Ebonics: A Question of the Validity of Separate Language Status - Coursework Example

Section/# Ebonics: A Question of the Validity of Separate Language Status The issue of accepting Ebonics as a separate language is one that is highly contentious. Ultimately, both sides of the argument have extraordinarily strong reasons for why they believe that Ebonics should either be included as a separate language for why it should be shined and excluded. As a means of seeking to understand these particular viewpoints, way their merits, analyze their basic levels of argumentation, and for whether or not ethical issues are represented within them, the following analysis will seek to provide the reader with a more understanding of this particular issue. It is the further hope of this author that such a level of discussion will be beneficial in providing an understanding for whether or not in bionic should continue to play a powerful role with respect to the way in which language is understood and represented or whether or not it should be diminished alongside other “incorrect” or “substandard” representations of a given language. Accordingly, the discussion that will be represented will first be concentric upon those arguments in favor of Ebonics being accepted as a separate language whereas the second portion of the analysis will be concentric upon those arguments against Ebonics being viewed as a separate language or utilized within a particular curriculum. The third and final portion of the essay will then be concentric upon weighing these particular points of view and determining which has the more logical arguments that represent an ethical decision as to whether or not Ebonics should play a greater or lesser role with respect to the future. One of the most basic arguments that individuals in favor of Ebonics being considered as a separate language promote is the definition of language itself. Indeed, according to Merriam-Webster, language can be defined as “a body of words and the systems for their use common to a people who are of the same community or nation, the same geographical area as a means of understanding one another”. From such a broad definition, it is clear and apparent that Ebonics most certainly can be considered as a language unique unto itself (Yancy, 2011). Whereas it is true that speakers of standard English can of course understand many of the phrases and vocabulary that Ebonics speakers regularly used, the differential is wide enough that it could be linguistically considered as a separate language. As a function of the differential in geography and cultural experiences that individuals who speak Ebonics have with respect to the remainder of English-speaking peoples, the determination of Ebonics as a separate language becomes even more resolute. Aside from the actual linguistic interpretation of whether or not Ebonics should be understood as a separate language, it must also be understood that a powerful argument that is made in favor of consideration of Ebonics as a separate language is rooted in the fact that this particular determination of the Ebonics aids in individuals coming to a greater level of acceptance and cultural understanding concerning their own legacy and roots (DeBose, 2006). As has been understood by many historians and anthropologists throughout the years, language is one of the greatest identifiers of the way in which an individual will view the world, view themselves, and you the group that they are identified with. Accordingly, individuals who argue this particular point of view engage with the understanding that as long as Ebonics is considered as “inferior” to “standard English”, the ability of an entire group of individuals to identify with themselves, their shared culture, and their history, will be greatly diminished. Delving back into linguistic issues and the way in which grammar and spelling is understood, a further argument for considering Ebonics as a separate language is that by providing this designation, schools and educational systems will be able to Ebonics alongside standard English. Benefit of this has to do with the fact that minute differences between the two can become underscored and the overall level of understanding for both languages can be maximized. If an individual teacher within a public school is asked what one of the greatest difficulties they face with respect to teaching English and an overall comprehension of grammar and spelling might be, they would necessarily denote that this is concentric upon the difficulties in helping to separate standard English from Ebonics in terms of written and spoken English (Grant et al., 2009). Accordingly, by teaching these alongside one another, something only possible in terms of denoting Ebonics as a separate language, these unique nuances and differentials can come to better be understood. A final and powerful argument that is used with respect to delineating a phonics is a separate language is contingent upon the belief that it would necessarily reduce forms of racism. Due to the fact that Ebonics has so long been understood as an “inferior” way of speaking, this level of inferiority is oftentimes inappropriately and incorrectly translated to mean that speakers of Ebonics are somehow culturally or racially inferior themselves. However, at such a point as Ebonics is understood, respected, and designated separate language, it is possible for these levels of tacit and uninformed racism to the reverse throughout society. In tandem with all of the individuals that believe that Ebonics deserves its designation as a separate language, there is an equally vocal group that points to the belief that demonic should never be considered as a separate language to English. One of the first arguments that is utilized within this particular point of view is that English, by its very definition, is a syncretic language. For instance, English has come to be the main the language of international trade, commerce, business, and social interaction. As such, it has found it necessary to incorporate many different rules, vocabulary terms, and approaches that are not common in other less universally known languages (Hopkins, 2008). Accordingly, by designating different branches of English as their own separate language, in addition to the many branches that already exist, these individuals argue for the fact that the overall power, strength, and diversity of English will inherently be reduced. Another argument against understanding Ebonics as a separate language also is contingent upon racism. In this alternate view, individuals, many of them within the African-American community, argue for the fact that the very name Ebonics itself is misleading and partially racist. The underlying reason for this has to do with the fact that the word Ebonics comes from a combination of two words: Ebony and phonics. However, even within this combination, a tacit realization or promoted idea is engaged; namely that this particular language is indicative of the way that all “enemy” people speak (Ronkin & Karn, 1999). Naturally, this is a gross exaggeration and not representative of the way that many African-Americans throughout the United States speak with one another or engage in language at all. A further argument against Ebonics being considered as a separate language has to do with the fact that much like learning Latin or a similar “dead language”, the overall application of Ebonics within the real world will be quite limited. Like it or not, the world that we live in is one that is dominated by “standard English”. As such, individuals that engage with the business world, or in any form of professional communication, are expected to speak standard English; both as a means of facilitating understanding and as a means of representing the fact that they are well educated individual (Kirk-Duggan, 1998). However, if the phonics is understood as a separate language unto itself, the overall level of understanding that can be represented, and subsequently the level of education that is inferred, is greatly reduced. Even though this is an unfair assessment, it is very much the way in which the real world judges and understands the individual speaker. Yet another argument against Ebonics being considered as a separate language is contingent upon the fact that even though many supporters of Ebonics point to its universality, at least within the United States, after the matter is that it phonics is much more regional as compared to universal. What is meant by this is that the Ebonics of a particular region, for instance the southern United States, is quite different from Ebonics that might be spoken in Chicago or Los Angeles. According to this, individuals that promote this particular argument against Ebonics point to the fact that what would instead be engaged, Ebonics working be understood separate language, would be a situation in which multiple languages must then be understood to exist within the “Ebonics language”. Although it is true that this breaks down into an argument over whether dialect or separate language is inferred, it is the belief of this author that the differentials are strong enough to warrant this particular viewpoint being relevant. An additional argument against Ebonics being considered is the question of who he by next education would actually benefit. For instance, most scholars agree that African-American students already have a general or exceptional understanding of Ebonics in the first place; prior to ever stepping into a formal classroom that might such a subject. Whereas it is that argued above that it phonics education could assist non-minorities and coming to a greater level of cultural appreciation and understanding, it must also be understood that different cultural appreciation approaches could be utilized and just as effective. Further arguments against it by considered as a separate language are concentric upon the difficulties that this would place upon this student that excelled within their studies and actively sought a job upon graduation. Like it or not, the world, at least as it currently exists, is one that places a high level of emphasis upon standardized nation and actively judge his people that do not ascribe to the norms of standardized nation that have thus far been discussed. Accordingly, an individual speaks fluent Ebonics will necessarily struggle with respect to finding adequate employment, within a great litany of different fields. The information that is thus far been presented, it is clear and apparent that local and passionate debate exists upon this particular topic. However, this fact notwithstanding, it is the belief of this particular analyst that the argument against incorporating Ebonics as a separate language has a greater degree of overall validity. The underlying reason for coming to such an assumption has to do with the practicality and real-world applications that Ebonics might offer the individual if it were indeed considered as a separate language. Ultimately, the arguments against Ebonics be Incorporated as a separate language are far stronger due to the fact that they point to the overall potential success of the individual as the final and determining metric of whether or not it should be considered. When one understands the flawed nature of the current world and points to the fact that so many individuals within society are so quick to judge an individual based upon the way in which they speak, the only relevant approach to the business world is to understand the negative ramifications that such an approach would have for the individual and act accordingly. In terms of ethical strength, it must also be noted that those individuals who promote Ebonics as worthy of inclusion as a separate language necessarily have the higher moral debate. This is due to the fact that the actual definition and linguistic interpretation of language is on their side. However, not to weaken the argument of those against Ebonics being viewed as a separate language, the ethical approach that such individuals normally take is one that understands the law of nature of the world and merely seeks to engage the argument in terms of realism versus idealism. Accordingly, from the information that is been presented and an analysis of the argument, it is clear and apparent that this debate is likely to be one that will be ongoing for many years to come. Regardless of this fact, from the debate and an understanding of the relevant decisions that have been presented, it is the view of this author that the interests of all parties would best be served within a system that appreciates and understand the relevance and importance of a dialectic interpretation of Ebonics; but one that still does not consider Ebonics as a separate language. References DeBose, C. (2006). The Ebonics Controversy as Language Planning. International Journal Of Learning, 13(7), 89-95. Grant, S. D., Oka, E. R., & Baker, J. A. (2009). The Culturally Relevant Assessment of Ebonics-Speaking Children. Journal Of Applied School Psychology, 25(2), 113-127. Hopkins, C. E. (2008). Whats all the Fuss about Ebonics? Lessons Learned from the Origins and Controversies of Black English Vernacular. Virginia English Bulletin, 58(2), 51-55. Kirk-Duggan, C. (1998). Ebonics as an Ethically Sound Discourse: A Solution, Not a Problem. Annual Of The Society Of Christian Ethics, 18139-160. Ronkin, M., & Karn, H. E. (1999). Mock Ebonics: Linguistic racism in parodies of Ebonics on the Internet. Journal Of Sociolinguistics,3(3), 360-380. Yancy, G. (2011). The Scholar Who Coined the Term Ebonics: A Conversation with Dr. Robert L. Williams. Journal Of Language, Identity, And Education, 10(1), 41-51. Read More