5 ms·

This is thinly veiled nihilism. Yes, language is a human construct and no dialect is "better" in any universal objective sense. But as a society, we have expect

This is thinly veiled nihilism. Yes, language is a human construct and no dialect is "better" in any universal objective sense. But as a society, we have expectations for how our common language is spoken. We have positive and negative associations with different dialects. The negative associations are equally valid parts of the language evolution process as the positive ones. I don't think schools should start teaching street talk. Civilization is about bringing order to chaos and having a standard accepted language is part of that. The common dialect, called Written English, used around the world is a major strength for our civilization. Teaching AAVE in schools is not going to help the students in black communities, it's just going to further alienate them from the rest of society. Accepting papers written in AAVE isn't going to prepare people for reality: no one cares about social justice for a dialect, they care about effective communication.

jordigh 10y ago
> I don't think schools should start teaching street talk. Why not? It would help understanding how many people talk. This kind of snobbery can be seen in Canada. Many English-speaking Canadians have to take some years of French schooling. However, due to whatever the opposite of "cultural Marxism" (edit: okay, the opposite of "nihlism", per your own edit) is, English Canadians are mostly taught the prestige dialect of France, which is not nearly as useful to Canadians as learning how Quebeckers actually talk would be. Sure, the prestige French dialect isn't completely useless either, but without this linguistic snobbery we could be doing a lot better to understand each other.
Spearchucker 10y ago
What makes your choice of a standard accepted language a valid choice? How are alternatives wrong? Surely "Witten English" was the wrong choice while the preceding choice was common? Also, nihilism is impossible. A belief in nothing is still a belief.
tptacek 10y ago
No. Neither this essay nor the Oakland school system announcement that prompted it ever suggested "teaching AAVE in school". As the essay points out: that would be stupid, since students arrive at school already knowing AAVE. The bulk of the essay is an exploration of what AAVE actually is. Some of what emerges debunks the notion --- casually tossed off in your comment --- that the rules of AAVE are somehow lower-class; many of them are shared by other dialects of English, and even more are present in the primary dialects of other languages. Even more persuasive is the essay's central implied point: contrary to your description of AAVE as "street talk", AAVE is an intricately and rigidly defined dialect of English. You can't speak or write it simply by mangling Standard English. Well-educated writers who have samples of AAVE to work from fail comprehensively at replicating it, as the essay demonstrates in its hilarious payoff. To the extent the essay concerns itself with AAVE education, it's to point out that AAVE-aware education produces superior results in outcomes for Standard English education, in the same sense that teaching French people to speak Standard English is easier when you allow the speakers to acknowledge the French language.
dang 10y ago
> This is thinly veiled nihilism. > Civilization is about bringing order to chaos Please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12030324 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12030324 and marked it off-topic.
- marcoperaza 10y ago
  I think my comment was perfectly on topic in response to the parent comment. I wasn't aware that only superficial views of subjects are allowed to be expressed on HN, or that subthreads can't discuss underlying philosophical debates. Taking two quotes out of context and presenting that as the reason for marking the comment off-topic is a bit bizarre. Are you saying that any comment that appeals to broader philosophical arguments is necessarily off-topic?
dragonwriter 10y ago
The issue isn't teaching AAVE in schools, it's understanding the nature and structure of AAVE and it's relation to General American English so as to improve the teaching of the latter to native speakers of the former.

jordigh 10y ago

> I don't think schools should start teaching street talk. Why not? It would help understanding how many people talk. This kind of snobbery can be seen in Canada. Many English-speaking Canadians have to take some years of French schooling. However, due to whatever the opposite of "cultural Marxism" (edit: okay, the opposite of "nihlism", per your own edit) is, English Canadians are mostly taught the prestige dialect of France, which is not nearly as useful to Canadians as learning how Quebeckers actually talk would be. Sure, the prestige French dialect isn't completely useless either, but without this linguistic snobbery we could be doing a lot better to understand each other.

Spearchucker 10y ago

What makes your choice of a standard accepted language a valid choice? How are alternatives wrong? Surely "Witten English" was the wrong choice while the preceding choice was common? Also, nihilism is impossible. A belief in nothing is still a belief.

tptacek 10y ago

No. Neither this essay nor the Oakland school system announcement that prompted it ever suggested "teaching AAVE in school". As the essay points out: that would be stupid, since students arrive at school already knowing AAVE. The bulk of the essay is an exploration of what AAVE actually is. Some of what emerges debunks the notion --- casually tossed off in your comment --- that the rules of AAVE are somehow lower-class; many of them are shared by other dialects of English, and even more are present in the primary dialects of other languages. Even more persuasive is the essay's central implied point: contrary to your description of AAVE as "street talk", AAVE is an intricately and rigidly defined dialect of English. You can't speak or write it simply by mangling Standard English. Well-educated writers who have samples of AAVE to work from fail comprehensively at replicating it, as the essay demonstrates in its hilarious payoff. To the extent the essay concerns itself with AAVE education, it's to point out that AAVE-aware education produces superior results in outcomes for Standard English education, in the same sense that teaching French people to speak Standard English is easier when you allow the speakers to acknowledge the French language.

dang 10y ago

> This is thinly veiled nihilism. > Civilization is about bringing order to chaos Please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12030324 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12030324 and marked it off-topic.

marcoperaza 10y ago
I think my comment was perfectly on topic in response to the parent comment. I wasn't aware that only superficial views of subjects are allowed to be expressed on HN, or that subthreads can't discuss underlying philosophical debates. Taking two quotes out of context and presenting that as the reason for marking the comment off-topic is a bit bizarre. Are you saying that any comment that appeals to broader philosophical arguments is necessarily off-topic?

dragonwriter 10y ago

The issue isn't teaching AAVE in schools, it's understanding the nature and structure of AAVE and it's relation to General American English so as to improve the teaching of the latter to native speakers of the former.