> cognitive biases Those cognitive biases are called "understanding GA/RP" and "not understanding AAVE". As I have said elsewhere, this is no different from a

> cognitive biases Those cognitive biases are called "understanding GA/RP" and "not understanding AAVE". As I have said elsewhere, this is no different from a German attempting to parse Dutch, except a Dutch speaker can actually point to a country that has Dutch as official language. This is not a fault of AAVE. This doesn't make Dutch "realer" than AAVE. This is just how humans work. It's apparently relatively universal and not new, so it's naive to imagine we can "fix humans" to eliminate that bias. The real problem is that Americans have negative associations with black people. That is fixable because it is largely an artefact of the US's incredibly unfortunate history. Once that is fixed the bias against AAVE is no less worth delving on than the bias against Southern American English in general. The phenomenon you're trying to call out is called a "sociolect". These days almost every "non-standard" dialect acts as a kind of sociolect because the "standard" dialect is expected to be followed in all kinds of formal or even informal settings from political speeches to the workplace. I'm not arguing anything is superior. I don't understand why you keep responding to every single one of my comments by arguing I'm making some kind of claim about superiority. You can't simplify Standard English and arrive at AAVE, yes. That's what I am saying. But you can simplify Standard English, put it alongside actual AAVE and a non-AAVE speaker will likely find the two indistinguishable and think they're both "just simplified English". I'm talking about appearances in the context of another language here. Of course no language is "superior". I'm making a pragmatic argument about why people act the way they do, not about some nonsensical cultural shouting match.