Have you ever received a comment from a surprised white person on how you “don’t talk black”? Have you ever had a professor or an employer tell you to clean up your “slang” and speak “proper English”?
I’ve heard these stories over and over from friends. I’ve heard people talk about how they consider the way black people talk “lazy,” and that if they ever want to get anywhere in life, they must speak proper English.
Frankly, these sorts of comments display a malevolent ignorance of the workings of language.
Language has always been an intimate part of human society. A language, and more specifically a dialect, is a powerful way for a people to establish an identity and connect with other people. Common language is such a strong uniting force that some group identities are constructed exclusively around it. The Basque people of Northwestern Spain, for example, form their identity around their unique language, rather than ethnicity or religion. Entire nationalist movements have been developed around specific dialects of a language.
It’s important to recognize, however, that these languages and dialects are human creations. No one was born with the ability to speak. Moses never came down from the mountain and handed us a stone tablet covered in grammar rules. Languages evolve gradually, accumulating small changes in lexicon and phonology over the years. Eventually, if a group’s speech changes enough, it becomes a specific dialect of its mother language. If the language keeps evolving to the point that it and the mother tongue are mutually unintelligible, it becomes a new language.
English is no different, and evolves like every other language. At one point in time, English was simply degenerate German used by “barbarian” invaders imposed upon Britain’s native Celts. From that point on, it evolved into modern-day English, together with borrowings from many other languages. When the British hopped on their boats and brought English to America, this new isolated community developed their own dialect. To the British, it probably sounded atrocious.
Considering this, how can a “standardized” or “proper” form of English even exist? If language is always changing and branching out into different dialects, who determines which dialect is the standard? How do we codify and enforce grammar rules that themselves are in flux?
The concept of grammar rules are actually a fairly modern concept. Grammar books did exist in ancient Rome, Greece and India, but their purpose was to document the common and accepted usage of language by a majority of people. Modern grammar has fallen prey to a fallacy known as “prescriptivism” – the idea that an objectively “correct” way to use a language exists. There is little to no basis for this idea, and most prescriptivist notions of grammar and dialect are entirely arbitrary. If English grammar rules are arbitrary though, why do they so consistently privilege the manner of speech used by rich white folk in modern America?
From here we must look to Pierre Bourdieu and the field of sociolinguistics.
Bourdieu introduced the concept of “cultural capital” to the public – an application of economic power domination to the realm of culture. He suggested that money was not the only way to dominate society, but that one could accumulate cultural capital in addition to economic capital. One’s acculturation could be used as a way to set oneself apart from the lower class, even if one is not actually of a higher social class. The kind of culture that is privileged in society, that is, the kind of culture you should invest in if you want to be among the elite, is determined by those in power in society.
Bourdieu applied this concept to language. Like culture, the individuals in power establish a form of language and deem it “proper.” This arbitrary designation results in social groups who are unable or unwilling to abandon the form of speaking they were raised with to become disadvantaged in society. This strategy is often used by nation-states in order to foster unity and assimilation among its citizens. Franco’s Spain, for example, banned regional minority languages as a way of curbing dissent.
In America, those who possess the highest linguistic capital have a Midwestern American accent, or “broadcast standard English,” and use a lexicon and grammar arrangements in line with the arbitrary designation of the “standard.” Using slang, irregular grammar or speaking in a different dialect can make it distinctly harder to rise to higher levels in society economically or socially. Bourdieu suggests that this is an intentional feature of prescriptivism. Those who speak the right way stay in power and those who do not fester in poverty.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the speech of Black Americans.
This dialect is maligned to a greater degree than any other. Speaking in African American Vernacular English (and, yes, that is its proper name, not “ebonics”) can bar people from many professions and social circles.
In the tradition of Bourdieu, I would argue that this stigmatization is an intentional means of preserving white supremacy. Stripping those who speak differently of any linguistic capital demolishes their chances at improving their economic situation and gaining positions of power.
Observe how President Obama speaks in press releases and compare it to how he speaks in casual situations. He is consciously trying to bring his speech more in line with the white-imposed standardized form of English. Otherwise, he would not be taken as seriously.
It’s worth pointing out that African American Vernacular English, even in Northern cities, shares a great deal with the southern American dialect. In fact, if you’re a white southerner, your dialect has far more in common with black people around the country than it does with white northerners.
So the next time someone hassles you about the way you speak, remember what we call “proper” speech possesses no objective qualities that make it superior to other dialects.
If history had developed differently, African American Vernacular English could have become the standard and Midwestern American English could be a stigmatized dialect. It would be just as arbitrary.
Take pride in your dialect, as it reflects your culture, your upbringing and your background. At the same time, respect the dialects and languages of others. The world would be far more just if we treated dialects as they are in reality – equals.
Robert McAuliffe is a junior international studies major from St. Louis, Missouri.
