different

e.      SWE and SSE are different registers: Educators do not speak SWE—no one does!

2.       Spoken and Written English are equally amenable to standardization

a.       No one has (can?) define and specify the lexical, phonological and grammatical features of SE (spoken or written).

b.      People erroneously believe that there is a SE

c.       Scholars prefer the term SI—standard ideology

d.      Hegemonic:  assumptions about SE are widely accepted in popular perceptions about language diversity

                                                               i.      Prescriptivists are very successful at promoting SI—even those who speak stigmatized forms believe that others are better

e.      How do speakers recognize SE? Authors describe prototype theory as one way

                                                               i.      Some features may be essential, while others may be characteristic

                                                             ii.      Judgments may be based on combinations of features

                                                            iii.      This is disappointing, I was hoping for an analysis

3.       Standard English is the language of the workplace and essential to social mobility

a.       Even when scholars accept the premise that all dialects are equal, they pragmatically say that accepts the privileging of SSE

b.      Stigmatized form are associated with lower socioeconomic class with least political power

c.       SI helps explain the privileging of SSE

                                                               i.      Si privileges certain users and stigmatizes others

                                                             ii.      “large numbers of intelligent people condemn and resent language change, regarding alterations as due to unnecessary sloppiness, laziness and ignorance.” Aitchison 1991

                                                            iii.      Historical and unquestioned association between good English and good character

                                                           iv.      “Language is pure; people who use language are corrupt.”

1.       Thus it is the individual’s fault for failing to learn SSE, not the school’s

2.       Justifies the use of language testing that labels certain features as meriting remedition and tracks certain students into particular curricula

                                                             v.      Some scholars believe linguistic bias is a cover for racism

                                                           vi.      Linguistic and cultural gap between teachers and students

1.       Teachers can punish students for perceived “deviant” language

2.       Teachers can mistake a difference in dialect as a learning disability or lack of intelligence

                                                          vii.      Racial or gender discrimination are illegal; linguistic discrimination are a kind of institutionalized discrimination

                                                        viii.      Many people still believe that nonstandard dialects indicate laziness or stupidity

4.       Standard English is the language of the classroom

a.       This assumption has never been tested

b.      More common: debates on whether nonstandard dialects should be allowed in the classroom (e.g., the ebonics controversy)

c.       Teachers think that imposition of the standard might be demeaning to students

d.      Some scholars think that to deny a student their way of speaking is to alienate them

e.      Most people (not necessarily teachers) think SSE should be used in the classroom

f.        There  is no guarantee that teachers are using SSE

                                                               i.      No agreement on what SSE is

                                                             ii.      Authors again suggest prototype theory to help define it

g.       Teachers are good at teaching SI, not so good at teaching SSE

Dilemmas of Identity: Oral and Written Literacies in the Making of a Basic Writing Student

Cook-Gumperz, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 1993

This is a case study of an African American woman student returning to a basic skills program at a community college, and her experience with a tutor.  The author finds aspects of her experience that “challenge accepted notions of schooled literacy.” (336) This is a case study and pedagogical piece whose intended audience is teachers and education professionals. The author’s main point is that learning standard English takes more than just learning a new dialect.  It is a complicated process that include re-defining oneself and the way one thinks about education. I may be reading into it too much, but by the author’s tone it seemed that she was judging (negatively) the institution and the tutor for oppressing Wanda (the name of the case study subject) by forming her story (and so, her) into academic English.

My detailed outline follows.

1.       “The institutional motivation for school practice remains the promotion and selection of a specific kind of literate talent.” 336

2.       Students have to learn how to write and also how to rethink their relationship to the process of schooling.

3.       Minority students become viewed “re-entering” and underprepared

4.       Author argues that the cognitive processes necessary for a minority student to prepare an academic text are more complex than previously thought

a.       This complexity can be one of the reasons adult students “fail to learn”

b.      Demands a deep emotional commitment and involvement on the part of the language user

c.       Students achieve technical competence and the construction of a social self that is linked to one’s language

5.       Case Study: Wanda

a.       30 year old re-entry student who sees herself as someone who has been admitted to  a college class, and so has overcome an earlier history of school failure

b.      Has two issues

                                                               i.      Provide a coherent sequesnce of events that can be understood by a stranger

                                                             ii.      Do so with clear grammar and mechanics that can be written down

c.       Tells a story about her first job

                                                               i.      When telling the story verbally, she focuses on (a) how she got the job and (b) how her attitude changed when she got the job

                                                             ii.      Written product only quickly mentions the attitude change

                                                            iii.      Moves between “unmarked” style and an AAVE style

                                                           iv.      This creates a difficulty that most people don’t realize: many aspects of her verbal style have no counterparts in written English

                                                             v.      This is difficult to manage for even experienced, talented writers

                                                           vi.      Further complicated as a minority woman, as her audience will not necessarily empathize with her (Minh-ha 1989)

                                                          vii.      Through the writing and dealing with  the tutor, her personal voice is transformed into a public voice.  The author seems to think this is a bad thing.

1.       Order is strictly temporal (unlike when spoken)

2.       More nominalizations and more complex sentence variety

                                                        viii.      Author seems to think that Wanda was oppressed by the institution (and the tutor) since the text she produced had more features of academic writing, though it seemed to me that Wanda had no problem with it. She was an enthusiastic student who wanted to learn.

“But I hope this analysis,

by going beyond the surface of what she has written to look at what she

really intended to communicate, can begin to show how any description

of literacy, as it applies to the real literacy products of real adults, needs

to be expanded beyond what is traditionally seen as schooled literacy.” 353

Dissin’ the Standard: Ebonics as Guerilla Warfare at Capital High

Fordham, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 1999

This is a beautifully written paper that explores the reasons AAVE speaking high school kids do not to speak “Standard” English.  This is a study that has teachers and education professionals as its audience. The author’s main point is to explain why speakers of AAVE (specifically, at a high school in Washington D.C.) will refuse to speak “Standard English.” There are several reasons: The students do not want to buy into the perceived power structure that Standard English is a part of; they do not want to be seen as acting “too White,” which might indicate they are siding with oppressors.  “Standard” English is a stigmatized dialect in this community, to be used only in school, and even then, only in specific circumstances.  One way students resist oppression is to refuse to participate in certain aspects of their education (Kory: “I don’t do book reports.”) even though this will affect their educational opportunities.

Below is my detailed outline.  I wrote it for myself, but thought I would include it here.

1.       Ebonics as rhetorical resistance; crucial in the subversive war of Black identity maintenance

2.       SE helps define caste system

3.       SE viewed as an inappropriate speech form: socially stigmatized

4.       What is considered “standard” is a “contested site for self-definition, reistance, and accomodation.

5.       Students realize that speaking SE is crucial to their success

a.       So some “lease the standard, ” speaking it from 9 to 3

b.      Others resist completely

6.       Black students who speak SE might be seen as trying to be White, and may use that power to exploit

a.       Acting white is a metaphor for power relationships that address the historic exclusion of Black Americans

b.      Suggests identity deflection or impersonation

c.       Getting good grades can be “acting White;” this causes students a lot of conflict

7.       After slavery, “Language ..replaced slavery as the social mechanism that would ensure the continued exploitation of Black people.) (5)

8.       “Appearing but not to be” allows students to use SE in certain situations, but not give up their power or place in the community

a.       The worst is when a Capital student uses SE uncritically

9.       Students sometimes use avoidance to maintain Black intellectual integrity

a.       E.G., Korey: “I don’t do book reports” is a way of rebelling and showing loyalty

b.      Sadly, this affects their educational opportunities: “marks them for academic and social failure.”

“Resistance—as conformity—is the academically successful student’s weapon of choice in their efforts to maintain a Black identity and in fighting the ongoing linguistic war.” (10)