Skip to main content

Analysing a Text Through a Bell Hooks' Quote

2. “I imagine them hearing spoken English as the oppressor’s language, yet I imagine them also realizing that this language would need to be possessed, taken, claimed as a space of resistance. I imagine that the moment they realized the oppressor’s language, seized and spoken by the tongues of the colonized, could be a space of bonding was joyous.”

The text I’m analysing through the selected Bell Hooks’ quotation is in an academic paper-style format, on the topic of “Variation and Change in English”

http://eprints.aston.ac.uk/439/1/studying_language_2a.pdf

Pages 3-4, Section 1.2.2:

“1.2.2 The Ebonics Debate
 In December 1996 the Oakland School District Board in the American State of California passed a resolution which gave official recognition to Ebonics, a separate language and distinct from English. Ebonics is a compound word made up of from the two words ‘Ebony’ meaning black and ‘phonics’ meaning sound, As a consequence, schools in the Oakland District were required to recognise and accept Black pupil’s speech in the classroom as part of a bilingual education program, so that pupils would be taught both in their primary language, Ebonics, and in English. The impetus for adopting such a resolution came from the persistently low educational achievements obtained by black students in the district, who made up over fifty percent of the school population. Although a local issue, the passing of this resolution quickly became national news and precipitated a fierce debate across all the American States. Amongst the issues raised by the Oakland resolution on Ebonics was whether or not black English could be shown to be linguistically a separate language. The very raising of this issue immediately brought to the fore another one, namely, the wider, more politically sensitive one of the nature of the relationship between language and ethnicity, and between African-Americans and Anglo-Americans in contemporary American society. At the heart of the debate was not, as it tended to be presented in the press, whether one was for or against Ebonics, but the far wider issue of equality: of equal access to education for all American citizens regardless of ethnicity and through it, right of access to a full participating status in American life regardless of class, ethnicity and gender (Clark 2001:237-252). Tatalovich makes the point that whenever an opportunity arises in America such as that provided by the Oakland Resolution to debate matters of language, ‘ordinary people rise to defend the English language against those who speak other tongues’ (1995:1). He points out that the Oakland Resolution, in common with similar episodes throughout the history of the United States, ‘is symptomatic of the debate over whether the United States should reflect a dominant English-speaking majoritarianism or encourage a multilingual culture’ (1995:2). Consequently, for Tatalovich, controversies over language such as those sparked by the Ebonics debate become not only linguistic conflicts but also moral ones. Such controversy is further compounded by the fact that, although English is by far the most common language spoken and used in most areas of American public life, it has no official recognition as the national language of all American states, nor indeed does any other language. Furthermore, unlike many other major English speaking countries in the world, the US Federal government has not been able to assert the dominance of English or legislate any kind of national language policy through the education system, since neither language nor education are enshrined in its constitution. One of the ways in which the United States gets around this is by the importance it places on immigrants into the United States taking a test in citizenship, which is in English. Not surprisingly, the Ebonics debate found its way onto the agenda of the Linguistics Society of America. In 1997, the society passed a resolution calling for the recognition of Ebonics, alongside African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) and Vernacular Black English, to be recognised as systematic and governed by linguistic rules. However, the society refused to be drawn upon the issue of classification, on the grounds that the distinction between ‘languages’ and ‘dialects’ or ‘varieties’ is usually made more on social and political grounds than purely linguistic ones. It argued that what was important from a linguistic and educational perspective was not whether Ebonics or AAVE is called a ‘language’ but that they, in common with other speech varieties, be recognised as systematic and governed by linguistic rules. At the heart of the debate then, according to the Society, was not the linguistic issue of what counts as a language, but more the social and political ones which surround the establishment and maintenance of language hierarchies. If linguistics does not help us in defining the term ‘language’, then maybe another way of defining language is in terms of sub-divisions or as a collection of mutually intelligible dialects. In this way, we can talk about the southwest dialect of France, the Black Country dialect of English, the Bavarian dialect of German and so on. So, for example, English as a language includes not only its standardised form known as standard English (see 1.3 below), but all other dialects which exist within the geographical boundaries of England and elsewhere. However, mutual intelligibility as a criterion is not very helpful, since different languages as well as dialects can be mutually intelligible. For example, Norwegian, Swedish and Danish, though accepted as different languages, can each be understood by the speakers of the other languages. Other factors concerning intelligibility also have to be taken into account, such as the individual’s degree of exposure to a language, her/his educational background and a willingness to understand.”

            This text details the struggle to get recognition for ‘Ebonics’ and African-American Vernacular English, along with other dialects within the Black community. Both Bell Hooks’ quotation and this text relate to an American cultural perspective and outlook, due to the focus with both of them relating to topics that are part of American history. While Bell Hooks talks about English being an oppressor’s language, which could honestly apply to the UK as well; her quote is catered more towards an American perspective and audience. This is because slavery holds a much bigger historical ‘footprint’ in American History, especially when compared to the UK. The British Empire sent slaves to its colonies (which, once upon a time, included America), however, not so much to the British Isles. In addition, the British abolished slavery at an earlier period than America did, and did not have to fight a civil war to do it. As such, slavery would have a lesser effect on British cultural perspective compared to the US. Therefore, Bell Hooks’ quote can be interpreted as being about Americans in particular rather than just English speakers.

            Moving on to the second text, and how it can be analysed through the lens of Hooks’ quote, the first part of the text especially, details how a school in Oakland, California, accepted and recognised Ebonics as a second language, allowing students from that school district (African-Americans accounted for over 50% of the district’s students) to be taught in both Ebonics and English. This, as mentioned by the text, sparked a debate over whether Ebonics and/or other African-American dialects, should be considered a separate language from English. Rather uniquely, the US does not (de jure) have a national language (good luck being in the US without a knowledge of English though), and as such, compared to other countries, it does not assert dominance of the English language, as per the text.  The text also details how mutual understanding between two different dialects or languages is not very informative in terms of classifying whether a language is a dialect or a separate language.

            This text relates to Bell Hooks’ original quote because it shows that the African-American community, at least in certain regions, has managed to make their own take on English, to the point where it is almost being considered a separate language. The fact that the school district in Oakland recognised Ebonics, and sought to teach it alongside Standardised English reflects how English has been “seized and spoken by the tongues of the colonised”, in Hooks’ words. The recognition of Ebonics by that particular district may also reflect a recognition of the African-American Community, as a distinct and equal entity in society, resisting historical oppression and unrecognition of their community and culture. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ibo Background Assessment

Note: Written from a non-Ibo person perspective, however the person has knowledge of what the Ibo culture is and what their achievements are and is speaking on behalf of it at the Royal Colonial Institute’s annual dinner. Set in the Late Victorian era, as the assignment suggests. Words in-between this: [ ], are explanations of phrases, and would not be said in the actual speech.             Greetings, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Royal Colonial Institute. As you all know, this is a time of great change in this world. In the span of 100 years we’ve gone from walking on foot and horseback, to being able to get to Edinburgh from London in only 8½ hours whilst sitting, in relative comfort. Despite losing America a century ago, the British Empire has grown immensely since then, acquiring massive territories in Africa. Truly, the Sun never sets on the British Empire. But despite your dominance and hegemony over the world, the human cost of the colonies that form your overseas empire has be
3 comments
Read more

This is Water and Alice Munro Short Stories

Alice Munro’s short stories are usually about women and families from a suburban and or rural setting. She discusses topics such as gender roles and interpersonal relationships, usually from a woman’s perspective. What David Foster Wallace’s theory on education can do with this, is that it allows us, the reader, to adjust our perspective, to be sympathetic to the characters. Although I personally am not a girl growing up in a post-WWII Canadian small town, I can still relate to or at least empathise with the characters and their emotions that Munro has created. In Munro’s stories, her characters tend to have personal flaws or defy the tradition character ideals, for example the narrator in “Boys and Girls”, despite her desire to keep her role helping her father and dislike of the role women are designated for in her family, she ends up subconsciously transforming, until she starts to fit the mould of what her family and society says a woman should be. While we, the audience, may expec
4 comments
Read more

Said Mahran Characterisation Blog Post

Passage: First stream-of-consciousness in chapter 4            This passage shows the reader what Said Mahran now thinks of his old mentor figure, Rauf Ilwan. In the previous chapter, Rauf, though cordial in his demeanor to Mahran, rejects his wish to work as a journalist at his newspaper – due to Mahran’s lack of qualifications, but gives him some money, and states that “No job is menial, as long as it is honest”.            In the passage, Said concludes that Rauf as evolved into someone else and has abandoned and/or betrayed his ideals. As characteristic of stream of consciousness, this passage operates non-chronologically, beginning with Mahran’s thoughts on the ‘new Rauf’, and going through his thought process that brings him to remember how he was betrayed by Ilish, and ranks them similarly in terms of how he feels they have betrayed him. The hatred expressed by Said in lines such as “I don’t know which of you is the most treacherous”, characterises the fixation on the p
2 comments
Read more