Blog Assignment #7

“Mainstream English… is an abstraction. It is an attempt to isolate from the full set of all varieties of US English those varieties which are not overtly stigmatized…” (Green 62). The English language is not nearly as universal, or even as national, as many people would like to think. It varies between different geographic locations, cultures, and ethnicities. However, certain variations of the English language are associated with social supremacy while others carry with them a negative social status connotation. One example of a widespread language variation which Rosina-Lippi Green explores is the African American Vernacular English, also known as AAVE. The role of this dialect in American society represents the social and cultural barriers constructed by language.
Although AAVE is a dialect specific to the African American race, I believe the social associations with it represent the greater issue; any variations on the generic English language are usually unacceptable in American society. As Green explains, “dominant institutions promote the notion of an overarching, homogenous standard language which is primarily white, upper middle class, and midwestern” (Green 65). Society is too quick to judge lingual variation as a fault or label it as mispronunciation, rather than simply a stylistic difference made by choice. It is important that you identify with your heritage or ethnicity so long as you do it in a way that allows you to still linguistically identify with the rest of society. “You may have dark skin, we tell them, but you must not sound Black” (Green 63). This racial and lingual double standard inhibits people from expressing themselves freely. After all, what is the point of using language as a tool to voice our opinions if you’re limited to one linguistic approach in order for your opinions to hold any credibility?
“…Language is… a flexible and constantly flexing social tool for the emblematic marking of social allegiances. We use variation in language to construct ourselves as social beings, so signal who we are, and who we are not and cannot be” (Green 63). However, if language is a means of personal expression, why does it lead to the formation of social barriers? This is because American culture often associates lingual variations with lack of education or class, therefore separating individuals merely based on the way they speak. In the United States “…power and authority in language are tied inextricably to education and literacy” but on the other hand, variations in language similar to AAVE are “…linked to a socially unacceptable set of social, economic, and racial characteristics” (Green 61, 65). The fact that language is associated so closely with these other societal issues is frightening, because in no way is a lingual difference synonymous with an economic or racial one.
It is important that our country begin to realize how truly non-homogenous language is. We need to accept this concept that linguistics are abstract rather than concrete; that a slight impurity in pronunciation may represent individuality rather than stupidity, creativity rather than inequality.