Log in

View Full Version : Ebonics: Your Thoughts?



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

MojoJojo
08-18-2007, 05:48 PM
Of course it's a real language. Any combination of sounds that have definitions is a language. An unfortunate one, mind you....in my opinion...but still a language.

Kaylinn
08-18-2007, 07:42 PM
Basically what your saying is people who speak Ebonics sound uneducated/ghetto, i beg to differ. Everyone will always have their view of ashy and classy. The kids you see in their white tees and fitted hats speaking "slang" from the High Schools...well thats todays rap music influence in full effect.


What clothing someone wears has no bearing anything.....

Actually...For a very long time, since I begame interested in boys...that style of dress was what turned me on. Thoes types of guys were what I dated.

I still think guys that dress like that are hot. Very hot.

But....I have dated enough of them to know that they anre't usually nice people. And I have dated enough of them to see that in general, guys who speak like that aren't the brightest in the bunch.
The stories I could tell.....


The guy I'm with now...he is very smart. He speaks liek a normal person.He's a good looking guy and He dresses slightly preppy, and HATES hats. His style of dress doesn't really turn me on much. There's nothign sexier to me than a guy in a fitted hat.

But the way this guy treats me.....I'd take that anyday over a hot guy in a hat because all thoes guys ever did was shit on me.

BlackSheEp3
08-18-2007, 08:00 PM
What clothing someone wears has no bearing anything.....

Actually...For a very long time, since I begame interested in boys...that style of dress was what turned me on. Thoes types of guys were what I dated.

I still think guys that dress like that are hot. Very hot.

But....I have dated enough of them to know that they anre't usually nice people. And I have dated enough of them to see that in general, guys who speak like that aren't the brightest in the bunch.
The stories I could tell.....


The guy I'm with now...he is very smart. He speaks liek a normal person.He's a good looking guy and He dresses slightly preppy, and HATES hats. His style of dress doesn't really turn me on much. There's nothign sexier to me than a guy in a fitted hat.

But the way this guy treats me.....I'd take that anyday over a hot guy in a hat because all thoes guys ever did was shit on me.

Glad to hear your current partner is doing you good. I asked some of my girl friends and they said when they see a guy in a fitted hat they think its "played out"....ive noticed it too. Kaylinn, i didnt expect you to favor the whole urban look thing. I thought your preference was GQ or "causal/preppy" style.
like this: http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5200118,00.jpg

Kaylinn
08-18-2007, 08:02 PM
Ugh. Not at all.

One of my ex's....I was 17, and yes, that is FUBU. ( had to take a picture of a picture. I don't have a scanner)

And one of my current boyfriend.

When I was young...like 12 I had the biggest crush on this boy who wore extremly baggy pants( they were in at the time) he always wore a hat, and I thought it was the sexiest thign in the world when he didn't wear a shirt and I coudl see his boxers peek over his jeans. I think that crush formed the type of guys I went after. UNfortunatly...guys that dress like that tend to act a certain way...disrespectful to girls. It took me a very long time to stop going after what I found sexy...and start going after the good boys instead.

BlackSheEp3
08-18-2007, 08:06 PM
Ugh. Not at all.

So you like this style?
http://media.drjays.com/dj-includes/images/central/men/akademiks_main.jpg

Kaylinn
08-18-2007, 08:15 PM
No...that look ssilyl to me also. I do not like...what they have on....I'm searchign for pics now...

cameron_keys
08-18-2007, 08:26 PM
Kaylinn..your current man is SO much hotter!

All Good Things
08-18-2007, 08:27 PM
Well.,since Ebonics is not a recognized separate language and instead, a dialect..they cannot be considered bilingual. You cannot speak two languages..if one is not a language.
bi·di·a·lec·tal (bī'dī-ə-lĕk'təl)
adj.
Using two dialects of the same language

I love it when people quote dictionaries back to me. It makes me feel all powerful and shit. :)

That definition just made the exact same point I outlined in my previous post. In order to be considered bidialectical, they would need to use two dialects of the same language (the example I used was the AAVE dialect and a Southern American English dialect.) Those individuals would be bidialectical.

The reason they are bilingual, and not bidialectical, is that they are using one standardized language (Standard American English) and one dialect of that language (AAVE).

I am a contributing author to a fascinating book called The Five Minute Linguist. It's a compilation of articles on language written by the top experts in the field, but designed for a non-specialist audience. The authors were invited by the national editorial board to participate. The book is really very entertaining, because we originally wrote the pieces for broadcast on NPR, and they were then distributed to high schools nationwide. The book was then published in soft cover in the UK.

The book covers such topics as what happens when babies are deprived of all language; how is language learned in infancy; how bilingual children keep languages separated in their mind; whatever happened to Esperanto; do you have to be a masochist to study Chinese; is there really a "correct" form of language usage and, of course, the difference between a language and a dialect.

I derive no benefit from sales of the book -- proceeds go to the National Museum of Language, so my recommendation is free of commercial interest. You can find it readily on the Internet.

Kaylinn
08-18-2007, 08:28 PM
Yeah..he is...you grow up, tastes change.....

I wouldn't trade him for nothing.

Nautilus
08-18-2007, 08:55 PM
t/jack:

TOO, do you get to put 'lexicographer' on your customs form for occupation? Do they go, 'wha...?'

snoopy
08-18-2007, 08:57 PM
The reason they are bilingual, and not bidialectical, is that they are using one standardized language (Standard American English) and one dialect of that language (AAVE).i'm not sure i understand. you're reaffirming that it's one language (eliminating the bilingual label) but noting a "master language" and a "slave language" (true, true, a very very poor choice of descriptives but it's late and i'm having trouble processing in my brain).

also that seems to be splitting hairs, assuming certain pov's, and imo from a global view incorrect. it would be bidialectical still.

but from an american point of view i would agree with you. that's assuming that the SAE is the 'mother tongue' and AAVE as the 'daughter'. although those quirky brits may have a differing opinion of that but they talk funny anyways. :P

aviendha
08-18-2007, 09:04 PM
You're not considered bilingual if you speak American Standard English and British Standard English. You're not even considered to be speaking two different dialects! Why would you be considered bilingual for speaking ebonics? That's just stupid and elevating ghetto slang to something higher than it actually is. It's not a language, it's slang. It's no more a language than speaking in Hax0r-speak is a language, or lolcats is a language. If I say, "Dude, that guy is totally 404, maybe he's got a glitch in the Matrix," am I speaking Nerdonics? No. Any kind of subculture will develop its own memes and slang, but that doesn't make it a language or even a dialect. Next thing we know, some dumbass will be trying to act like texting shortcuts belong in the dictionary. "U r totally spking another lang lolz"

Mr Hyde
08-18-2007, 09:10 PM
Of course it's a real language. Any combination of sounds that have definitions is a language. An unfortunate one, mind you....in my opinion...but still a language.

OK this is semantics...it's not a language separate from English. It IS English, just an ethnic pronunciation/form of it...maybe even just an accent.

LuckiCharm
08-18-2007, 09:31 PM
Ebonics being its own language is the most rediculous thing I've heard in a while, I don't care how technical you try to get. And for the record, I grew up around this "dialect" so I never assume someone is "uneducated or ghetto" when they open their mouth and speak ebonics. So I'm not down-talking it...Just saying it's not another language. Sorry, it's not.

miabella
08-18-2007, 09:44 PM
AAVE is to some extent derived from west african, scots and irish and some english dialects that came over here 100s of years ago. so anyone saying AAVE aka 'ebonics' isn't a proper dialect, is thuggish, etc, etc, is pretty much insulting scots, irish, west africans (and that region covers over a dozen countries, so lots of people to be insulting), and english folks.

languages, including dialects, come from someplace.

but most of the complainers are doing that prescriptivist thing i hate, even as one could easily take apart any number of their posts for crappy grammar and spelling.

but one can be assured that they'd somehow swear their actual poor use of SAE is somehow more acceptable than a dialect of SAE that follows clearly defined rules and structures.

Tart
08-18-2007, 09:47 PM
I don't get why anyone would speak/dress/act in a way that dumbs them down. ( speaking of slang )

EOM

aviendha
08-18-2007, 09:51 PM
AAVE is to some extent derived from west african, scots and irish and some english dialects that came over here 100s of years ago. so anyone saying AAVE aka 'ebonics' isn't a proper dialect, is thuggish, etc, etc, is pretty much insulting scots, irish, west africans (and that region covers over a dozen countries, so lots of people to be insulting), and english folks.

My forebears are all from Scotland, Ireland and England, and I doubt they ever considered their slang to be proper English, much less a separate dialect or language that should be taught in a school. I have yet to see any Scots, Irish or English group claiming such a thing, either.

All Good Things
08-18-2007, 09:56 PM
^ My dear, AAVE is not a language, you are correct. It is a dialect of SAE, which we've been saying all along. It is most certainly not "slang," not by a million miles.

Let's show how AAVE is just so damned efficient. I was always blown away by the Kanye West lyric, "His baby mama car, crib is bigger than his." I always thought, "how [in the fuck] am I going to translate that in less than about, oh, 20 words, and really capture the meaning?"

So Kanye uses 9 words; I really need about 22 words in SAE to get the full meaning across:

"The mother of his child, to whom he is not married, has a car and house that are bigger than his are."

OK, kick it up a notch. Here is another part of the song:

You will see him on TV any given Sunday
Win the Superbowl and drive off in a Hyundai
She was s'pose to buy ya shorty TYCO with ya money
She went to the doctor got lipo wit' ya money
She walkin' around lookin' like Michael wit' ya money
Shoulda got that insured, GEICO for ya money( your money)

OK, 56 words. Damn. No way I'm going to capture everything in SAE in 56 words. Think I can do it in less than 85?

You will see him playing pro football on TV on any given Sunday;
Even if he wins the Super Bowl, he will drive home in some cheap Hyundai;
She was supposed to buy your child toy cars with your money;
But instead, she went to the plastic surgeon and got liposuction with your money;
She's had so much plastic surgery that she is walking around looking like Michael Jackson with your money;
You should have taken precautions, like you insure your car with GEICO with your money.

Yes! 56 words in AAVE and 87 to get it into SAE!

BrunetteGoddess
08-18-2007, 10:04 PM
As to CorsicaFire's OP, I find those questions a little odd. First of all, if people speak it and communicate with others in it, of course it's a "real" dialect or language. Academically, it has been accorded the status of a dialect because it does not differ so drastically from English that it is another language.

Suggesting that African Americans who speak that particular variety of English are "trying to sound stupid or 'ghetto' on purpose" is unbelievably offensive, ignorant, classist and racist. If that's the language they know that's the language they speak. If it isn't their main dialect then they might switch to it when it's socially appropriate, much as my talk gets more Texan when I'm in the south.

Oh Jesus Susan, it's quite obvious that you really didn't read the thread that this stemmed from. It was actually a nudge at BlackSheep more than anything. I am not racist and I will say that only once. I don't feel the need to repeat myself so that you believe me either. Obviously you misunderstood the premise of the questions. I was trying to start a new topic so another could stop being derailed.

Thanks.

WiseGuy_TX
08-18-2007, 10:06 PM
...y'all brainiacs should start posting your arguments/discussions in ebonics. Just for fun that is. :D

aviendha
08-18-2007, 10:08 PM
So what if it's more efficient? It's still crap.

I could make it into even fewer words using texting-speak. That doesn't mean I'm gonna start submitting my resume using that shit, or writing my emails in it to send to my coworkers or boss. I don't even use it in posts or IMs.

I suppose I could be more sensitive to whoever's heritage I might be insulting, but you know what, I don't even care. It's not about heritage anymore, it's about exposure to the media and the positive reinforcement the uneducated gets in today's society. Education is free in this country, and it's not like it takes a huge amount of effort to learn to spell and speak correctly (edit: for a native speaker born in the US, I'm not including people who are learning English as a second language). But American society is founded in a deep and prominent antipathy toward aristocracy and privilege (since it was against precisely that which we fought to establish our independence from Britain), and I'm sure that's why people feel compelled to act like something like ebonics qualifies as a legitimate lingual structure in any way but the technical definition.

Cockney slang is considered a legitimate dialect in England in terms of linguistic study, but I doubt they're fucking offering it in classes over there.

pinkkitten
08-18-2007, 10:19 PM
i respect how other people choose to express themselves verbally. But i hate it when people who speak with whatever kind of slang act like if i'm the stupid one cause i can't understand what they said. Like start making fun when i ask them to explain what something means or something.

All Good Things
08-18-2007, 10:35 PM
But what does "spell and speak correctly" really mean? It means spelling and speaking in accordance with Standard American English, but not the other dialects that are alive and well in the culture. And who decides what SAE is? Mostly, it's based on the most common usage in print, and it's then codified in dictionaries by linguists who study how the language is actually used. Then we get into these amazing food fights. I personally like chocolate cheesecake as my best weapon.

I will say this again and again and again and again until I am purple in the face: there is no universal "correct" form of Standard American English. This is the dirty little secret of lexicographers. There is just a standardized one, and that one is in constant flux based on how the language is used by actual people. The notion of "correct" English was hammered in your brain endlessly by unimaginative grammar Nazis with their own psychosexual conflicts when you were too young to defend against your own ownership of your own language. The language is yours, not theirs. Trust me on this. I've translated enough books and introduced into the English language dozens of phrases and terms and ideas that never, ever existed in the language before. Once they appeared in some book, the grammar Nazis jump on board and tell you that you have to observe it. Bullshit! Don't believe them! Publication confers no special privilege at all. There are millions of people who converse in beautiful, intense, unparalleled speech and write in prose that represent wonderful elevations above the confines of any standard that has been arbitrarily established by a backward-looking committee of lexicographers.

miabella
08-18-2007, 10:57 PM
as i noted, pretty much everyone in this thread talking about how AAVE 'dumbs you down' or whatthefuckever uses 'standard english' incorrectly-- several instances have appeared in this very thread!

'prescriptivism' is the notion that some grammatical uses are superior to others. this incidentally creates goofy rules like 'don't end a sentence with a preposition'. there is a very funny quote deflating that prescriptivist 'rule'.

a lot of posters are dismissing AAVE/ebonics from a place of complete linguistic and grammatical ignorance, and that is simply that.

i could pause to decline at length the latent racism that is quite palpable subtextually, but that is somewhat beyond the scope of this primarily linguistic discussion.

exotisch23
08-18-2007, 11:04 PM
It's trashy and I hate it. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

LuckiCharm
08-18-2007, 11:08 PM
I don't believe ebonics "dumbs you down" I grew up around the dialect. I grew up in downtown Atlanta.
Again, Ebonics being it's own language is retarted. Sorry it is.

Tart
08-18-2007, 11:09 PM
as i noted, pretty much everyone in this thread talking about how AAVE 'dumbs you down' or whatthefuckever uses 'standard english' incorrectly-- several instances have appeared in this very thread!

'prescriptivism' is the notion that some grammatical uses are superior to others. this incidentally creates goofy rules like 'don't end a sentence with a preposition'. there is a very funny quote deflating that prescriptivist 'rule'.

a lot of posters are dismissing AAVE/ebonics from a place of complete linguistic and grammatical ignorance, and that is simply that.

i could pause to decline at length the latent racism that is quite palpable subtextually, but that is somewhat beyond the scope of this primarily linguistic discussion.

Oh because slang is just with a race.?! Jesus fucking christ. Get a god damn grip. Leave the fucking race card alone and pick another argument because that one is fucking over used by you and moot.

Point a finger and call us all racists if that's the best you have to offer.

slang sounds fucking uneducated at best. And let me just say slang is not connected with ANY certain group . Or defined by a god damn race.

"SCENES" however have their own ebonical terms and yes outside of those realms it sounds fucking stupid.

Just like someone using internet speak in real life. it has it's place. and it's time. Ravers have their own ebonics. So do club kids and crust punks..

ebonics and slang same fucking difference for fucks sake.

All Good Things
08-18-2007, 11:15 PM
t/jack:

TOO, do you get to put 'lexicographer' on your customs form for occupation? Do they go, 'wha...?'

My company actually translates the US Customs declaration forms in about 24 languages, so I'm usually much more focused on whether our QA staff was paying attention to producing PDFs in outline form so the DHS printers do not produce gibberish because their printers lacked the proper font support or settings in the bidirectional languages. And Arabic has nothing on Pashto or Dari, trust me.

If I were a full-time lexicographer, rather than a business owner, I would probably see the inside of a strip club once every decade. Maybe. But thankfully, I have a wide variety of professional titles and interests, including business owner, stock trader, translator, author, commentator, columnist, media spokesman, and, alas, lexicographer.

My college roommates, who were kept up through endless nights of, well, enthusiastic female vocalisms, once insisted on a trip to Jamaica that I actually write "gigolo" on the form, even though I protested that I was never actually a gigolo, but a dom female pleaser in very intense training. We settled on "student" to keep from being sent home on the next outbound flight. :)

DJ Maimed
08-18-2007, 11:15 PM
Oh because ebonics is just with a race.?! Jesus fucking christ. Get a god damn grip. Leave the fucking race card alone and pick another argument because that one is fucking over used by you and moot.

Point a finger and call us all racists if that's the best you have to offer.

Ebonics sounds fucking uneducated at best. And let me just say ebonics is not connected with ANY certain group . Or defined by a god damn race.

"SCENES" however have their own ebonical terms and yes outside of those realms it sounds fucking stupid.

Just like someone using internet speak in real life. it has it's place. and it's time. Ravers have their own ebonics. So do club kids and crust punks..

ebonics and slang same fucking difference for fucks sake.

Thank you.....thank you very much....thank you infinity.

Tart
08-18-2007, 11:16 PM
Im so fucking irritated with this BULLSHIT.

God help us all. I have to go flick my bean or something and let out this aggression .

aviendha
08-18-2007, 11:34 PM
I'm just going to go back and stare at that picture of George Clooney.

Ah, much better. You know, this reminds me of my folklore class. The term "folklore" has a very specific definition among folklorists, and applies to very specific things. For something to qualify as being "folk" to a folklorist, it cannot be formally taught, it cannot be popularly distributed in a fixed form (e.g. a song on the radio or a printed story) and it cannot be commissioned (paid to perform). So, making up songs to sing around the campfire is "folk", playing Stairway to Heaven on your guitar is not "folk".

Now, if you hear a song by the Indigo Girls on the radio, what genre is it? Folk. Does that mean everyone who calls the Indigo Girls a folk band is wrong, and that they're not giving proper attention to the study of folklore by using that term? No, it means that according to the popular understanding, the word "folk" has a different meaning than the strict scholastic definition.

My point in all this is that nobody outside of linguists gives a tin shit whether ebonics has an efficient structure and blah, blah, blah. Furthermore, I should think that someone who claims to be a linguist would know that English DOES have established rules and grammatical structure, all established languages do! That's what qualifies it as a language. And so, yes, there IS a right way and a wrong way to speak that language, spell words, and use words in context. If you want to make the argument that language drift occurs because eventually enough people speak a language incorrectly that their speech eventually develops its own rules and grammar, then okay, I can accept that. But let's face it--ebonics arose in the first place as a vernacular of the least educated and wealthy segment of society, and it is STILL the vernacular of that same segment. Notice how I'm not including race in here, because as has been stated several times, there are about a zillion white and/or Asian kids who emulate this speech because they think it's cool, and plenty of people of all races (and economic levels) who don't speak like this either. So it has nothing to do with REGION, or isolation of a population, which is usually what affects language, and everything to do with the perception of status of people who use that vernacular, and the imitation of that vernacular by the people who want to appropriate that supposed status.

I see no reason to admire or legitimize the LACK of effort a person or group of person puts into communicating properly with his neighbor. This is right up there with lowering any other educational standard so you can get an A for doing less work or work of a poorer quality. And luckily, the law seemed to agree that there was no need to legitimize it either by including it in the curriculum.

This whole discussion reminds me of the scene in "To Kill A Mockingbird" when Calpurnia takes the kids to her neighborhood. She slips into ebonics while she's there even though she speaks proper English while in the Finch household, and Scout asks her why. Calpurnia says that it's not because she *can't* do it, but that her peers would consider her stuck-up or trying to reach beyond her social level if she spoke properly around them. Which only emphasizes my point, that people TODAY speak ebonics not because it's their "native language" but because they choose to despite being exposed to plenty of influences in speaking American Standard (in, say, virtually every piece of printed literature, 12 years of compulsory education and every news and non-pop show on television). In a lot of cases, they learn how to speak correctly and THEN dumb down their language! That is not language drift either. That's the use of slang.

britt244
08-19-2007, 12:06 AM
Oh because ebonics is just with a race.?! Jesus fucking christ. Get a god damn grip. Leave the fucking race card alone and pick another argument because that one is fucking over used by you and moot.

Point a finger and call us all racists if that's the best you have to offer.

Ebonics sounds fucking uneducated at best. And let me just say ebonics is not connected with ANY certain group . Or defined by a god damn race.

"SCENES" however have their own ebonical terms and yes outside of those realms it sounds fucking stupid.

Just like someone using internet speak in real life. it has it's place. and it's time. Ravers have their own ebonics. So do club kids and crust punks..

ebonics and slang same fucking difference for fucks sake.

i dont think ive ever agreed with one person on here as much as i have with you in quite a few threads recently. haha..

i dont care if a person is black, white, asian, hispanic, freaking sweedish for all i care. i will always think that ebonics makes a person sound uneducated, regardless of race, ethnicity, or anything else.

Nautilus
08-19-2007, 12:29 AM
I have a wide variety of professional titles and interests, including business owner, stock trader, translator, author, commentator, columnist, media spokesman, and, alas, lexicographer.
So you put the one that is least likely to get you a digital exam from a scary customs guy. Wise. 8)

Nicolina
08-19-2007, 01:36 AM
Let me try to address the issue of a "language" vs. a "dialect," because I know it can get confusing.

So, let me quote from a text, because I have no special credibility here, other than having taken a Linguistics 101 course (and dating a hot linguist. ;))

The text is Language: Readings in Language and Culture, 6th edition, edited by Clark, Eschholz & Rosa)

"We all speak a dialect; a dialect is not a language form spoken by other people in other places." The linguist's definition of a dialect is that it is "simply a habitual variety of a language, regional or social. It is set off from all other such habitual varieties by a unique combination of language features: words and meanings, grammatical forms, phrase structures, pronunciations, patterns of stress and intonation...No dialect is simply good or bad in itself; its prestige comes from the prestige of those who use it. But every dialect is in itself a legitimate form of the language, a valid instrument of human communication, and something worthy of serious study."

So, in this sense, Standard Vernacular English is a dialect, just as AAVE is a dialect. (Given this fact, Cameron is probably correct in describing speakers fluent in both vernaculars as "bidialectical.")

However, in any culture, there is almost always a dialect that is spoken by the ruling classes, which is considered the "official language" of the culture. Variations from that official "language" are classed--socially and culturally--as "dialects" of the dominant "language." But linguistically, the terms "language" and "dialect" are sort of interchangeable.

So how do you know if something is a language or a dialect? One possible answer is "mutual intelligibility." If you can more-or-less figure out what someone is saying, they are probably speaking a "dialect" of the same "language" that you speak--or, rather, a language that is very closely related to the one you speak, and very recently diverged.

However, even this criterion is not sufficient to define a language vs. a dialect. Case in point: Swedish and Norwegian are more-or-less mutually intelligible. But they are culturally defined as different 'languages.' Why? Apparently because the Swedes and the Norwegians can't stand each other.

OTOH, Mandarin and Cantonese are NOT mutually intelligible, yet they are both defined as "dialects" of the "Chinese language" because their speakers are united under the same government and culture.

So, yeah, it's confusing. But I just thought I'd add my two little obnoxiously academic cents on this issue.

JustJayda
08-19-2007, 02:06 AM
est. And let me just say ebonics is not connected with ANY certain group . Or defined by a god damn race.



HUNH????

"Ebonics" comes from the words "ebony" and "phonics"

That connects it to Black Folks! We aren't the only "certain" group/race using it, but it damn sure is named for us.

For phuck's sake, first cornrows, then F.U.B.U., now Ebonics, we can't have shit!

Nicolina
08-19-2007, 02:09 AM
Considering the distinct lack of predictable verb conjugation and subject/predicate agreement, this is a debatable point.

This isn't true, CO. Read any scholarly work on the subject and you will find that BEV/AAVE has its own very well-defined grammatical rules. Just as there are multiple ways to express the same thought in standard English, there can be multiple ways to express a single thought within the well-defined rules of AAVE. This may be what you are perceiving as "unpredictability." But if you read the work of linguists who have really studied the structure of the language, you'll see how multiple forms may be conforming to a single a set of rules.

e.g.:

Geneva Smitherman's book, Talkin' and Testifyin': The Language of Black America.

William Labov and Steven Pinker are two other linguists who have written on the subject.

I don't think this is a point of contention among linguists.

A quote from Dr. Labov (professor of linguistics at UPenn), taken from his Testimony (http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~labov/L102/Ebonics_test.html) on "Ebonics" given January 23rd before the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services and Education of the Senate Appropriations Committee:

"The term "Ebonics," our main focus here, has been used to suggest that there is a language, or features of language, common to all people of African ancestry, whether they live in Africa, Brazil or the United States. Linguists who have published studies of the African American community do not used this term, but refer instead to African American Vernacular English, a dialect spoken by most residents of the inner cities. This African American Vernacular English shares most of its grammar and vocabulary with other dialects of English. But it is distinct in many ways, and it is more different from standard English than any other dialect spoken in continental North America. It is not simply slang, or grammatical mistakes, but a well-formed set of rules of pronunciation and grammar that is capable of conveying complex logic and reasoning."

Tart
08-19-2007, 02:09 AM
^ well goddamnit I didn't cornrow or wear the fubu

can we still be friends ?

Tart
08-19-2007, 02:13 AM
BTW I just wikipedia ebonics and read it all :)

I always saw ebonics as "slang" not certain to any race. I'm sure most probably see and feel the same way.

Now I'm educated to call it slang verses ebonics. So to restate what I said..

Using slang dumbs people down.

But what does this say about people that aren't black and use ebonics? I'm curious to know .

JustJayda
08-19-2007, 02:15 AM
^ well goddamnit I didn't cornrow or wear the fubu

can we still be friends ?

Its funny that u said that, cuz I was just having this convo with another sw'er.

Our differing opinions on SW about "stuff" has nothing to do with how hot I think you are (or anybody I disagree with), or that I still think you're cool as hell.

So of course:-*

Tart
08-19-2007, 02:19 AM
thank you damnit.

I totally went back and edited my posts to say slang instead of ebonics because I never understood there was a serious difference.

This lil polish girl has been educated.

I still hate slang though lol

Nicolina
08-19-2007, 02:26 AM
But what does this say about people that aren't black and use ebonics? I'm curious to know .

A lot of people in this thread have mentioned suburban white kids who co-opt some of the vocabulary/pronunciation/grammar that they hear in hip-hop.

IMO, this is completely different from being fluent in AAVE.

I guess technically, white kids who mix AAVE with standard English are speaking a pidgin. Maybe in the next generation, we'll get a brand-new creole. :D

Tart
08-19-2007, 02:33 AM
Im so not trying to go through 4 pages of rants ,flaming and some actual info to figure this out so i'll just ask (and hopefully get a simple answer )

what is AAVE?

Nicolina
08-19-2007, 04:48 AM
"African-American Vernacular English." (formerly known as Black English Vernacular/BEV for short.)

Sorry, other folks had mentioned earlier that this is the term used by linguists to denote the dialect in question. "Ebonics" was a word invented by educators, I think. Someone went into it back on page one, I think.

snoopy
08-19-2007, 08:15 AM
Let's show how AAVE is just so damned efficient. I was always blown away by the Kanye West lyric, "His baby mama car, crib is bigger than his." I always thought, "how [in the fuck] am I going to translate that in less than about, oh, 20 words, and really capture the meaning?"

So Kanye uses 9 words; I really need about 22 words in SAE to get the full meaning across:

"The mother of his child, to whom he is not married, has a car and house that are bigger than his are."too's been spying on my myspace page for background checks! ;D


So what if it's more efficient? It's still crap.exactly why lolcats speak isn't considered a separate language...yet!

but we'll get there eventually. we'll be in ur languages! :D

http://i14.tinypic.com/4q7i6up.jpg


Cockney slang is considered a legitimate dialect in England in terms of linguistic study, but I doubt they're fucking offering it in classes over there.exactly my point.

btw, i loved the "mockingbird" reference. i didn't remember that at all from the story. good one! ;)


OTOH, Mandarin and Cantonese are NOT mutually intelligible, yet they are both defined as "dialects" of the "Chinese language" because their speakers are united under the same government and culture.another great example! but i think their link together has to do just as much with their written language being identical as the political/social one you noted.

but the divergence of pronounciation is a great example/analogy of the situation we're currently discussing with 'ebonics'. especially because cantonese is considered the "lower class" and mandarin considered the "ruling class" or "northern speak".

now there WILL be a maelstrom of backlash from the cantonese speakers on that view/definition :P (especially british educated hong kong'ers) but that's the general view from the gov't, educators, and upper class. <--(modesty aside that's where my family background comes from so i hear it from that social group)

will ebonics eventually evolve into a separate (recognized) dialect and then language? maybe. but again, i think the originators of the term were completely wrong in their intent (catering to politics imho).

there's a number of sub-discussions that can evolve from that simple point though (education methods, budgets-political/social, racial issues, and so on). bleh.

BlackSheEp3
08-19-2007, 08:22 AM
HUNH????

"Ebonics" comes from the words "ebony" and "phonics"

That connects it to Black Folks! We aren't the only "certain" group/race using it, but it damn sure is named for us.

For phuck's sake, first cornrows, then F.U.B.U., now Ebonics, we can't have shit!

I agree.

Sirona
08-19-2007, 09:16 AM
Know what I think?

Shitty English is shitty english. Period.
Trying to give it a name and a title isn't going to change the fact that it's SHITTY ENGLISH.

Sh0t
08-19-2007, 09:21 AM
Slang is the words you use. Ebonics(not that I endorse it) has that plus a host of grammatical and phonetic rule changes. Replacing "friend" with "homie" is slang. A systematic replacing of the "th" sound with the easier to pronounce "d" sound is far more than slang. They are the very close physically, and many non-native speakers have a hard time with the "th" sound. They often replace it with "d" pure "t"(west indians tend to do this, they pronounced my name "Tim-o-tee-" rather than "Tim-o-thee", or say "one, two, tree")

Proper English is filled with a lot of imporperties anyway, so I see no reason why it is superior in any way except the tastes of the listener. I get irked when i hear "Aren't i'. Are is not the conjugate of 'to be' that matches with "I', yet pretentious assholes say it with EMPHASIS to make sure everybody knows they aren't using "Ain't I". I use "Ain't I". What is proper about using the plural form of "to be" with a singular pronoun? Nothing.

The double negative is so common, it seems to suggest that people have a certain preference by nature to use double-negativity for emphasis, rather than negation. "I'm not doing nothing" seems to want to naturally emphasize the lack of doing something, instead of being a convoluted way to say 'I'm doing something'. Since descriptions are of what people are doing/being, not what they are not doing, it seems like a natural habit. Many languages contain a built-in double negative for negation, such as French's "je" and "pas". Two negatives don't make a positive in French.

THen we have the drift of pronunciation and phonics away from the written word. "Right' is spelled as it is, yet it sounds like "rite". In older English, it was pronounced "richte", much more close to the way it is spelled. The list of these is nearly endless. Many who are unaware of the difference will pronounce it the way it is spelled, which to me seems sensible. Maybe they are the ones doing things correctly, trying to bring written and spoken word back in harmony. Remember that scene in Pretty Woman where she says "Ver Says" instead of 'Ver Sa Che"? We all laughed at her for being so ignorant and uncouth, yet she was following the rules of the language.

One area of grammar-Nazism I engage in is refusing to couple "more" with the comparative form of an adverb or adjective. "She is more close to me" or "She is closer to me" as opposed to "She is more closer to me". To me, the second begins to imply some sort of calculus like situation, a rate of change. Speed versus acceleration. Yet, it is so common, it has to make me wonder if that is some kind of natural tendency that "Proper English" has drifted away from by importing too many foreign words without converting them. In some sense, it's similar to the double negative. "more closer" is understood by most to mean "closer" but with a little more umph. than "closer"

Speaking of "umph", is it considered proper to take onomatopoeia and then use their nounified version? Nounification is a contraversial subject, too! The gutteral noise of "umph" becomes an elegant noun used to convey a slight bit of...umph. Nothing describes an onomatopoeia like an onomatopoeia.

Nounification itself is something that is transforming English these days, but because it "sounds proper" it is accepted. For example, I try to use the active voice. "She fucked". Yet, stuffy professors would prefer "She made love" or "she had sex". The less you use active voice, the more intelligent you sound, to some circles, like if you read any kind of political press release, there is very little active voice used at all. People "make statements", they don't "state". "She drove the car" has been pushed into the sea by "The car was driven by her". I concede that sometimes the emphasis wants to naturally move to the object in certain situations, but less common than the usage of passive voice, I feel.

Ebonics tends to eschew the passive voice and use the active voice. I cannot prove this, but my intuition tells me it has something to do with the overstressed masculinity of black culture. Active voice focuses on the doer. "I fucked her". Passive voice focuses on what got done to something. "She was fucked by Tim." The Academe focus on the passive might be because academics are feminine and thus, feel more connected to the passive voice. Slightly facetious, but it might be true.

Pure
08-19-2007, 09:23 AM
The problem is not with ebonics itself. It's with people not knowing how to spaek proper english when the situation calls for it. Speak however the hell you want to around your peers but if you are in a professional setting than adhere to the proper standards.I think that the problem is,many black youth might LEARN proper english but hardly EVER actually hear it spoken. Their parents, friends parents, the cashier at wal-mart, even some TEACHERS in an attemept to relate with thier students speak slang or ebonics.That sends a message that it's not really neseccesary to speak properly.

Optimist
08-19-2007, 10:20 AM
HUNH????

"Ebonics" comes from the words "ebony" and "phonics"

That connects it to Black Folks! We aren't the only "certain" group/race using it, but it damn sure is named for us.

For phuck's sake, first cornrows, then F.U.B.U., now Ebonics, we can't have shit!


Aaa-A-A--A MEN!! :rotfl: I hate to restate it but Black people's slang, dialect, etc. isn't about rappers and their videos. That's street. I could go to anytown and hang with the hustlers of any race and economic level and hear their style of speaking. It'll no doubt be foolish (hence the illegal hustling lifestyle). That's not the same as the light, fun lingo their legal living neighbors speak.

The goal for the legal livin' folks is to have fun and infuse more emotion in their conversation. Say it in a way that amplifies the FEELING. It's moving to hear, it's moving to say. It isn't about cursing or stupidity. It's about the pure joy some people feel in speaking! That's how our sayings get adopted. Plenty of descriptive fun expressions are adopted from us all the time so consider that before you trash all Black dialectical usage.

So, having said all of that--STOP taking that lowlife foolishness that some rappers glorify and equating it with Black dialect. I don't equate rocker foolishness with Euro-Americans. It's just one group talkin' crazy! (See how I used the slang to get a giggle out of yas?!) [note yas is a Philly white slang thing meaning you all or y'all]:P

Susan Wayward
08-19-2007, 10:31 AM
Oh Jesus Susan, it's quite obvious that you really didn't read the thread that this stemmed from. It was actually a nudge at BlackSheep more than anything. I am not racist and I will say that only once. I don't feel the need to repeat myself so that you believe me either. Obviously you misunderstood the premise of the questions. I was trying to start a new topic so another could stop being derailed.

Thanks.

Wha wha wha? Uh, where did I call you a racist? You didn't state any opinions of your own to begin with.

Though I have enjoyed all of the thoughtful and interesting commentary you've contributed to this thread. Oh, wait, you started it, never to return until now, to jump down my throat for no reason.