Letters to the Editor

In response to yesterday’s letter to the editor in The Pitt News, Ebonics is only one… In response to yesterday’s letter to the editor in The Pitt News, Ebonics is only one sociolect of many in America, but one that is stigmatized due to outright racism, expressed in the more indirect form of disdain and mockery of the features of the particular speech of a targeted group. The last part of the preceding sentence must be thought of as opinion, but the first part is accepted as linguistic fact by those who study language. It is extremely hard to disagree with the idea that stigmatization of dialects and language features is usually associated with lower classes or underrepresented races in America. If I say bucket and you say pail, and I’m white and you’re black, is that significant? How about if we’re both white? The relevance of this example is undeniable. While many features of black English vernacular, or Ebonics, do differ from what you would consider “standard” or proper English, the only real difference is how we as people perceive them. As the linguist William Labov demonstrated in his “Language in the Inner City: Studies in Black English Vernacular in 1972,” black English is a rule-governed and somewhat widely used dialect in America

Let’s take a look at some of the assertions you make and why it’s troubling that you are teaching students. You say those who did not “critically analyze” Dyson’s comment about Ebonics being a “sophisticated language which needs to be appreciated over time” are “guilty of ‘dummifying’ our children.” The level of ignorance in this could rip the very fabric of time/space as we know it. As it has been proven that African American Vernacular English is a complex, rule-governed form of English, Dyson is correct. I read the “appreciated over time” part as meaning we need to work at reversing these misconceptions and truly accepting the ways of life and language of those who lead different lives than us (whomever we may be) so we can better cohabitate the world. You didn’t, but why? You are likely a black woman who has adopted (or has always spoken) a more standard variety of English and consequently believes this has helped to deliver you to a position in society that is more advanced than most of your race, and that all of those who refuse to speak a certain way (yours) are only doing themselves a disservice by continuing to use “gutter language” as you put it. Does this still make sense to you? Me either.

You bring up a valid point, which is that 10 percent of Duquesne Middle School students are considered proficient in reading and writing, and you cite recent PSSA test results. However, AAVE is a sociolect that shows no sign of going away. It has been well established and is beyond the scope of this writing that whites have historically forced blacks into a lower societal position in America. The PSSA test most definitely is written in a form of standard English. It is indicative of the overall educational dilemma facing blacks in America, and why there has been little progress towards better literacy rates in most areas. However, if you knew anything about this issue, you would probably know about the Oakland Unified School District Court decision in 1997, which to paraphrase stated that black English is valid and that due energy should be given to it by teachers (YOU) and administrators in regards to the notable differences in how language is processed and absorbed. Imagine reading a book written in heavy black vernacular and being expected to speak as such at most times.

Please be informed before you think and write at the same time.

Nick Celender

nec4@pitt.edu

April ’06 Bachelor of Science in Information Science