Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 78 posts

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#21

Post by pg »

stcredzero wrote: post #12
pg wrote: post #11

The argument here is in effect that no vernacular variant of any language could possibly embody a mistake. Which is true for some definitions of mistake, and false for others. The problem with the definitions that make it true is that there's a slippery slope from dialects to idiolects. How many people have to speak a dialect for it to count as a dialect? You can't have any threshold, or you get weird consequences in…

You can't have any threshold, or you get weird consequences in hypothetical cases, like all the speakers of a dialect dying off except one. So if you decide that no vernacular can embody mistakes, you're bound to conclude that nothing any individual does can be a mistake, so long as they do it consistently. But lots of disciplines involving living things have problems like this. You can't "define" species. A species…

I don't disagree with anything that you say here, and yet you seem to be disagreeing with me, which is odd.

You seem to think I'm naively making some argument that depends on the words breaking down at boundary conditions. Actually I'm not. I believe a language spoken by just two people (or even one) is just as real a language as one spoken by millions-- that the difference in the way they're treated is a matter of politics, not the intrinsic qualities of the language.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#22

Post by stcredzero »

jacobolus wrote: post #18
stcredzero wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't have any threshold, or you get weird consequences in hypothetical cases, like all the speakers of a dialect dying off except one. So if you decide that no vernacular can embody mistakes, you're bound to conclude that nothing any individual does can be a mistake, so long as they do it consistently. But lots of disciplines involving living things have problems like this. You can't "define" species. A species…

> manners and rules of social conduct of rural African Americans are more complex than I am accustomed to Is that increased complexity, or merely lack of familiarity? I imagine someone coming to a large gathering of your family would also feel like there were new subtle rules to learn, etc. I know that I have to think more about myself when I'm stuck in an unfamiliar social setting than in one I've spent lots of time…

Actual increased complexity. "Crossing in front of" someone is socially significant, where it usually isn't for me. Addressing people is absolutely required when leaving the room, not just a good idea. There are more manifestations of the difference between children and adults. There are more unspoken rules, not just different ones.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#23

Post by jeromec »

jfarmer wrote: post #19
jeromec wrote: post #16

Regardless of the school board debating the potential validity of AAVE, I think it's misguided to experiment with asserting such "correctness" to teach kids that will grow up in a world that doesn't regard it as such. Save such philosophy for later academics, where the author/speaker can make a conscious choice of use - similar to the stylistic, but "incorrect", use of 'But' or 'And' to begin a sentence.

Why should dictionaries and grammar books be any more authoritative than the way people actually speak? AAVE isn't correct or incorrect any more than gravity is correct or incorrect. They both exist; it's our job to study them. Putting AAVE into a box labeled "incorrect English" is just a way to avoid the hard work of understanding our world. And yes, the "academic" understanding of AAVE includes the sociolinguistic…

> Why should dictionaries and grammar books be any more authoritative than the way people actually speak?

Simple, because of perception. Whether you like it or not perception matters. If I perceive your car as worth your selling price, a deal happens - doesn't mean my perception over yours is any more "correct". Same happens with stock prices, or hiring decisions. In other words, the things that matter in the day-to-day life in which we currently function include dictionaries and grammar books.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#24

Post by stcredzero »

pg wrote: post #21
stcredzero wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't have any threshold, or you get weird consequences in hypothetical cases, like all the speakers of a dialect dying off except one. So if you decide that no vernacular can embody mistakes, you're bound to conclude that nothing any individual does can be a mistake, so long as they do it consistently. But lots of disciplines involving living things have problems like this. You can't "define" species. A species…

I don't disagree with anything that you say here, and yet you seem to be disagreeing with me, which is odd. You seem to think I'm naively making some argument that depends on the words breaking down at boundary conditions. Actually I'm not. I believe a language spoken by just two people (or even one) is just as real a language as one spoken by millions-- that the difference in the way they're treated is a matter of p…

I believe a language spoken by just two people (or even one) is just as real a language as one spoken by millions-- that the difference in the way they're treated is a matter of politics, not the intrinsic qualities of the language.

I was also trying to provide support to the notion that, "the difference in the way they're treated is a matter of politics." Often, I'm replying to 3rd parties or countering common misconceptions in my "replies," which is probably trying to say too much in one post as well as leaving too much implicit.

In other words, I am grinding an axe here, but it's not directed at you.

A language spoken by exactly two would be very difficult to study. There are problems analogous to studying a species with only the last two individuals from which to draw data. I think there is some mechanism here that links the softer fields inextricably with politics. There is less academic "territory" to occupy, and so there is a handicap to the political power of academics who study that particular data, while at the same time, there's also often increased power that stems from scarcity. (Dead sea scrolls.)

EDIT: All human endeavors are linked with politics. "Softer" fields tend to be more encumbered.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#25

Post by loup-vaillant »

jeromec wrote: post #16

Regardless of the school board debating the potential validity of AAVE, I think it's misguided to experiment with asserting such "correctness" to teach kids that will grow up in a world that doesn't regard it as such. Save such philosophy for later academics, where the author/speaker can make a conscious choice of use - similar to the stylistic, but "incorrect", use of 'But' or 'And' to begin a sentence.

This is not philosophy at all. This is purely technical. The differences between AAVE and standard English (or should I say American?) are consistent. They are spoken by a lot of people. They follow precise rules (a grammar, actually). They're not erratic. So you can't call them "errors". The only other choice is to conclude that AAVE is a language —or a dialect.

Telling that to kids can only have good effects. First, it is telling them that they're not retarded —and neither are their parents. Second, it makes a clear separation between AAVE an standard English. They are two separate dialects, so, students should learn both. Third, if speaking standard English is "correcting errors", it may be percieved as a loss of Identity, "acting white" or whatever. If it is "speaking another language", this can't really be seen as such. For instance, I don't lose my French identity by writing English.

If the entire world sees AAVE as incorrectly spoken English without investigating furter, the entire world is simply mistaken. Kids should learn to correct the entire world's mistakes, not to do them.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#26

Post by a-priori »

pg wrote: post #11

The argument here is in effect that no vernacular variant of any language could possibly embody a mistake. Which is true for some definitions of mistake, and false for others. The problem with the definitions that make it true is that there's a slippery slope from dialects to idiolects. How many people have to speak a dialect for it to count as a dialect? You can't have any threshold, or you get weird consequences in…

What this argument doesn't account for is that there are universal rules that underlie all human languages -- even so-called "idiolects". When languages mutate, as they do constantly, they do so only within these rules. I'm speaking here of X-bar theory, bare phrase structure, and so on.

In effect, we're hard-wired to process language, and so are constrained by the limits of that wiring. A mutation ("mistake") that violates these rules will not 'stick', because the resulting language would be unintelligible to humans.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#27

Post by loup-vaillant »

jeromec wrote: post #23
jfarmer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should dictionaries and grammar books be any more authoritative than the way people actually speak? AAVE isn't correct or incorrect any more than gravity is correct or incorrect. They both exist; it's our job to study them. Putting AAVE into a box labeled "incorrect English" is just a way to avoid the hard work of understanding our world. And yes, the "academic" understanding of AAVE includes the sociolinguistic…

> Why should dictionaries and grammar books be any more authoritative than the way people actually speak? Simple, because of perception. Whether you like it or not perception matters. If I perceive your car as worth your selling price, a deal happens - doesn't mean my perception over yours is any more "correct". Same happens with stock prices, or hiring decisions. In other words, the things that matter in the day-to-…

Are you actually saying that our perception of the world is actually bending the world?

I agree that perception matters. For instance, a bad perception could mean you buy a worthless car, or make a bad hiring decision. It doesn't mean, however, that the car was worth your money, or that the bad employee was worth hiring.

Same thing about AAVE. If it has been proved that this is a dialect of English, it is a dialect of English. No matter how delusional the majority of the population can be.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#28

Post by jeromec »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #25
jeromec wrote: post #16

Regardless of the school board debating the potential validity of AAVE, I think it's misguided to experiment with asserting such "correctness" to teach kids that will grow up in a world that doesn't regard it as such. Save such philosophy for later academics, where the author/speaker can make a conscious choice of use - similar to the stylistic, but "incorrect", use of 'But' or 'And' to begin a sentence.

This is not philosophy at all. This is purely technical. The differences between AAVE and standard English (or should I say American?) are consistent . They are spoken by a lot of people. They follow precise rules (a grammar, actually). They're not erratic. So you can't call them "errors". The only other choice is to conclude that AAVE is a language —or a dialect. Telling that to kids can only have good effects. Firs…

> Telling that to kids can only have good effects.

I disagree. I think the mistake you are making is the focus around what is or is not "error". It's not about that. My friend from Argentina constantly strives to improve his American English, rather than his AAVE, regardless of your insistence of the validity of AAVE. He now works in an office on the 17th floor where he hires people, and I knew him when he knew no English. Like it or not it does makes a difference.

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#29

Post by kjhgftgyui »

jeromec wrote: post #28
loup-vaillant wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not philosophy at all. This is purely technical. The differences between AAVE and standard English (or should I say American?) are consistent . They are spoken by a lot of people. They follow precise rules (a grammar, actually). They're not erratic. So you can't call them "errors". The only other choice is to conclude that AAVE is a language —or a dialect. Telling that to kids can only have good effects. Firs…

> Telling that to kids can only have good effects. I disagree. I think the mistake you are making is the focus around what is or is not "error". It's not about that. My friend from Argentina constantly strives to improve his American English , rather than his AAVE, regardless of your insistence of the validity of AAVE. He now works in an office on the 17th floor where he hires people, and I knew him when he knew no E…

Yes - if he had chosen to improve his British English he would be on the 20th floor. Or doomed to always play the villain in Holywood movies

Re: African American Vernacular English is not Standard English with Mistakes

#30

Post by [deleted] »

pg wrote: post #21
stcredzero wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't have any threshold, or you get weird consequences in hypothetical cases, like all the speakers of a dialect dying off except one. So if you decide that no vernacular can embody mistakes, you're bound to conclude that nothing any individual does can be a mistake, so long as they do it consistently. But lots of disciplines involving living things have problems like this. You can't "define" species. A species…

I don't disagree with anything that you say here, and yet you seem to be disagreeing with me, which is odd. You seem to think I'm naively making some argument that depends on the words breaking down at boundary conditions. Actually I'm not. I believe a language spoken by just two people (or even one) is just as real a language as one spoken by millions-- that the difference in the way they're treated is a matter of p…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN