Running head: DIALECT V.

STANDARD

My Dialect, Your Standard Matthew R. Savinda Community College of Allegheny County

ENG 101-DT90 Ms. Jessica L. Legg October 29, 2011

DIALECT V. STANDARD My Dialect, Your Standard

Standard English is a complex and confusing idea, the implications of which are probably impossible to fully grasp. The idea of a standard language is so difficult partly because it is different to individuals and groups, and partly because it is in a state of constant flux, but mostly because it is dictated by those who have the authority to do so and much importance is tied up in controlling the perceptions of language. Standard English is perceived through many different lenses; the most common and, arguably, most important of which are race, class, and gender. These things influence the language in ways verbal, vocal, and cultural. The idea of Standard English is just an abstraction of the English language that people speak. It is thought to be the way that all Americans are supposed to speak and write. Having a standard is useful in codifying our language so that we have a source that encourages understanding and communication between different dialects. A dialect is defined as a form of a language spoken in a particular geographical area or by members of a particular social class or occupational group, distinguished by its vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation (Collins English Dictionary, 2009) by the World English Dictionary. Some American dialects are virtually incomprehensible to others. Though some people do speak Standard English it is important to distinguish that it is still only one dialect of American English-speakers. Having a standard gives a goal to which all can relate when speaking cross-dialect. The highly educated and those in political and cultural positions of power have set Standard English, through education and societal perception - encouraged through media, to be the true and correct English. The consequence of this is that those who are perceived to speak a

DIALECT V. STANDARD

dialect other than Standard English are often unfairly looked down upon as inferior in education, stature, and bearing (Chaika, 1994). Spoken Standard English is heavily influenced by its written counterpart. In writing, Standard English offers very specific rules of spelling, grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary. This serves to maintain uniform reading and writing skills and therefore written communications among a population. Linguist John McWhorter (1998) postulates that having a codified, written language slows down language change and maintains coherency among the many dialects of a language; which, given time, would become another language entirely and, therefore, depart the realm of mutual understanding. Those who speak Standard English are generally perceived to be better educated and upwardly mobile, because they tend to hold positions of power and influence or positions where they have considerable public exposure, such as newscasters and politicians. Standard English is also dynamic in its application, just as any other language is. Which is to say, what is standard today may not be standard tomorrow. McWhorter (1998) shows this in how, not all that long ago, we used the word you only in the plural sense. The word thou was the present-singular pronoun. This is no longer the case and no one speaks or even thinks of it. You has become the acceptable form and the rules of grammar have followed suit. Changes like this, and others, are constantly happening to all forms of language, Standard English included. Another, more recent, example of standard speech change in America is that of /r/ pronunciation in such words as car or bar. Before, roughly, 1960 the northeastern /r/-less speech was considered right but with the growth of western and mid-western universities and shifting perceptions /r/-full speech has become standard. A good comparison of this being John F. Kennedy versus his younger brother Edward Ted Kennedy, respectively (Chaika, 1994).

DIALECT V. STANDARD Standard English is not, as is generally understood, the pure or original English. What one might call the original English or Olde English is, in fact, almost a foreign language. One would need a translator to communicate with a speaker of Old English as compared to Modern English (McWhorter, 1998). Standard English is not a better form of English than any other dialect. It is perceived that way by those that speak it. This is the prerogative of people who hold power or position, I have power and influence in society so my way of speaking must be the right way might be how the thinking would go. Standard English has no legitimizing factor that sets it over another dialect other than public perception. All of this is not to say that Standard English does not serve a purpose. It certainly does. As noted Linguist Elaine Chaika (1994) showed in Language: The Social Mirror when people wish to seem more suitable to upward mobility or if they plan on leaving their place of origin they will discard many elements of their native dialect in favor of the perceived standard so that they will be more relatable in their travels. Also, as McWhorter (1998) has already shown us,

without the benefit of intercommunication and at least some of a population attempting to ascribe to some kind of standard, in a, relatively short, 500 years or so, different dialects will become completely different languages. This would make things like governance, commerce and trade, and travel exceedingly more difficult. Imagine going on vacation to, say, Florida, and needing to hire a translator upon leaving the resort! On a more negative note, Standard English can be abused by those with power and influence to set themselves above non-Standard English speakers. A non-standard dialect may be stereotyped as being lower-class or uneducated. For instance, black people who speak Standard English are perceived to be intelligent and hard-working because Standard English is the language, supposedly, taught and used in the classroom, and those who do not speak

DIALECT V. STANDARD Standard English are perceived to be working-class and uneducated, much like inner-city hoodlums. Race is a hot-button issue in America and our language is not immune from this. Americans define race mostly by the physical differences that are apparent in different peoples, but also through such things as ethnicity, ancestral location, and cultural identity. Historically, America has had to deal with serious issues involving race, not the least of which is the enslavement of Africans in the South. For many, this issue has not yet seen resolution and new problems arise all the time. On top of these things, race dynamics also change with the times. Those who were considered non-white, such as the Jews, pre-World War II, became white afterwards because there was a gap in the middle-class that America needed to fill (Brodkin, 2002). Black Americans have evolved their own form of the English language referred to as Black English, Black Vernacular, or Ebonics. The way that they speak the English language is derived from three main sources: the plantation owners, who were likely not standard dialect speakers themselves, white indentured servants who worked among them; these were nonstandard-British-dialect speakers, and creole-English speaking slaves from Barbados. Black English has influenced Standard English in many ways through interaction, pop culture (rap music), and even poetry. Many black slang terms have made their way into American culture (McWhorter, 1998). Minorities who have found success in America have had to develop an ability which is called code switching. They are able to transition between their native dialect and a more

DIALECT V. STANDARD standard dialect as the situation demands. This enables them to be viewed as educated and intelligent among professionals and still be accepted in their hometown communities. Class is defined in our nation by how much money and/or influence one possesses. America is an exceptionally affluent State. We possess much of the worlds wealth and most of that wealth is concentrated with the richest 1% of Americans. Even so, the poor in this nation

lay claim to far more than the worlds poor could ever hope to see. Those in the upper-class tend to hold jobs and positions of power and influence. They are doctors, lawyers, politicians, CEOs of businesses large and small, and those in the entertainment industry: actors/actresses, singers, and so on. These people earn annual incomes of more than $250,000. Those in the lower/working-class hold jobs like janitors, housekeepers, laborers, and other, mostly physical, menial jobs requiring little education. They earn less than $20,000 per year. The middle-class fills everything in between: managerial positions, engineers, bricklayers, landscapers, teachers, and just about everything else. They, obviously, earn somewhere between $20,000 and $250,000 in a given year (Gilbert, 2003). Class is another thing that influences language. Specifically, the upper-class in a society are the ones who get to define what the standard is. As one might imagine, it is the dialect that the upper-class speaks that becomes the standard dialect. In America, we have a small upperclass, a fair amount less-small lower-class, and a substantial middle class. Typically in our country, the upper class defines the standard dialect, the middle-class comes close to, and ascribes to the upper-class dialect, and the lower-class speaks dialects that are looked down on. Slightly more than half of the population of the United States of America is made up of people of the feminine persuasion. Yet, America remains a patriarchal society. In some circles,

DIALECT V. STANDARD women are treated as second-class citizens based on nothing other than the fact that they are women. For instance, when men and women work in the same positions with the same qualifications and responsibilities; in fact, all other things being equal, and the only difference being sex, women tend to be paid less than men. Certain positions are viewed as being maleappropriate: politicians, doctors, bosses; and others are viewed as distinctly female: nurses, nannies, housekeepers. Linguist James Gaffney (1995) claims in She Who Laughs Last: The Gender Inclusive

Language Debate that, unlike racism, none have ever experienced language without sexism. He even goes so far as to say, If dealing with racist language is like dealing with an infection, sexist language is more like the result of a defective gene (Gaffney, 1995, pg. 9). The problem is that such speech has become so ingrained in our society that it would be tremendously awkward to effect its removal. He/shes and such notwithstanding, McWhorter (1998) asserts that a significant problem regarding this subject has already been resolved with the use of the word they in the third-person plural. Rather than saying Has someone dropped his or her pen? which is obnoxious and still begs the question of which sex is represented first and why, people already say Has someone dropped their pen? So, grammarians aside, yay for America. To conclude, language is complicated. There are so many facets to it, all of which are dynamic in time and space. People, the arbiters of language, are eternally causing and solving problems of all kinds, even, and sometimes especially, in the realm of language. I dont know what the answers are to many of these problems, but I suspect that those of us who are willing to ask the questions, and seek truth, with love for our fellow-man (and fellow-women), will find them.

DIALECT V. STANDARD References Brodkin, Karen. (2002). The Social Construction of Difference: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. Rutgers University Press Chaika, Elaine. (1994). Language: The Social Mirror (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle Publishers dialect. (n.d.). Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. Retrieved October 27, 2011, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dialect Gaffney, James. (1995). She Who Laughs Last: The Gender-Inclusive Language Debate. America, 173(5), 8-12. Gilbert. (2003). The American Class Structure: In An Age of Growing Inequality (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth McWhorter, John. (1998). Word on the Street: Debunking the Myth of a Pure Standard English. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing