coined by Kemp... extrapolated further by Gilyard... still vague.
Dialect.
Usually we view dialect as a negative thing, or at least, a creation detrimental to our understanding and ability to test the notion of "Standard English". I believe we all can agree that dialect is a salient part of our code-switching experience and in fact, a huge part of our life.
One aspect of dialect we have not explored deeply yet: What is dialect doing? What is it doing REALLY?
In post-colonial studies we view the language of the oppressor/occupier as destructive to the natural voice of those being oppressed. Through the act of renaming, the oppressor creates new meaning and destroys what existed (the Assiwikales of the Pittsburgh region in Pennsylvania surely had different names for many things), the colonizers/occupiers/thieves would change the name of some living part of Native culture, hence, with time destroying it. Somethings of unadulterated beauty have kept their original name: Susquehanna, Lackawanna, et cetera. Our words claim something (Lackawanna = The forks of a stream). Through our renaming we lay claim to the object described.
In Gilyard's Let's Flip the Script he quotes Kemp's extreme example of oppressive naming deemed "genopsycholinguisticide":
"You are the victim of... of, let's see, we need a new
word for it... How about: genopsycholinguisticide.
Sure, why not: 'first there was the word... and the
word was nigger,' and you became -nigger. And
that, dear nigger, dear lost, blown -up bleeding,
stumbling, raggedy nigger, that is genopsycholin-
guisticide." -Arnold Kemp, Eat of me: I am the savior
The idea of a word being forced on humans and it having a self fulfilling prophecy effect has been written about by everyone from Master Raymond Gilyard to Bill Ashcroft.
My view of dialect is an opposition to the ridged occupancy of the "Standard English" reign. The production imperative introduced by Brandt, forces all Americans to adopt the "Standard" as means of providing equal and upward mobility. We strive to produce in the global world of gears too huge to see; here is where our sentient primate sounds out - in the dialect of our tribe.
We employ the very tools of the "Standard" reign to reassure our selves and the world around that our tribe is real and not too huge to see; survivalinguistices, if you will. Our dialect -much like "pittsburghese" and others- claims things known specifically to our native culture. It can be used as a tool to find out who doesn't belong on our "turf" at the utterance of a single word. It is an exclusive key into a club... maybe it's ethnic, geocentric, or age related... I bet it's all of these. If we loved this notion of "Standard English" so much, why have poetry? Why so much deviation in language?
How do you feel about Dialect? Do you think is exists solely to oppose the "Standard"?
Celebrate Independent Bookstore Day!
-
On the last Saturday in April, Independent Bookstore Day is recognized! It
brings together the celebration of classics, entrepreneurship, and …
The post ...
6 days ago
3 comments:
I do not think that dialect exists to oppose the standard. That gives too much agency to dialect. Everyone speaks a dialect. Even the colonizers spoke a dialect of their standard language. I think we are putting too much weight in standard English. We don't speak standard English, we don't write standard English (though we try). Standard English is just a model that we use in literacy. Dialect is something that is alive. This does not mean that the two are in opposition to each other.
I agree that Dialect can create a community (i.e. Pittsburgh), but if I moved to Pittsburgh tomorrow and didn't speak the dialect, that wouldn't make me less a citizen of that community.
I guess what I'm trying to say, and not doing a very good job at, is that both dialect and standard English are valid. They shouldn't be opposed or 'enemies'.
Also, I don't think standard English destroys poetry. Language is extremely important to poetry and I don't think standard English is any less important than a dialect.
I agree with Meg that dialects and Standard English are not mutually exclusive in any given community. The purpose of SE in today's culture, as I see it, is to provide cohesion in our schools and the rest of society. If we do not base our literacy on some standard then it cannot be measured. Whether measuring literacy is good or bad can be debated. On the other hand, the English we speak today is not the English of the past and that change can be attributed to the dialects that have come and gone throughout the years. Dialects do have the power to change culture, but I do not believe that they should replace SE. After all, what happens when the majority of people don't speak SE? The dialect becomes the standard.
Our love affair with SE is just that- a love affair. We might be able to keep up the charade for short amounts of time when we're writing or giving a formal speech, but SE, like a secret affair, is an unsustainable mode of communication. We ultimately return to our own dialect when we want our true voice to be heard, which explains why poetry sounds beautiful when written with dialect and stilted and sanitized when written in SE.
Post a Comment