PDA

View Full Version : California School Requiring Ebonics


James Boston
07-18-2005, 02:13 PM
link (http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208~12588~2969790,00.html)

[ QUOTE ]
"Ebonics is a different language, it's not slang as many believe,' Texeira said. "For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language.'

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously...why is an educational system furthering the misuse of the English language? Isn't it enough of a problem that so many people living in America already only speak a foreign language? Do we really need to create a new one to add to the problem? I know America does not have an official language, but why are so many trying their best to encourage others not to learn proper English when they know that it will be beneficial to them?

asofel
07-18-2005, 02:20 PM
[ QUOTE ]
link (http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208~12588~2969790,00.html)

[ QUOTE ]
"Ebonics is a different language, it's not slang as many believe,' Texeira said. "For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language.'

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously...why is an educational system furthering the misuse of the English language? Isn't it enough of a problem that so many people living in America already only speak a foreign language? Do we really need to create a new one to add to the problem? I know America does not have an official language, but why are so many trying their best to encourage others not to learn proper English when they know that it will be beneficial to them?

[/ QUOTE ]

Mang, why you gotta be hatin like that? Jus like da man to come down rough on some peeps jus straight livin, tryin a make a dolla outta fiteen cent. Lemme axe you sumpin muthafucka, how'd u feel wif dis glock ticklin yo tonsils. sheeeit...

B Dids
07-18-2005, 02:21 PM
Ebonics is a name that white people made up to describe someting that linguistics already call AAVE.

The post above mine sucks.

asofel
07-18-2005, 02:22 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Ebonics is a name that white people made up to describe someting that linguistics already call AAVE.

The post above mine sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

i thought i'd get the obvious reply over and done with. sorry for the lack of amusement. i couldn't help myself.

[censored]
07-18-2005, 02:27 PM
pig latin has more of a claim to being a language than ebonics.

Voltron87
07-18-2005, 02:29 PM
what i really hate is when white people are conversing with black people (this is mostly 16-25 white males to their black counterparts) and try to "talk black". this pisses me off to no end.

ChoicestHops
07-18-2005, 02:29 PM
This is ridiculously stupid.

bisonbison
07-18-2005, 02:30 PM
Dibs is right. All ebonics or AAVE or BVE is is a low-prestige dialect of English. If it helps the kids learn the Broadcast Standard English that will help them get jobs later in life, I can't imagine why this would be problematic.

PokerBob
07-18-2005, 02:40 PM
[ QUOTE ]
link (http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208~12588~2969790,00.html)

[ QUOTE ]
"Ebonics is a different language, it's not slang as many believe,' Texeira said. "For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language.'

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously...why is an educational system furthering the misuse of the English language? Isn't it enough of a problem that so many people living in America already only speak a foreign language? Do we really need to create a new one to add to the problem? I know America does not have an official language, but why are so many trying their best to encourage others not to learn proper English when they know that it will be beneficial to them?

[/ QUOTE ]

My friend summed it up best 8 years ago when this first turned up in Oakland, "I've had bad grammar all my life, but I don't get to call it a language." That said, what Bison said has merit, but I think this could be a slippery slope.

James Boston
07-18-2005, 02:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If it helps the kids learn the Broadcast Standard English that will help them get jobs later in life, I can't imagine why this would be problematic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. If AAVE is a deviation of "the broadcast standard English," then it would stand to reason that you would already have a grasp of the fundamentals of speech if you were using a colloquial version of it. Don't teach someone how do something that is 80% wrong so that the 20% that is right will be retained. If someone were using the word "ain't," then they would seem to have a good concept of when and where to use "am not." Why settle for the fact that they get the general idea when you could show them how to speak properly?

Riskwise
07-18-2005, 02:44 PM
[ QUOTE ]
This is ridiculously stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/259/racist2tf.gif

im kinda surprised, and appreciative, that no one has thrown the immature racist accusation card, because i bet thats the whole reason this program is in whichever school it was.

BreakfastBurrito
07-18-2005, 02:45 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't it enough of a problem that so many people living in America already only speak a foreign language? Do we really need to create a new one to add to the problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

In my opinion, no, it is not a problem. I believe the percentage of people who speak no English in this country is very small, and most of those unable to learn English are older and basically illiterate in their native language. Permanent residents who speak no English have had absolutely zero impact on my life, and I challenge you or anyone else to describe the deleterious effects that they, or anyone they know has experienced due to this alleged "problem".

B Dids
07-18-2005, 02:48 PM
The issue is not that people are teacing somebody to speak in AAVE. Originally when this came up in Oakland it's that they wanted the teachers to have familiarity with it in order to better communicate with their students.

quinn
07-18-2005, 02:49 PM
[ QUOTE ]
"For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the most retarded part. Apparently Texeira doesn't know what "foreign" means. I guess this explains a lot..

Cancer Merchant
07-18-2005, 02:51 PM
Well, teaching classes in Ebonics/AAVL in California is a dead issue, since ESL was outlawed in 1998 (prop 227). On the other hand, they could make it a foreign language. English for English Speakers 101, complete with field trips to Watts.

James Boston
07-18-2005, 02:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion, no, it is not a problem. I believe the percentage of people who speak no English in this country is very small, and most of those unable to learn English are older and basically illiterate in their native language. Permanent residents who speak no English have had absolutely zero impact on my life, and I challenge you or anyone else to describe the deleterious effects that they, or anyone they know has experienced due to this alleged "problem".


[/ QUOTE ]

I see you point, and didn't mean that is was a problem in the sense that it possesses dire consequences. If someone is content with the inablity to speak the langauge that the vast majority of the country uses to communicate, and is comfortable with the socio-economic limitations that go with that inability, I have no problem with their lack of desire to learn. I do have a problem with education systems who are supposed to be teaching people how to better themselves allowing and encouraging people to avoid learning English. That is a problem.

bisonbison
07-18-2005, 02:52 PM
I'm saying, tell the kids "a lot of you speak this way, and that's fine. It's just a dialect like Australian English or Scots-English, and sounding like this doesn't make you stupid or anything else, but if you want to get a good job or get into college, Broadcast Standard is the language you're going to want to learn to speak and write."

That's it. I call it realistic relativism.

James Boston
07-18-2005, 02:58 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying, tell the kids "a lot of you speak this way, and that's fine. It's just a dialect like Australian English or Scots-English, and sounding like this doesn't make you stupid or anything else, but if you want to get a job or get into college, Broadcast Standard is the language you're going to have to learn to speak and write."

That's it. I call it realistic relativism.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with that. Speaking in slang terms or colloquial terms doesn't make someone stupid. I live in the south and know many intelligent people who abuse English. However, the article I linked worries me because it seems as if the administrators behind this idea are saying, "This is how many of you speak, and it's fine. It's a real language and you shouldn't worry about learning anything else," and that is not "realisitic relativism." Maybe I'm reading between the lines too much, but as another poster stated, this is a slippery slope.

slamdunkpro
07-18-2005, 02:59 PM
Warning – Possible inflammatory post!!!

This reminds me of a situation at the Luxor on my last trip to Las Vegas. My wife and I are going out and we are walking past the entrance to RA (Luxor’s nightclub). There’s a big sign out front about the dress code – No athletic jerseys, no sweats, no sneakers, no hats backwards no big bling; and there is a big line. My wife and I ask the door guy if we can just stick our heads in for a quick look out of curiosity, we had no plans to stay for more than 30 seconds. He says no; because we are both wearing sneakers. I repeat that we don’t want to stay; we just want to take a quick look. At this point the manager comes out and very politely explains that they have a very strict dress code, and that if we didn’t come right out we’d be hard to locate and people try this all the time and on and on and on.
I said “OK no big deal, but if the dress code is so strict what about those people pointing to about 10 “urban African types” wearing lots of bling, basketball jerseys over their sweat pants and unlaced sneakers (plus a few hats backwards)?”

His response (and I’m not making this up): “Oh that’s different – they’re making a cultural statement”

CRF250X
07-18-2005, 03:15 PM
It took me a few minutes to figure it out but now I understand and it's absolutely brilliant! It's simply another step on the path to eliminating the middle class.

Never let anyone tell you that your leaders don't know what they're doing.

CRF250X

EliteNinja
07-18-2005, 07:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Warning – Possible inflammatory post!!!

This reminds me of a situation at the Luxor on my last trip to Las Vegas. My wife and I are going out and we are walking past the entrance to RA (Luxor’s nightclub). There’s a big sign out front about the dress code – No athletic jerseys, no sweats, no sneakers, no hats backwards no big bling; and there is a big line. My wife and I ask the door guy if we can just stick our heads in for a quick look out of curiosity, we had no plans to stay for more than 30 seconds. He says no; because we are both wearing sneakers. I repeat that we don’t want to stay; we just want to take a quick look. At this point the manager comes out and very politely explains that they have a very strict dress code, and that if we didn’t come right out we’d be hard to locate and people try this all the time and on and on and on.
I said “OK no big deal, but if the dress code is so strict what about those people pointing to about 10 “urban African types” wearing lots of bling, basketball jerseys over their sweat pants and unlaced sneakers (plus a few hats backwards)?”

His response (and I’m not making this up): “Oh that’s different – they’re making a cultural statement”

[/ QUOTE ]

omg, what an F'n' joke!

James Boston
07-18-2005, 08:01 PM
[ QUOTE ]
“Oh that’s different – they’re making a cultural statement”


[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree that is a load of crap, that wasn't really my point. I just don't think our schools should be promoting incorrect English for anything other than what it is. It's NOT a foreign language. To your point, I can see where it and mine are intertwined. I guess in some ways, fear of offending minorities leads some people to create a tolerance that superseeds what we would extend to non-minorities, which to me is more condescending to them. If a southern white man abuses the English language and constantly says stupid things, we call them redneck, make a Deliverance joke, etc... While these are deragatory statements, they also imply that this man is inferior to what he is capable of being. When African-Americans misuse English, accepting it as a "foreign language" is like telling them that we'll be tolerant because we don't think they can do any better. Which is more insulting?

Sephus
07-18-2005, 08:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
“Oh that’s different – they’re making a cultural statement”


[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree that is a load of crap, that wasn't really my point. I just don't think our schools should be promoting incorrect English for anything other than what it is. It's NOT a foreign language. To your point, I can see where it and mine are intertwined. I guess in some ways, fear of offending minorities leads some people to create a tolerance that superseeds what we would extend to non-minorities, which to me is more condescending to them. If a southern white man abuses the English language and constantly says stupid things, we call them redneck, make a Deliverance joke, etc... While these are deragatory statements, they also imply that this man is inferior to what he is capable of being. When African-Americans misuse English, accepting it as a "foreign language" is like telling them that we'll be tolerant because we don't think they can do any better. Which is more insulting?

[/ QUOTE ]

AAVE is not "incorrect" english. speaking a nonstandard dialect is not "abusing" english. it's just different.

you think they're making "mistakes" when actually they're just following a different set of rules. in many ways "ebonics" is more efficient than standard english, in both syntax and pronunciation.

bisonbison is right though, speakers of nonstandard dialects are (unfairly or not) handicapped when it comes to the job market, etc. so learning how to speak "standard american english" is important for american students.

James Boston
07-18-2005, 08:33 PM
[ QUOTE ]
AAVE is not "incorrect" english. speaking a nonstandard dialect is not "abusing" english. it's just different.

you think they're making "mistakes" when actually they're just following a different set of rules. in many ways "ebonics" is more efficient than standard english, in both syntax and pronunciation.


[/ QUOTE ]

AAVE, as a form of colloquial speech or slang, is not my issue. I'm not claiming that I always use proper English, or that I never "abuse" the English language. I don't have a problem with how people speak to each other in conversation, or write in informal letters/e-mails. I do have a problem with propagating the idea that "nonstandard dialect" is a language unto itself. It's not. It is exactly what you said - nonstandard dialect. In its proper context, I don't think it should be frowned upon, but it's not a foreign language.

Sephus
07-18-2005, 09:01 PM
im saying AAVE is not "misuse" of the enligsh language as you have called it.

[ QUOTE ]
"For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language

[/ QUOTE ]

he has a point. students who only speak AAVE are better off learning SAE in a similar environment to that of spanish-speaking students learning english as a second language.

simply "correcting" their "mistakes" is an inadequate way for them to learn to speak "regular english."

i know a little about this (i basically have a linguistics degree and this issue is important) and i'm guessing the texeira guy really wants teachers to understand how AAVE works and to use this understanding to teach SAE. that's what he means by saying they should treat it as a legitimate "foreign" language.

James Boston
07-18-2005, 09:28 PM
OK...you may be able to enlighten me on this issue. Here's my objection to what you just said. Spanish-speaking persons can benefit from learning in an environment that is friendly to the language they already speak. But, Spanish is in no way derivative of English. It is a foreign language in the most literal sense of the word. AAVE, however, is derivative of SAE. So, doesn't it stand to reason that it is easier to transform AAVE to SAE than to transform Spanish into SAE? To me it's as simple as saying, "Don't say 'ain't,' say 'am not.'" If I am wrong, please elaborate.

LittleOldLady
07-18-2005, 10:34 PM
[ QUOTE ]
OK...you may be able to enlighten me on this issue. Here's my objection to what you just said. Spanish-speaking persons can benefit from learning in an environment that is friendly to the language they already speak. But, Spanish is in no way derivative of English. It is a foreign language in the most literal sense of the word. AAVE, however, is derivative of SAE. So, doesn't it stand to reason that it is easier to transform AAVE to SAE than to transform Spanish into SAE? To me it's as simple as saying, "Don't say 'ain't,' say 'am not.'" If I am wrong, please elaborate.

[/ QUOTE ]

What we are talking about is called code-switching, going from one variety of a language to another variety of that language as circumstances dictate. Many of us have the ability to code-switch from a regional or social dialect of English to (so-called) Standard American English (which is of course simply another dialect, but one with prestige) at will. When schools are faced with students who cannot code-switch from, say, AAVE to SAE, they need to come up with a way to help students develop that ability. Some who have researched and written on this subject have advocated that the contrastive methods used to teach English as a second language be adapted to teach SAE as a second dialect (or variety). I suppose some people who have heard of this idea may have mistakenly interpreted it to mean that AAVE is a foreign language, rather than simply a variant of English, one of many.

Mutual intelligibility is the touchstone used to determine whether whether two 'varieties' are different languages or merely different dialects. I, who am not a speaker of AAVE, can nonetheless understand it perfectly well; thus it is a dialect. To say otherwise is simply wrong. Back in the days of the Oakland School District flap over Ebonics, it was even asserted that there was a genetic predisposition for African-Americans to speak Ebonics, a language foreign to English. This was a ludicrous assertion, first, because any human being can learn any language if taught in infancy/childhood (language learning becomes much more difficult after puberty--particularly for monolinguals), and, second, because 'race' is a cultural construct, not a biological/genetic one.

Another example of determing whether a language variety is a separate ('foreign') language or simply a dialect is Scots. A number of Scottish linguists assert that Scots is a separate language, having developed in the kingdom of Scotland from Northumbrian. Since I can understand Scots (whether we are talking about Henryson or Bobby Burns or Trainspotting) and I am not a Scot, I say Scots is a dialect of English.

It has been said that a language is a dialect with an army, a navy, and a flag (see Spanish and Portuguese and Mandarin and Cantonese). Obviously AAVE has none of those things /images/graemlins/smile.gif

LOL

James Boston
07-18-2005, 10:43 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Mutual intelligibility is the touchstone used to determine whether whether two 'varieties' are different languages or merely different dialects. I, who am not a speaker of AAVE, can nonetheless understand it perfectly well; thus it is a dialect. To say otherwise is simply wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm fine with that. As I've stated, I'm not fine with educators suggesting AAVE is another language, nor am I fine with them teaching it as an acceptable form of speech. I have no objection to acknowledging it as a common form of colloquial speech, or an official dialect of English. I object to teaching ANY dialect as a proper form of speech.

-Skeme-
07-18-2005, 11:56 PM
[ QUOTE ]
"For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language.'

[/ QUOTE ]

Hehe, yeah it's like any other foreign language.. except for the fact it's associated with drug dealers, thugs and total morons. If they're rallying to teach kids how to sound like an uneducated chump, they should also teach kids how to [censored] their pants and run into walls.

B Dids
07-19-2005, 12:25 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"For many of these students Ebonics is their language, and it should be considered a foreign language. These students should be taught like other students who speak a foreign language.'

[/ QUOTE ]

Hehe, yeah it's like any other foreign language.. except for the fact it's associated with drug dealers, thugs and total morons. If they're rallying to teach kids how to sound like an uneducated chump, they should also teach kids how to [censored] their pants and run into walls.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's really no need for this post or poster. Way to generalize an entire race fucksteak.

My current location is your fault.

-Skeme-
07-19-2005, 12:51 AM
Do you not realize how stupid you sound? I didn't mention a race, did I? No, I didn't. The idea that I was referring to, or singling out an entire race with my statement was entirely your own. You do realize that more than one race speak ebonics?

Teaching broken english to students is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. It's completely ridiculous.

B Dids
07-19-2005, 01:09 AM
It's funny.

When idiots are challenged on [censored] like that, they're always like "I didn't see race, you brought it up, why is this racial" like we're too dumb to see through their arguments.

Ebonics or AAVE (African American vernacular english) is about race, and any discussion that tries to ignore that is just foolish.

If you think that you could say what you said to any black person and try and convince them it wasn't about race, you're [censored] kidding yourself.

Again, the issue isn't teaching "broken english". It's about acknowleding that it exists so that you can work with it.

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebonics#Educational_issues)


[ QUOTE ]
Proponents of various bills across the country, notably a resolution from the Oakland, California school board on December 18, 1996, desired to have Ebonics officially declared a language or dialect. At its last meeting, the lame duck Oakland school board unanimously passed the resolution before stepping down from their positions to the newly elected board, who held different political views. The new board modified the resolution and then effectively dropped it. Had the measure remained in force, it would have affected funding and education related issues.

The Oakland resolution declared that Ebonics was not English, and was not an Indo-European language at all, asserting that the speech of African American children belonged to "West and Niger-Congo African Language Systems". This and other assertions, particularly the statement that "African Language Systems are genetically based", contributed to a widespread reaction of incredulity and hostility. Supporters of the resolution later stated that "genetically" was not racism, but a piece of linguistic jargon.

Proponents of Ebonics instruction in public education believe that their proposals have been distorted by political debate and misunderstood by the general public. The belief underlying Ebonics education is that African American students would perform better in school and more easily learn standard American English, if textbooks and teachers acknowledged that AAVE was not a substandard version of standard American English, but a legitimate speech variety with its own grammatical rules and pronunciational norms.

For African American students whose primary language was Ebonics, the Oakland resolution mandated some instruction in that language, both for "maintaining the legitimacy and richness of such language... and to facilitate their acquisition and mastery of English language skills." Teachers were encouraged to recognize that the errors in standard American English that their students made were not the result of lack of intelligence or effort, but due instead to the fact that the language which they normally use is grammatically different from SAE. Rather than teaching standard English by proscribing non-standard usage, the idea was to teach standard English to Ebonics speaking students by showing them how to translate expressions from AAVE to standard American English.

[/ QUOTE ]

-Skeme-
07-19-2005, 01:18 AM
Again, you are not responding to anything I said. My point was that ebonics is associated with thugs, drug dealers and uneducated persons. Ebonics is slang, whether you want to admit that or not. Slang is not proper, this is an undeniable fact. Pawning off slang as another form of communication is ridiculous. Should we also have Redneck 101 where students learn to speak in hillbilly jargon?


[ QUOTE ]
Rather than teaching standard English by proscribing non-standard usage, the idea was to teach standard English to Ebonics speaking students by showing them how to translate expressions from AAVE to standard American English.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I don't know why you're quoting this crap when it's blatantly obvious that I was only responding to the quote posted by the OP.