Proposition 227 (was Re: NP Ebonics)

[Malignd]

With some of the dust cleared around this debate, it
is peculiar to find people referring to Rob Jackson's
side of this as opposed to my own.  Rob wrote:

<< The fact that people speak a language other than
English as their first or chosen language does not 
mean that they're stupid, or that they can't learn to
understand and use "standard" English to communicate
in formal and informal contexts. But appropriate
educational programs - and that includes acknowledging
and respecting individual and cultural identities, and
cultural diversity -  need to be provided to ensure
that they get the chance to do this.>>

There is nothing in this I disagree with; he suggests
no more or less than teaching--prescribing--standard
American English in schools, to blacks as well as
whites, as well as everyone else. 

He also wrote:

<<A society which institutionalises failure and
exclusion for individuals from certain backgrounds -
whether on the basis of religion, skin colour, 
wealth, language ability, migration status, IQ or
whatever - is far from  democratic.>>

This is somewhat murkier.  It's not entirely clear
whether he means by a "society which institutionalises
failure and exclusion for individuals from certain
backgrounds" one which teaches a standard American
English/grammar/spelling or one that doesn't.  I
assume, from context, he means the former.

He also wrote:

<< The backlash against providing equity programs for
students with Language Backgrounds Other Than English
resurfaced in California just under five years ago: It
set a nasty precedent, and similar policies have been
adopted in other US states since then.>>

Here he says something far more sweeping and
debateable.  Resistance to the Oakland Proposition
took many forms, some of which were undoubtedly racist
and/or ignorant in nature.  But there was much to
legitimately criticize in it and no nasty precedent
was necessarily set by those doing so.

He also wrote:

<< Perhaps "Ebonics" wasn't the best example to bring
to the debate, as it  is a derivation from (or
subversive reappropriation of) "standard" American
English rather than a "foreign" language ...>>

Although I agree, the authors of the Oakland
proposition did not.  The Oakland proposition said
that Ebonics was in fact a language with roots in
African languages and not a derivation of standard
American English.  

It was also claimed that the speaking of Ebonics was
"genetic, to those who spoke it" a claim later
retreated from.




__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com