[stormingheaven] ebonics?

curtiss_leung at ibi.com curtiss_leung at ibi.com
Fri Aug 20 15:18:01 PDT 1999


Wojtek Sokolowski writes:

> ok, suppose that we all agree - and use all our time and effort to

> convince our so-called elected representatives - that ebonics is

> morally equivalent or superior (or whatever) to the so-called

> standard english.

As I understand it, so-called Ebonics was only ever meant *TO BE A

TEACHING TOOL FOR STANDARD ENGLISH*. Children were not going to be

taught a dialect that they already spoke, but rather *TAUGHT STANDARD

ENGLISH USING THAT DIALECT*. There's a paper at:

http://www.stanford.edu/~rickford/papers/VernacularToTeachStandard.html

(I just followed the link in Robert Chametzky's previous post)

That, among other things, describes three different pedagodic

techniques for using the vernacular -- in this case, Ebonics -- to the

standard form of a language. So the question Wojtek asked:

> Will that improve access to job market, decent housing,

> health care, or child care for the speakers of ebonics?

Should instead be:

> Will instruction in Standard English via Ebonics improve access to

> the job market, decent housing, health care, or child care?

Which simply becomes a question regarding the effectiveness of

teaching Standard English via Ebonics. There are no moral,

spectacular issues involved.

--

Curtiss



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list