The general concept is that any language spoken has a set of built-in rules that aren't broken by it's speakers and give structure to the language. Even so-called "dialects" of English have rules that govern the language of its speakers. There is a trade-off with any dialect or language, while some aspects may seem less efficient or clear or sensible compared to Standard American English (SAE), other aspects are actually more efficient or descriptive. Often they are accomplishing the same thing, just in a different way. Here are some examples:
From Black English Vernacular (BEV):
"Where SAE uses there as a meaningless dummy subject for the copula, BEV uses it as a meaningless dummy subject for the copula (compare SAE's There's really a God with Larry's It's really a God). Larry's negative concord (You ain't goin' to no heaven) is seen in many languages, such as French (ne ... pas)."
"BEV allows its speakers the option of deleting copulas (If you bad); this is not random laziness but a systematicv rule that is virtually identical to the contraction rule in SAE that reduces He is
to He's..."
Still no SAE speaker would try changing Yes he is! to Yes he's! and no BEV speaker would change Yes he is! to Yes he!
"BEV speakers use the full forms of certain auxiliaries (I have seen), whereas SAE speakers usually contract them (I've seen) ... He be working means that he generally works, perhaps that he has a regular job; He working means only that he is working at the moment that the sentence is uttered. In SAE, He is working fails to make that distinction."
From the South:
"The same bumpkins who are derided for dropping g's in Nothin' doin' are likely to enunciate vowels in pó-lice and accidént that pointy-headed intellectuals reduce to a neutral "uh" sound."
From Boston:
"Bostonians who pahk their cah in Hahvahd Yahd name their daughters Sheiler and Linder. In 1992 an ordinance was proposed that would have banned the hiring of any immigrant teacher who "speaks with an accent" in - I am not making this up - Westfield, Massachusetts. An incredulous woman wrote to the Boston Globe recalling how her native New England teacher defined "homonym" [two words with different meanings that sound the same] using the example orphan and often. Another amused reader remembered incurring the teacher's wrath when spelled "cuh-rée-uh" as Korea and "cuh-rée-ur" as career and not vice versa as intended by the teacher."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I'd like to posit that along with SAE, BEV, and whatever other acronymical dialects you can come up with there is also something called AEV, or, "academic english vernacular." In this specific brand of english, one uses words such as "copula" without defining them for the poor unsuspecting reader who, if he does not undertand, must not be sophisticated enough to be reading.
heh. Don't worry, I don't really think you're an academic snob, I just realized that I have some vocab to learn if I'm going to keep up with you!:)
The truth is, I'm not really sure what a copula is either. Perhaps it is a linking verb...I suppose instead of typing this I should be looking up what copula means, but I'd rather live in ignorant bliss. I didn't feel that not knowing what copula meant detracted from the argument (i.e. big picture). :)
no way dude: big picture arguments rely for their strength on little-picture details. Otherwise you can talk in huge generalizations about, say, embellishing a copula, but when anyone doesn't believe you you can't give specifics that would convince them.
Plus, you just sound cool when you can define your terms:)
ps: if I were critiquing that last comment of mine, I would write a big red slash through "anyone" and "them" and mark it "subject-verb agreement error."
..And I call myself an english major..;)
you need to do the assigned reading I gave you and then you would understand why you DON'T have to put red marks through your comment
Post a Comment