Standard English and Academic English (Dialect) Learners in the African Diaspora

Abstract

This article compares and contrasts the learning of (Standard?) English as a second dialect in the United States with the learning of Standard English as a second language in South Africa. It argues that the common denominator of racial segregation has had clear econolinguistic and educational consequences that have been, and might continue to be, detrimental to the welfare of historically subordinated racial populations. In order to advance the teaching of Academic English, Standard English, and Workplace English in both contexts, educators should address stereotypes associated with specific varieties, students' goals, the potential benefits of gaining communicative competence in particular varieties, and the potential consequences of not gaining that competence.This article compares and contrasts the learning of Standard English as a second dialect with the learning of (Standard?) English as a second language. In an effort to place conceptual parameters around this problem, we devote primary attention to the plight of speakers of Black English, which is used here to include English as spoken by Blacks in the Republic of South Africa and in the United States. By this operational definition, Black English will vary considerably due to the source and circumstances of its colonial birth. Although the educational and conceptual issues raised here are pertinent to other populations, the case at hand results-in partfrom a legacy of overt racial discrimination against Black people.These introductory remarks provide an overview of several topics that intersect in ways that share as a common denominator language discrimination based on race. The California experience, growing from the infamous Ebonics controversy

Critical Language Pedagogy in an Urban High School English Class

“…Such attitudes have been documented in recent research on the Oakland Ebonics controversy and K-12 teachers' beliefs (Perry & Delpit, 1998;Wassink & Curzan, 2004). Finding terminology that accurately represents particular dialects and their use in society without reinforcing existing stereotypes surrounding language is difficult (Baugh, 2004); thus, we acknowledge that our choice of terminology, although meant to balance accuracy and clarity, is not without flaws. Although the term stigmatized highlights widespread societal reactions to such dialects, it deemphasizes their richness and value.…”

“…Despite considerable theoretical work on critical approaches to language instruction for speakers of stigmatized dialects (Alim, 2005;Baugh, 2004;Foster, 1992;Wolfram, Adger, & Christian, 1999), educational researchers have given minimal attention to the systematic study of actual classroom practice. This article provides a concrete example of how critical language pedagogy might be enacted and the learning opportunities that it could provide for adolescent students who speak AAVE as well as their teachers.…”

“…Our conception of critical language pedagogy begins with guiding students to "expose and demystify as well as demythologize some of the truths that we have been taught to take for granted and to analyze them critically and carefully" (Nieto, 1999, p. 17), particularly "truths" about language and dialects. Research in linguistics and in education suggests that effective language and literacy instruction for students who speak stigmatized dialects of English often begins with revealing and critiquing language ideologies, or collectively held beliefs about language, dialects, and language users (Baugh, 2004;Milroy, 2001;Wassink & Curzan, 2004). Dominant language ideologies in the United States often posit standard dialects as more grammatical, logical, and educated than stigmatized dialects such as AAVE (Milroy, 2001;Wassink & Curzan, 2004).…”

“…By questioning widely held beliefs about language, critical language pedagogy also explicitly acknowledges that our society unfairly discriminates against some dialects and privileges others (Baugh, 2004;Milroy, 2001). Sociolinguistic perspectives on dialect diversity, which view all dialects as equally logical and grammatical, have been shown to provide an alternative viewpoint to linguistic discrimination and a foundation for examining the presuppositions behind language-related prejudices (Wolfram, Adger, & Christian 1999).…”

Linguistic Contributions to the Advancement of Racial Justice Within and Beyond the African Diaspora

“…Ball's (2006) comparison of the education and literacy development of Black students in the USA and South Africa affirms important differences in educational opportunities available to students from low‐income backgrounds who lack fluency in academic modes of discourse (Heath 1983; Baugh 2004). Fluency in academic discourse, whether in Cape Town, Paris, or St. Louis, will enhance students’ prospects for higher education and eventual access to higher paying employment.…”