RES 5530: Race, Class, and Gender in Literacy Research (Spring 2009)

Growing up in a small town in Maine, I didn't realize that I even had an accent until I traveled to Washington, DC with other high schoolers from around the nation. My roommate was from Alabama. At first, I wondered if we were even speaking the same language, her Southern drawl sounded so foreign to my ear. That first day, we spent our free time comparing how we each spoke certain phrases, then laughing at just how different we sounded. I think it was eye- opening for each of us to learn that the same words could be spoken so differently. However, unlike Dowdy's or Smith's experiences, I never felt that my Maine accent was wrong, or bad; just different. I wonder now if others made judgements about my intelligence, based on my accent. And, "ayah" (yes) it certainly makes me mad to think that they may have thought I was less capable because of the way I talked.

Given Trinidad's long history as an English colony, I can certainly understand Dowdy's animosity and resentment toward her "oppressors" language. I'm glad that she found a way to honor her native language later in her life. But I'm puzzled by some of her views, which seem extreme. I see a difference between written language and spoken language. So I don't agree with her view that local papers should be written in the Trinidadian dialect. To me, since Trinidadian is a dialect of English, not a language, writing should still be in standard English.
As educators, it is still our responsibility to teach standard English. However, we certainly need to find a way to honor the local dialect and we must never make judgements about someone's intelligence based on their oral language.

I thought it was interesting that Dowdy seemed to feel judged more by her peers for speaking standard English and Smith felt judged by educators because he didn't speak standard English. Yet both felt a strong allegiance toward their native dialect. Clearly, the predjudices run both directions and there is a need for understanding on all sides.

Jayne Thompson, Native Maine-ah.

When I read Delpit's other book, I was focused on Latino ELL students and the discrimination they face because of their skin and language. This book is forcing me to take a look at African American speech. I think Dowdy's experience is that of many black students. To be successful, they must risk being segregated from peers of their own race. At least that was true when I was in school in the 70's and 80's. Black kids who acted "white" and got good grades took a risk. I hope that has changed some now 20 years later.

Dowdy found herself when she realized she could choose how she would speak. Her acting gave her the freedom to use her dialect. When I lived in Mexico and had to speak Spanish constantly, it was exhausting. Your emotions and deepest feelings need to be spoken in your heart, or first, language. For me, a white woman, it is hard to understand the constant effort it takes for African Americans, Latinos, etc. to put on the "act" so they can fit into mainstream culture. This means most of our students are operating under this stress!

I think Smith points out that America has made a mistake for a long time. We pretend to love everyone and be colorblind. We don't talk about differences, we try to make them go away. We will take the tired and hungry but only if they learn English quickly and act like the rest of us. But our silence causes pain and separation for those who are not in the white culture. It absolutely must be talked about so that those of us who are white, who have never really been discriminated against, can begin to understand the other side.

Ashley Catlett

For the first 8 years of my life I grew up in Staten Island, New York. While I lived there I went to a Catholic elementary school, St. Joseph’s, that was part of the church I attended with my family. For those 8 years my home language matched my school language. I don’t remember ever feeling out of place in my classroom because of my language and I never felt that my language was a burden that I had to overcome. However, at the end of my third grade year, our family left Staten Island for the small town of King, NC. At that time King was quite small and had only 1 stoplight, a Hardee’s and a Waffle House. The differences between King and a borough of New York City were enormous. It started out with the pizza and then school started.

My first day was pretty rough. It didn’t take long for me to learn that both my accent and my language were quite different from the other students in my class. I have to admit that the differences in language were quickly solved but the differences in accent still follow me a little. I remember sitting in class on the first day. I had my new book bag, pencils and lunch box. My mom realized how hard the move had been on my brother and I so buying new school supplies seemed to be a way to make it easier. Anyway, I’m sitting in my seat and the teacher announces to the class, “Ok, let’s put our pencils up.” Well I, who was trying hard to be the best student ever, put my pencil up in the air. As I looked around the classroom, I was the only one with my pencil up in the air and the only one that everyone’s eyes seemed to be on. Looking back I know this is a small moment but it did impact me and it’s a memory I keep with me.

After that day I got better at learning the new language around me. The hardest saying to learn was “What you know good?”. I still don’t ever say this one, but if I’m asked this question I know how to answer it. The differences in my accent stayed around much longer and kids in my class, who became my best friends, still ask me to say certain words because I say my vowels a little differently –in my opinion I say them more distinctly -but that’s an argument for another day. Even my teachers would ask me to say certain words because they just wanted to hear how I said it and then they would mimic what I said afterward, along with a little chuckle. As an adult I don’t really mind it anymore when something I say comes out differently, but as a kid it got old fast.

Now that I have told this story, I have to follow it up by saying that I would never compare my experience to those of Dowdy and Smith. As children they had to deal with many deeper issues that at times went beyond the language. Both Dowdy and Smith were forced to choose which was more important – their home language and culture or fitting into and succeeding in the dominant culture. Children shouldn’t be asked to make that choice – the value and intelligence of an individual should not be judged by their language but instead their language should be considered as a gift, a resource that they bring to the classroom. Children need the support of their teacher to nurture and develop the person they are to be and in doing so they need a teacher that values and appreciates the story that they bring to the classroom. Our classrooms are full of students from different cultures and communities and in those differences we can find an unbelievable amount of knowledge to be shared. Our language is one of the first things we learn from our family and in school it is one of the first things that others notice about us. If a student’s first experiences using language in school are marked with ridicule it isn’t surprising that many of our students choose to remain silent. If we want all of our students to feel comfortable in discussing and sharing what they know and what they have learned, then we need to make sure we allow them to speak loudly with the language they know the best. To end I feel the need to put in one of the MANY thoughtful quotes written by both authors:

So, for the colonized speaker, the issue is not really about whether she has a language or not. The issue is about having enough opportunity to practice that language in “legitimate” communications. The central concern is about having the freedom to go back and forth from the home language to the public language without feeling a sense of inferiority. The issue is about letting colonized people communicate in their many spheres of communication, and not limiting them to jazz, reggae, samba, calypso, and zouk. Let the Head Girl be a good Masai and the cricketer hit the ball beyond the boundary ovuh dyuh (p. 13).

Amie Snow

As I read the first part of The Skin That We Speak, I truly began to reflect on my life experiences and how they have impacted me. Although moving a lot had many disadvantages it also at many advantages. I have always accepted people for who they are and never understood why there is so much racism in the world. So unlike Dowdy and Smith there never was another language that completely dominated over English where I lived/grew up and I did not feel the prejudice that they did or have to 'fight' to fit in. English was the language that made it possible for us to communicate in a community full of people from different places.

My mom married my step dad when I was seven. He was in the Navy so because of that and some other circumstances we moved often. Everywhere that we lived we always had a sense of community no matter what your race or identity. However, we all had two common threads, we were military and we spoke English. We might have different accents or even said a few words differently but overall we spoke English. This book makes me wonder how hard it might have been, for us as military children, if we didn’t have that common thread of language and none of us understood each other.

Maybe I am being devils advocate because I think about military communities and schools like South Fork Elementary and wonder how could or would you teach the children at that school, in which over 26 different languages are spoken, if you didn’t pull them together with a common language. How would they communicate with each other? I also think of Middle Fork, a school I taught at for two years, and the families there. A large portion of the population was Hispanic. However, they spoke many different forms/dialects of Spanish. Our teachers that could translate for families in meetings ran into the difficulty of not knowing the correct dialect of Spanish to communicate with certain families.

Now don’t get me wrong I feel that an individual’s native language and culture is extremely important and it helps make each and every one of us unique. I also feel that children should not feel ashamed to speak in their native language and when they are doing things such as journal writing that they should not be burdened by the stress of translating to English. However, when they are writing papers for “publication” or to share with the class or public I feel that it is necessary to be able to write/speak in English.

I also believe that the ability to speak multiple languages is an advantage not a disorder. So I guess my question is how do we maintain a common language in our country while equaling respecting and embracing the many languages that are spoken in our country?

Amy Spade

As I read these first two chapters, I was struck by how the authors focused on their differences. They were different linguistically from their peers or from an educator's perception of what literacy is. The question I am left wondering is where is the sense of building community? It seemed that a choice had to be made between a native tongue and a more socially acceptable form of communication. These authors felt as though they were forced to make absolute decisions about their communication in order to survive or more importantly succeed in educational endeavors. Dowdy talked about "assuming the best mask ever fabricated: the mask of language." This disheartened me greatly. Are our ESL students living with this mask on each day they attend school? Are they experiencing such inner turmoil as Dowdy and Smith? When has language acquisition, language experience, and language retrieval crossed too many lines in the life of a child? I read these two chapters with more questions than answers. Where was a sense of community developed in these authors' lives? Instead, it appears that they felt a need to vacillate between communities, rather than adhere to a persona equipped to deal with whatever environment they were present in. Is literacy choosing one tongue over another forever? Or aren't there ways to incorporate how one is raised at home with how the schedule runs at school, or at church, or in any other environment. I am speaking from an ignorant place. My students are mainly white, upper middle class children in a private school setting. My upbringing was problem free linguistically or in terms of acquiring and building literacy knowledge. Is literacy too broad a topic to offer a list of absolutes for children in different envrionments? How do we take where a student is and lead them to authenticity in their literacy development?
Stefoni Shaw

As I reflect on the introduction and the first two chapters of The Skin That We Speak, a single comment sticks out: “I invented a character who wanted to please her teachers and her dead mother”. This comment was from the author in the first passage, Ovuh Dyuh. The reason this comment stays in my mind is because I can’t help wondering how it felt to grow up and feel this way all through high school, which is a tough time to go through because of the battles we face. I felt sorry for the author after reading that, she speaks about being able to create the character because of her acting desires, but I’m sure no one regardless of their desires, enjoys creating a character that doesn’t represent her beliefs in order to do well in school. But then I wonder, when she “played the character” did she still represent her beliefs? They may have because of the way her mother’s beliefs influenced her, she may have felt it was a necessary part in achieving her goals. After she did was she needed to do to succeed in school, and got the job at a television station she described how she had a new opportunity in life and “the chains fell from around my tongue, and my brain began to feel as if it were oiled and moving along…” I wonder if she immediately felt that way. Maybe she did not feel this way until she reflected on her past? I would compare this to my experience during student teaching and other internships within the school system, but they were all in the mountain areas and the only thing I could think about are the students who have the “mountain accents”, and those accents seem to be accepted more so than the language Dowdy was describing.

I enjoyed reading both excerpts because the authors had two different feelings towards speaking the language that was deemed proper. (At least I felt they had two different view points.) I think they were so different because Dowdy experienced success in school and rejection from her peers at times, instead Smith appears to refuse to succumb the pressure. He experiences a lot of rejection from the school system as he was tested for mental disorders and received suggestions to attend the speech clinic for therapy. I think there are families that would be outraged today if their child had to attend separate schools because they scored low in English Comprehension, instead of teaching them at the neighborhood school. Smith makes a comment about his label in high school: “by the time I reached the ninth grade at Edison, I was labeled anti-social and described acting out”. I read this and thought who wouldn’t act out and be anti-social? Based on both stories it seems that both author experienced success, which is amazing to me because after all of the negative comments and suggestions from educators and other school personnel, they pushed on. I hope it is success in their eyes.

Elizabeth Griffin

For at least 200 years, Americans have been forging a linguistic identity of their own. Once the United States gained its independence from Great Britain, the citizenry sought to forge a new national identity. It is no wonder that one of the primary means of accomplishing this was through their language. Noah Webster's “American English” dictionary in the 1800s, with its more simplistic spelling methods and new vocabulary, created a new form of the English language that is still used in the United States today. This movement by the American public shows the how a group's “language of intimacy” (Delpit, 12) can reflect the cultural identity of that group.

Even within the United States, itself, various regions have dialects that are unique—each one subconsciously being judged by its listener. For example, if a movie director wants a character that seems ignorant, he will cast someone who has the thickest southern accent imaginable, and put him in West Virginia. If he wants a female that is just “dumb,” he will cast her with blond hair, and give her a “valley girl” accent. These examples could go on all day. However, the point is, like the essayists point out in the book, humans are constantly being judged by their language.

Unlike Joanne Dowdy, I did not have a parent who told me that I should lose my thick southern accent if I wanted to succeed. I was very successful throughout school—blindly unaware of how many in the country judge those with my dialect. It was not until I went to college at North Carolina State where I learned that “survival techniques involve double realities (11).” Now, I realize that N.C. State is still in the South, but Raleigh is a large city with a salad bowl mixture of people. As I began my courses, I realized that students and professors were trying their very best to transform their southern accents into more mainstream English—especially for presentations or meetings with colleagues. It was like the language that I associated with my home and childhood would not “work” in the real world. What ultimately led me to rethink my usage of language was one night at dinner. Without even thinking, I ordered the salmon (clearly pronouncing the “l” like everyone else in my hometown). After being made fun of, I immediately learned the art of code switching. Ironically, I am engaged to a man originally from upstate New York. This has made each of us more aware than ever of our dialects, and how others judge them. It is because of my experiences, that I feel a kinship with Ms. Dowdy.

I thought that it was interesting that in Trinidad, the native Trinidadian language/culture was really only accepted in the entertainment field. Similarly, in the U.S. African Americans and their culture first gained momentum in this same arena. Take for instance, the music industry. The words “rock and roll,” themselves, are rooted in black culture. For African Americans, it was slang for dance or sex. Many of the hits of early great artists, such as Elvis Presley, were either complete fabrications of “black” songs, or closely related versions. African Americans such as Muhammad Ali and Jackie Robinson helped the movement of African Americans in the sports arena.

I really appreciated the fact that Ernie Smith chose to incorporate his intimate language (ebonics) into his essay. It provided the reader an opportunity to gain some insight into this man's world. I still struggle with my language identity. It is very difficult for me to go with my fiance to his hometown, without feeling the pressure of “not living up to the stereotype.” I feel that I cannot let my guard down. Don't get me wrong, they know that I am from the south—I can't hide all aspects of my southern dialect. But rather than just relaxing my tongue, I try very hard to speak a more standardized version of English—I would never say “aint” or “y'all.”

Did anyone else think that it was ironic that the reform school that Mr. Smith was sent to was “Jacob A. Riis School?” Jacob Riis was an early pioneer for reform. He represented and spoke up for those who were unfortunate, and often did not have a voice of their own. His piece, “How the other half lives,” was almost solely responsible for the reform of immigrant living conditions.

Heather Coe

Language is an interesting concept. It can be a uniting factor in a group of people but also a dividing factor. I remember the first time I traveled outside of the southern United States. I went to Washington DC with a group of peers. I noticed quickly that we sometimes received strange stares from people as we conversed. Then, I went on to make the tragic mistake of ordering sweet tea at a local restaurant. It was a unique cultural experience, and it made me realize that people had differences, even those of similar ethnicities, races, backgrounds, religion, and more. Language and dialect are parts of who we are as people.
While reading, I thought of my own experiences with different dialects and languages. Just as in the reading, I had learned to "code switch." I learned to speak standard English in professional settings and keep my "Southern" dialect with family and friends. Although my experiences were not as extreme as working on the streets then gaining professional degrees as in The Skin that We Speak, I knew that I was labeled the moment I opened my mouth using my acquired Southern dialect. Therefore, I was quick to learn standard English before college and scholarship interviews. On p. 10-11, there was a quote that really seemed like a profound realization to me. "I could travel up and down the continental shift, moving from Caribbean to English intonations, without anyone being offended. All the shades of my existence could be called into the performance medium, and I, at last, could feel integrated." It is powerful to hear that someone who has struggled throughout school and life because of misconceptions associated with dialect could successfully balance a new and old identity. I have often considered myself as two different beings in this same way.
Overall, I think the reading showed the difficulty and damage associated with misconceptions and prejudices, especially those with language and dialect. Although we may need a standard way of communicating, it is extremely important that people are allowed to keep their own identity. On p. 13, there were a couple of lines that really provided a main idea for the reading. It said, "The central concern is about having the freedom to go back and forth frm the home language to the public language without feeling a sense of inferiority."
As educators, it is important that we attempt to let go of preconceptions about children or groups of people. A person's background says very little about their intelligence or potential in life. The lesson is that in life or in the microcosms of our classrooms, we should keep an open mind regarding culture, language, and background. Our biases can become self-fulfilling prophecies in the people we come in contact with throughout our personal and professional lives.

Brittany Guy

The title of the preface spoke to me and I believe is the key theme that runs throughout the two chapters we read. Both Dowdy and Smith wrote moving accounts of how their lives were changed by judgment of a dialect they spoke. How sad to have a life negatively affected by a dialect you thought was proper! I found myself wondering throughout both of these chapters, "WHO says this dialect isn't correct?" It seemed as though, in both cases, schools & educators were the cause, and again, I found myself wondering, "what makes THEM the experts?"

In the preface, the Delpit told a story of a young, Hispanic boy and his grandmother in a waiting room. I found myself wanting to push through the pages of the book to come to their defense when the older, white woman told the pair that "he should learn English." I feel that many English speaking people feel this same way; we are snobs about our language, feeling that everyone should speak it, everyone should understand it, but what makes English speakers the experts on language? Why should there be a certain way of speaking? Why take all the diversity out of this world?

Before this year, I had never dealt with non-English speakers in a classroom before. This semester, however, I have two Hispanic boys in my Freshman English class. One has been in the country 3 years and can speak English pretty well; one has been here about 3 months and cannot speak much English at all. I have enjoyed the challenge of having these boys in my class, but have noticed that they really hold back when trying to communicate with me. Even the boy who speaks English well will hesitate when asking me a question or answering me. I can completely understand their hesitation though. Put me in a classroom in Mexico, and I'd surely hesitate as well! I am sure these boys have the same confusion that Dowdy and Smith had when wondering how to act and speak between the two environments they are in each day.

Even though I've grown up in the South, my Southern dialect is not all that strong. Many people are surprised to learn that I'm from the South when I travel. I'm not sure why this is, but it has definitely made me more aware of other dialects around me while helping me to accept each separate one as it's own form of communication. Isn't that what language is for anyhow? I loved one of Dowdy's final thoughts at the end of her chapter: "The war will be won when she who is the marginalized comes to speak more in her own language, and people accept her communication as valid as representative" (pg. 13). Language is communication. No matter how one speaks or what dialect or accent they used, if communication is achieved, then I feel that it should be accepted.

Christy Rivers

I was struck by the Joshua Fishman quote at the beginning of chapter one, "What do you lose when you you lose your language?" I think the cost is too great to contemplate. My thoughts immediately go to a teachers assistant that I worked with once. She was from Germany and married to an American. When she came here, she began to to learn English, it was not easy for her, but she kept on. She has two children, and I asked her one time, after a trip to Germany, how her children liked it. She said they loved it, except for the language barrier. I was surprised that her children did not speak German. After all that was her mother tongue, I thought she would have passed her heritage on to her children. When I questioned her about it, she said it was too difficult to learn English and keep up her German. I realize that I won't ever be in her shoes, but would I have made the same choice?
Joanne Dowdy's story was facinating to me. How she developed two separate "languages" or "personalities". Her mother certainly played a role in the making of her life story. But is that really so different from many of us? My grandmother, an educator, was very rigid in regards to language and enunciation. I was chastised for not speaking clearly.She believed you might be poor, but if you were educated, that was something that no one could ever take away from you. I too, had two voices, although certainly not to the extent, of Dowdy. I was raised in a middle class home with educated parents, but when I was in third grade, we moved to a very rural area. I was laughed at for the way I dressed as well as the way I spoke. It didn't take me very long to start wearing blue jeans and plaid shirts and drawlin' my words.
Ernie Smiths piece was interesting. To be honest, most of it was quite new. I have, since third grade lived in Western North Carolina and never in a major city. I have had very little experience with the black population. I tried to think of role models who might use the vernacular of which he spoke, what comes to mind are music and television personalities. Certainly not our new president. Obama is certainly going to be a role model for now and the next generation to come.

Until next time,

SuSu Watson

My title is a combination of words I hear from professionals daily. I thought it fit nicely with this topic.

After reading the article from Dowdy, I had to step back for a moment. She blamed her mother for her being forced to speak “white”. I can understand how she felt. This took away part of her identity. It made me think about what we do to students in school now. As educators we are responsible for teaching Standard English. But at the same time, are we punishing students for speaking and writing in their own language? I am currently grading writing tests for a first grade class. One of the key differences from being a level 3 or a level 4 is that they are moving away from oral language to formal language. But first graders write the way they talk. Even the oral language is grammatically incorrect. How am I ever going to get them to write in formal language? I think it is so important as educators, for us to model correct Standard English. But I do not think we need to punish students for using their own language.
I have a few students in my class now who can “switch” back and forth. When they speak to me it is, “Ms. Feinman, may I please go to the bathroom,?” and when they speak to their classmates it is, “Yo, I’m is going to the bafroom.” I am amazed that first graders can switch back and forth like this. I even had a classroom discussion about it. We wrote down some of the things they hear at home that they never hear at school (minus the curse words). Then we wrote the correct Standard English way to write it. I explained that there is “school talk” and “home talk”. I also told them that when they speak at home, they can speak however they want. But at school, it is expected to be said like this. I am glad that Dowdy was able to use her ability to switch back and forth in acting. In the end, it provided her with wonderful experiences. I am also glad that she was able to show her true identity when she was a prefect. It is so important to embrace cultures, and keep them alive. I hate that her mother pushed her culture away from her.

The thing that stood out most for in Smith’s article was his hatred towards the “boojze”. In my mind I can clearly picture who these people might be at my school. And yet, I know they also have the ability to turn proper English off and on. I have heard them do it in professional settings and social settings. And yet, when I hear a professional educator say things like, axed, funeralized, pacific (specific), bolded (bold print), liberry and so on, I cringe. I also laugh. These same people are wondering why our students are not passing EOGs dealing with written passages and writing. What happens when they come to the word specific? How are they supposed to know what that means when all they have heard their teacher say is pacific. As educators we need to model correct Standard English, and explain WHY it is important to do so.
Another thing that struck me in his article was the lack of black professional role models. To me this makes Obama that much more important. My students can now look up to someone and see that it is possible for them to be anything they want to be, no matter what they look like, or where they have come from. I thought it was interesting that his manner of speaking hurt him so much in school, but provided him much success on the streets. This goes to show that we cannot stifle the cultures that are coming into our schools. Because ultimately we are stifling the success of that child.

-Sarah Feinman

I am going to be completely exposing myself to criticism right now when I say that these writers really sound bitter! Granted, they have been through some things like Ernie Smith whom was basically sent to juvenile hall over his speech, but in many countries and communities, English is the standard course of communication.
Before anyone misunderstands me, let me say that I am a lover of languages. I speak Spanish fluently and want to learn Italian by the end of this year. I am a firm believer in being able to communicate across a wide range of audiences. But let's examine Dowdy's entry. Her family had high aspirations for her to become a citizen in the elite class, right up there with political and royal figures. Imagine if that was one of us. Do you think we would be raised saying ya'll? NO! It is not as much the English language that is to blame, as her family's insistence of "perfection" and idolizing the "Queen's English". Also, why could she not have separated her "proper English" and her "socializing English"? I know that personally, as a teacher, the way I speak adapts to my audience. In class, I speak proper English and instruct my children to do so because I believe that people do pre-determine intelligence by the way one speaks and the ability to converse with other highly trained well educated individuals will ultimately help you succeed in life, right or wrong as it may be. I tell my students that in class, we are there to learn grammar and speak correctly and that they may speak however they want to around friends and family. In the community in which I work in, I realize that many of the parents are not educated and do not understand the ways in which I say things, so in turn, I change my way of speaking to them so that they can understand, just like I have had to have many words explained to me such as "wallering" so that I may understand them. I don't see why, if I have been able to adapt and switch roles in English and Spanish, it would be so hard. I don't feel that my teachers "oppressed" me by correcting my grammar in grade school or telling me that "aight" was incorrect and not suitable for class. I now use these skills to teach.
Imagine also if Ernie Smith's entire chapter had been written in Ebonics. It was difficult looking through and figuring out what he was saying for me in just that little section because we have been skilled in academic English. Now, a "brother" from the "hood" would not have been able to have understood the proper English because he knows only of Ebonics. But, English is one of the universal languages. One will have an extremely tough time learning to read and communicate to more audiences if they are not skilled in basic academic English. If one wishes to remain in one position, trapped by their language, then learn ONLY Ebonics. The truth and reality is that proper English opens up opportunity to pursue many different areas. I do not think anyone should ever be ridiculed because of the way they speak, but it is a truth that in society, almost any society now, a well versed background in English will help you move further ahead.
Whitney Gilbert

Whether we like it or not, language divides. It always has and always will. Although I have known this at some level my whole life, this fact was brought to the forefront of my thinking the last time I visited the DMV. I thought I was being smart to arrive before the office opened in order to be first. Besides underestimating the wait time and the number of people who also wanted to be first, I was shocked to realize I was a "minority" of such in the waiting room. I quickly noticed that no one was speaking English. I eventually spoke to the woman next to me. She smiled, nodded, and looked to the teenage girl who accompanied her. It was obvious we were not going to converse. As more and more people arrived and others shuffled seats, I realized how segregated the room became. Even without the prompt of a class like this, it became apparent to me that this shifting of people into "common" groups was not so much about race as communication. After sitting for two hours I finally stepped to the restroom. When I returned to realize my seat had been taken, I made a deliberate choice to sit in an area where I heard my language being spoken.

One should not assert the division that language creates is bad in and of itself. The fact that a people group shares a language unique to their culture allows that group to maintain distinction. It allows people within that culture to pass down experiences and knowledge that may not be accurately described by words in another language. Throughout history, people groups have relied on language unique to their population for self-preservation--to gain military and political advantage. As Delpit states, “It is no wonder that our first language becomes intimately connected to our identity”. (p. XIX)

However, the divide that language created for Dowdy and Smith was painful. Although both excelled because of their abilities to adapt and make language work to their advantages, both resorted to being people they did not want to be. The “skin that they spoke” spoke so loudly that they—the real Dowdy and Smith—could not be heard.

For me, the great paradox is that language also unifies. History is riddled with examples of how language was used as a unifying means. The Greeks realized the importance of having a people that spoke one language in order to facilitate trade, educate their citizens, and expand their empire. In the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, many immigrants to this nation took pride in learning English in order to become a part of the great melting pot. The unity that comes with a common language is what allows communication, cooperation and camaraderie. All three allow us to work together to make our society better than the one before.

It is not just the similar tones or specific linguistic code that unifies us in language. It is the message. Words are powerful. When we deem a certain language or dialect as inappropriate, we take away the voice of the people who speak that language. The notes at the end of Smith’s chapter help to validate his language. If Dowdy and Smith did not value his language they would not have included his notes. We would have been left to assign meaning to his words. Why can’t this type of integrated expression happen in our classrooms? Do we really sacrifice academic excellence if we embrace differences in language? By forcing all to be the same in their spoken tongue we divide rather than unite.

Lisa Rasey

As a black woman that grew up in an upper middle class family I found both of these life stories VERY interesting! In a sense I am a lot like Dowdy, except in my life it was not my parents who forced me to speak "white" english, it was my school environment. I remember my 2nd grade teacher declaring that I was "highly intelligent" and "very gifted" during a parent-teacher, student lead conference and she insisted that my parents sign the paper work so that I could get tested for AG. I tested and I passed. Gone were the days when I would sit in a nicely mixed class with a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds. Gone were the days of hearing the "language" of the students that looked like me. I was in a new day. A day where I was moved out of my 2nd grade class in the middle of the year. A day where I would be the only black student in a class full of white students, because where I went to school all the AG children were in one class, and we moved up together as a group. First to 3rd grade then to 4th and 5th (and we stayed their for 2 years because it was an AG combination class). The "language" that I heard all day at school was the same "language" that I heard in my home.

Unlike Dowdy I did not wish to say "ovuh dyuh" because in the world that I now learned in, "ovuh dyuh" just didn't sound right. Not only did it not sound right, but I didn't grow up in the world of "I'm fixina to" so I did not have the need to speak the "language". My parents are professionals, my parents' friends are professionals, most people in my extended family have a masters or a doctoral degree and we just don't talk like that. Like Dowdy's mom, my entire family knows how to "curse in white" because we know where we live. I am not going to say that things aren't changing, but we still live in a world where what you know isn't as important as what you look like or the language you speak.

However, I do have issues with the "issue" of Ebonics. It is a language, just like Spanish is a language. And I say it is a language because you literally have to translate the words and phrases to find meaning. In our classrooms we are very accomodating with our Spanish speaking students and their parents. We don't make our Hispanic children feel bad because they have limited "white" english. We also don't make their parents feel bad because we have to get a "translator" in order to have a conference. So why is it okay to tell a child that their "black" english is wrong or that they shouldn't speak that way? By no means am I saying let's not teach children "proper" english, but where do you draw the line between teaching "proper english" and taking away a child's identity?

How many minority children are in the same educational boat as Ernie Smith simply because they don't speak "proper" english? And who defines what "proper" english is? If you have ever spent some time in educated Boston, then you know North Carolinians do not speak "proper" english. But if we took a trip to middle of nowhere Utah our "english" would be very proper. Sadly, the question that keeps popping in my mind is "What is the real issue, the language itself or the color of the language speakers?"

Honestly, I am riding the fence on this one. I personally would not like to sit in a lecture or a meeting where the presenter spoke to me in Ebonics. However, if there are a group of African-Americans that want to use their own language to communicate why should they be made to feel like they are any less American?

Cherrita Hayden-McMillan