Validating Home Language - Ebonics in Oakland

Validating Home Language*
At the end of 1996, the Oakland, Calif. school board inspired nationwide debate with its endorsement of Ebonics as a
separate language. Responding to the furor, Dennis Baron clarified the role of English among African Americans — in
school and out. (The research cited in this essay was first published in 1997.)
The word of the year so far is “Ebonics.” Although it’s been around since the 1970s, few people had heard of it before
last Dec. 18, when the Oakland, Cal., School Board unanimously passed a resolution declaring Ebonics to be the
"genetically-based" language of its African American students, not a dialect of English. In its resolution, the school board
called Ebonics a separate language derived from African linguistic roots, with heavy borrowings from English vocabulary.
The board declared its intention to instruct “African American students in their primary language [Ebonics] for the
combined purposes of maintaining the legitimacy and richness of such language . . . and to facilitate their acquisition and
mastery of English language skills.” Claiming that “African-American people and their children are from home
environments in which a language other than English is dominant,” the board indicated that it would also seek bilingual
education funding from the federal government for the teaching of standard English. After a great deal of negative
publicity, Oakland backed away from some aspects of its original resolution. Oakland now plans to follow a less
controversial path, educating teachers about the language of their students, and teaching students how to translate
from Ebonics to standard English.
The linguist Max Weinreich once said that a language is a dialect with an army and a navy. The schoolchildren of
Oakland, who are predominantly African American, do not have the kind of power that brings their speech linguistic
prestige. The school board tried to do something to change the negative image of black language by calling it Ebonics
and asking teachers to learn something about the speech of their students.
But the American public reacted to the school board’s declaration of linguistic independence as if to an act of secession.
Black leaders and intellectuals condemned the board’s decision. They denounced black speech as slangy, non-standard,
and unworthy of the classroom; they condemned as racist the separatism that would result from any recognition of
black English. They warned that Ebonics would give schoolchildren a misplaced sense of pride and that students’
continued use of black English would exclude students from higher education and the corporate boardrooms of the
nation.
Is Ebonics a separate language, or is it a dialect of English?

We can say that two people use the same language—or dialects of that language—if they can understand each other’s
speech. If they can’t communicate, they are speaking separate languages. But linguists define languages politically and
culturally, as well as by degree of comprehension. Mandarin and Cantonese are not mutually intelligible, yet both are
Chinese. They are held together by an army and a navy and share a common writing system as well as a common
cultural definition of what it means to be Chinese. Serbian and Croatian are mutually intelligible, though they use
different alphabets, but because of their two separate armies what once was Serbo-Croatian is now considered by Serbs
and Croats to be two separate languages.
Most linguists, myself included, think of black English, or African American Vernacular English (AAVE) as a dialect of
English. It may exhibit some features derived from African languages, but it is readily recognizable and understandable
as English. Afrocentrists may see a political and cultural advantage in calling AAVE Ebonics and treating it as an
independent language, but even Oakland has backed away from this separatist position.
Are Ebonics and other dialects of English simply incorrect, sloppy speech?
American schools, particularly in the northern United States, have treated AAVE as a form of language requiring
remediation by speech pathologists or special-education teachers. But linguists have known for some time that non-
standard dialects, such as AAVE and Hawaiian Creole, to name another example, are consistent, legitimate varieties of
language, with rules, conventions, and exceptions, just like standard English. These dialects do not carry the prestige of
standard English, but they influence and enrich the standard language, keeping it vibrant and constantly evolving.
Examples from black English abound: in an article on Ebonics, the New York Times cited Richard Nixon’s use of “right
on!” “Rip-off,” “chill out,” and “dis” are other popular borrowings. Hawaiian gives us “aloha,” and Hawaiian Creole
expressions permeate travel brochures as well as the English of the islands.
Don’t students need standard English to be successful in school and in the

workplace?
Perhaps. But it is also true that discrimination—on account of their language—against people who speak non-standard
English usually masks other, more sinister forms of prejudice. Women and members of every ethnic and racial minority
have found that mastering the mainstream varieties of English—say, legal language, business English, or technical
jargon—by itself will not guarantee them equal treatment. Even if your language is irreproachable, if teachers,
employers, or landlords want to discriminate against you, they will find another way to do so.
Is Ebonics only “a black thing?”

No. For one thing, not all African Americans speak Ebonics, and not all Ebonics speakers are African American. A
significant number of whites, Hispanics, and Asian Americans who live and work closely together speak dialects that can
be characterized as black English. As linguists study AAVE, they find that, just like standard English, it is not monolithic,
but comes in flavors and varieties. In addition, as I’ve indicated above, mainstream English has borrowed heavily from
the speech of African Americans. So, in many ways, it is easier to conceive of all the dialects of English as variable and
continuous, rather than categorical and separate. For another thing, the problems Ebonics speakers face are shared by
speakers of other nonstandard dialects as well, whether they live in the inner city, in rural America, or even in the
suburbs.
*
Adapted from http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/americanvarieties/AAVE/hooked/

Validating Home Language - Ebonics in Oakland

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Validating Home Language - Ebonics in Oakland

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Validating Home Language - Ebonics in Oakland

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Validating Home Language*

Is Ebonics a separate language, or is it a dialect of English?

Don’t students need standard English to be successful in school and in the

Is Ebonics only “a black thing?”

You might also like