Obgu Article

American Educational Research Journal
http://aerj.aera.net Beyond Language: Ebonics, Proper English, and Identity in a Black-American Speech Community
John U. Ogbu Am Educ Res J 1999; 36; 147 DOI: 10.3102/00028312036002147 The online version of this article can be found at: http://aer.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/36/2/147
Published on behalf of
http://www.aera.net
By
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for American Educational Research Journal can be found at: Email Alerts: http://aerj.aera.net/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://aerj.aera.net/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.aera.net/reprints Permissions: http://www.aera.net/permissions
Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009
American Educational Research Journal Summer 1999, vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 147-184
Beyond Language: Ebonics, Proper English, and Identity in a Black-American Speech Community
J o h n U. O g b u
University o f California, Berkeley
The discourse on the ebonics resolution passed in December 1996 by the Board of Education in Oakland, CA, has increased national awareness of the language problems faced by African-American children in the public school. The discourse focused almost exclusively on dialect differences per se between the standard English of the public school and the children's home dialect or ebonics. This article has three objectives: (a) to contribute to sociolinguistic studies of speech communities; (b) to describe and explain sociolinguistic factors (beyond language~dialect) that affect Black children's performance on standard English; and (c) to show a connection between the children's dialect beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors in school with those of their parents and community. This article is based on a 2-year ethnographic study of a Black speech community in Oakland, CA, characterized by bidialectalism and diglossia. However, the community and its children face a dilemma fn learning and using proper English because of their incompatible beliefs about standard English.
JOHN U. OGBO is Chancellor's Professor in the Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley 94720. His specializations are educational anthropology, education and culture, and minority education.
Ogbu
B observations continue to show that Black children do not do well in school. 1 In Oakland, California, as in other cities in the U.S., they still lag
behind White and other minority children. In 1995-1996 their GPA was 1.8, the lowest of all major ethnic groups. A task force established by Oakland Unified School District 2 in 1996 concluded that differences between Black children's home English and the school standard English were at the heart of the problem. It noted that, of the eight major language groups in Oakland, Black students had the lowest scores in the 1995-1996 Language California Test of Basic Skills (CTBS). The task force also attributed their overrepresentation in special education (71%) to their performance in language assessment tests. For these reasons, the task force included among its nine recommendations the "ebonics resolution" adopted by the Oakland School Board on December 18, 1996. The resolution unexpectedly generated a national discourse on Black American English dialect and education. The discourse focused almost exclusively on differences in dialects p e r se. Some people agreed with the Task Force that the academic problems are caused by large differences between Black students' home dialect and school standard English. Others contended that the differences are not large enough to cause problems. The two groups, however, missed the point: It is not only the degree o f differences in dialects p e r se that counts. Wbat also seems to count is the cultural meanings o f those dialect differences. One reason for questioning the emphasis on differences in dialects or languages is that there are more than 60 language groups in Oakland schools. Students from many of these language groups are doing better than Black Americans. The language groups include speakers of West African languages (e.g., Igbo, Krio, Lingula, and Yoruba) which, some say, have influenced Black-American English to be different from standard English. As far as I can determine, the language problems of West African immigrants w h o speak their native languages in Oakland schools are similar to those of Chinese immigrant speakers of Cantonese and to those of Filipino immigrant speakers of Tagalog, rather than to the language problems of speakers of Black American English. Like Cantonese and Tagalog speakers, West African language speakers are tested and classified as either FEP (Fluent English Proficien0 or LEP (Limited English ProficienO students. Black Americans, on the other hand, are tested and classified as either FEP (Fluent English Proficient) or SI (Speech Impaired) students. Furthermore, students in Oakland (including Black Americans) whose mother tongue is not standard English encounter lexical, phonological, syntactic, and prosodic problems with standard English. But most of these language groups appear to be more successful in overcoming the language differences than Black Americans. The work of some sociolinguists provides some clue to the problem. They note that the difficulties experienced by "disadvantaged children with standard English are caused not only by differences in dialects p e r s e but also by nonlanguage factors, including language identity and cultural rules of 148
asic research, evaluation of intervention programs, and common sense
Beyond Language
language use. In the case of Black Americans, the problem lies partly in miscommunication because students differ from their teachers in social meanings and usage of English. These sociolinguists remind us that Black children and their teachers learn different structural rules for their respective English dialects (i.e., grammar, phonology, and vocabulary of Black English and standard English) as well as different cultural rules for using those dialects in their respective speech communities. They point out that within their own speech community Black children do not have the kind of language problems associated with them at school, where they have to communicate with people from a standard English speech community. Sociolinguistic studies have convincingly demonstrated that differences between minority students and their teachers in cultural rules of language use affect to a large extent the children's success in learning to read standard English. But these studies have remained classroom discourse analysis. They have not examined the historical, societal, and cultural factors outside school that shape the social perceptions and interpretations of students and teachers observed in the classroom. The perceptions and interpretations of minority students are determined partly by how the history of a minority group has shaped the dialect beliefs, attitudes, and behavior of their speech communities. Of particular importance in the history of minority groups is whether people became a minority group voluntarily through immigration or involuntarily through conquest, slavery, and so forth. As we shall see, the folk history of a minority speech community provides some clue as to the nature of the people's dialect beliefs and behaviors. Another problem with sociolinguistic studies is that, with few exceptions, researchers have not tried to connect students' classroom dialect attitudes and behaviors with the dialect attitudes and behaviors of their speech community. 3 This failure to examine the relationship between the students' classroom dialect attitudes and those of their speech community has led some to think that they can fix the dialect problems by changing classroom dialect attitudes and behaviors of teachers and students. And this approach has not proved successful. Sociolinguists have convincingly argued that the difficulty of Black students with the standard English lies partly in the differences in social meanings and use of the dialects. But we need to identify the factors which determine the social meanings and use of dialects of minority speech communities, and this calls for research beyond analysis of classroom discourse. The study I will report in this article is intended to contribute to this direction of research. It examines the cultural rules and use of two English dialects by adults and children in a Black speech community. It attempts to discover why and how the social meanings and cultural rules of using the two dialects in this community make it difficult for Black students to learn in standard English in school. From a comparative perspective, Blacks are not the only students who differ from their teachers in discourse style and social perceptions. Students from all the 60 non-English language groups in Oakland probably differ from their teachers in discourse styles and 149
Ogbu
social perceptions. The real issue is, why are some of the language groups, especially minorities, in spite of their distinctive language features and discourse styles, more successful in learning and using standard English than Black Americans? Some Theoretical Considerations Speech Community Dell Hymes published several important works in the 1960s and 1970s arguing that the speech community is an appropriate social unit to study communicative interaction in a society. A speech community is a population that shares both a common language or linguistic codes and a common theory of speaking or cultural rules for the conduct and interpretation of speech acts. 4 A speech community may be characterized by more than one language or dialect. In that case, each language or dialect is associated with its own cultural rules of usage. A person is considered a competent speaker in a speech community if he or she knows both the language (i.e., vocabulary, grammar and phonology) and the cultural rules of s p e a k i n g - - w h e n to speak (speech situations), which speech event is appropriate (e.g., conversation, lecture, or debate), which communicative code (verbal or finger-pointing), and what style (e.g., confrontational or conciliatory, etc.). To become a competent speaker of his or her language, a child during language socialization must learn both the language and the cultural rules of speaking the language of its speech community. Bilingualism and Diglossia
Batngualtsm 5
A whole society or some segments of it may be a bilingual speech community. Some segments of the U.S. society may be more appropriately considered bidialectical speech communities because of the existence of two variants of the English language. Inner city Black-American neighborhoods in Oakland, California, qualify as such bidialectical speech communities. In these minority speech communities, there are separate cultural rules governing the use of minority dialects and standard English. During their language socialization, minority children in these communities learn their own dialects as their mother tongues and the cultural rules of using them; they also learn the standard English and their speech community's rules of usage of the standard English. The rules for using standard English in minority speech communities are not necessarily the same as the rules for using it in school or in mainstream White speech community.
Dlglossta Diglossia is the relationship between two dialects or two languages that are used for different purposes within a speech community. Members of the
150
Beyond Language
speech community recognize and accept the separate functions of the dialects.6 Although the relationship between the co-existing dialects is relatively stable, the dialects can change. There may be mutual borrowing of codes, speech events, and so forth. For instance, in the United States, standard English has borrowed many elements from Black English. The dialects of a diglossia relationship are not of equal status. Usually one ranks higher than the other on political or other grounds. In the case of a minority speech community in the U.S., White-American proper English (i.e., the standard English) is the high dialect which is approved for education, jobs, and communication with "outsiders." The mother tongue of the minorities (e.g., Black English) is the low dialect for everyday life in the family and community. Fishman has proposed four types of diglossia relationships in a speech community. For the purpose of this essay, I will add a fifth. Brief descriptions of the five types of speech community follow. (See Figure 1 below.) Both diglossia and bilingualism7 One is a speech community with both diglossia and bilingualism (Fig. 1, box 1). This type of speech community often originates from colonization, conquest, or enslavement, whereby the superior power imposes its language and communication pattern on the subordinate population. For example, when the British colonized Nigeria they imposed the English language on Nigerian language groups; when White people enslaved Black people from Africa, they imposed the English language on Blacks who previously spoke various African languages; and,
1. BOTH DIGLOSSIA AND BILINGUALISM

3. DIGLOSSIA
2. BILINGUALISM WITHOUT DIGLOSSIA 4. NEITHER DIGLOSSIA NOR BILINGUALISM
WITHOUT BILINGUALISM
5. DIGLOSSIA, BILINGUALISM AND COLLECTIVE IDENTITY
Figure 1. BiUngualism and diglossia in a speech community Note. From "Bilingualism and Diglossia," by Joshua A. Fishman, 1967, Journal of Social Issues, 23 (2), p. 30. Copyright 1967 by Blackwell Publications. Adapted with
permission.
151
Ogbu when the U.S. conquered and annexed the American Southwest, the conquering Anglos (see Fig. 1) imposed English on the Spanish-speaking and various Indian language populations in the region. Bilingualism without diglossia (Fig. 1, box 2). This situation exists in a formerly diglossia speech community undergoing rapid social change. Although the author does not know a specific case, he speculates that the last phase of a hypothetical colonialism is a good example. At such a period of nationalist political struggle, the native elites may split over the status of the colonizers' language that had existed in a diglossia with the indigenous language. Before now, almost all the native elites had embraced the colonizers' language and used it to achieve their elite status. Now, however, some of these elites are rejecting the colonizers' language because it is the language of their oppressors and a symbol of the colonizers' identity. They question its appropriateness for their political identity. Some nationalists begin to emphasize the importance of their indigenous language. Other native elites continue to emphasize the importance and appropriateness of the colonizers' language. A point may be reached eventually when, in practice, there is no consensus about the status of the languages and no clearly established functional separation between the mother tongue and the colonizers' language. Fishman believes that bilingualism without digiossia may be a transitional situation. In the hypothetical colonial situation, digiossia may return in the postcolonial future. Diglossfa without bilingualism (Fig. 1, box 3). This occurs when formerly separate speech communities are brought together (not necessarily voluntarily) into a common political boundary. An example is Calabar, Nigeria, where the author grew up. The British colonial rule brought several language groups to settle alongside the native Efik population. Each immigrant group became a bilingual or multilingual speech community. Its members used their indigenous language for everyday life in their community; they learned and used Efik, the language of the indigenous population for local economic transactions and for communication with other "strangers," or immigrants. The indigenous Efiks and the immigrant Hausas, lbibios, Igbos and Yoruba learned and used English for education, colonial administration, commerce, and, for some, Christian religion. The indigenous Efiks were not bilingual with respect to the immigrant language groups; the immigrant groups did not learn or use one another's language; and the colonizing British were not bilingual because they did not learn or use any of the colonized groups' language. Neither bilingualism nor diglossia: The fourth type is really a monolingual speech community with neither bilingualism nor diglossia present (Fig. 1, box 4). This type is rare and occurs among isolated peoples. Diglossia, bilingualism, and language frames of reference (Fig. 1, box 5). The fifth type added by the author is a speech community with both diglossia and bilingualism but the frames of reference of the two languages or two dialects are oppositional. Although members of the speech community accept the co-existing languages or dialects for different functions, they 152
Beyond Language
are unwilling or ambivalent to learn and use one of the languages or dialects, usually the dominant group's dialect partly because of its perceived meaning for their collective identity. This situation exists in the Black speech community described by the author. It is different from those of the four types described by Fishman. I will explain how the fifth type arises and what distinguishes it from the others by describing some of its distinctive features: type of minorities involved, collective identity, and dialect frame of reference. Minority status. The presence of opposition between co-existing dialects or languages in a minority speech community depends on whether the minority group is voluntary (i.e., immigran0 or involuntary (i.e., nonimmigrant). Voluntary minorities are people w h o have come to settle in the United States more or less voluntarily because they expected better opportunities (better jobs, more political or religious freedom) than they had in their places of origin. People in this category may be different in race, ethnicity, religion, or language. The important distinguishing features of voluntary minorities are that (a) they chose to move to the U.S. society in the hope of a better future and that Co) they do not interpret their presence in the United States as forced on them by the U.S. government or by White Americans. Immigrant minorities in the U.S. include people from Africa, China, Japan, Korea, the Caribbean, Central and South America, and Mexico. Nonimmigrant (or involuntary minorities) are people w h o have been made a part of the United States permanently against their will through conquest, colonization, or slavery. Their distinguishing features are that (a) they did not choose but were forced against their will to b e c o m e a part of the United States and that (b) they themselves usually interpret their presence in the U.S. as forced on them by White Americans. Again, people in this category may be different in race, ethnicity, religion, or language. Nonimmigrant minorities in the U.S. are Native Americans and Alaskan Natives, the original owners of the land w h o were conquered; early Mexican Americans in the Southwest w h o were also conquered; Native Hawaiians w h o were colonized; Puerto Ricans w h o consider themselves a colonized people; and Black Americans w h o were brought to the U.S. as slaves. Both voluntary and involuntary minorities consider the standard English as "White," but they also know that in order to succeed in school and to get good jobs it is necessary to know and use the standard "White English." However, the two minorities differ in their ability and willingness to accommodate the White English, partly because of their collective identity and dialect or language frames of reference. Collectfve identity refers to a people's (e.g., members of a minority group) sense of w h o they are, of "we-feeling," or "belongingness." Members of a minority group construct their collective identity out of their collective historical experience. The collective identity of minority groups is either different from or oppositional to the collective identity of White Americans, depending on how and why a group became minorities. Immigrant minorities w h o bring with them a pre-existing sense of w h o they were before 153
Ogbu
arriving in the U.S., at least initially, have a collective identity that is mainly different from, rather than oppositional to, White-American collective identity. Nonimmigrant minorities constructed an oppositional collective identity after White Americans forced them into minority status and mistreatment. For both immigrant and nonimmigrant minorities, collective identity is closely tied to dialect frames of reference. A languagefrarne of reference refers to the correct or ideal way to talk by members of a group or community. The language frame of reference of immigrant minorities usually predates their arrival in the U.S. and is perceived by them as different from the frame of reference of White speakers of standard English. For example, some Chinese immigrants in Oakland, California, brought their Cantonese language as well as their pre-existing notion of the correct way to speak it (i.e., their language frame or reference) from I-long Kong. Likewise, Igbo and Yoruba immigrants in Oakland brought with them Igbo and Yoruba languages and their own language frames of reference. The relationship between the dialect frame of reference of nonimmigrant minorities and the frame of reference of White speakers of standard English is different. Involuntary minorities like Black Americans developed their English dialects after being deprived of their original languages. Others who retain their original languages reinterpret the frames of reference after they have been forced into involuntary minority status. Indeed, the creation of oppositional dialect or language frame of reference is a part of the overall effort of these minorities to solve the status problems caused by forced incorporation into U.S. society. One necessary step in coping with the status problems is to create mutually acceptable criteria for determining w h o is a bona fide member of the group. The creation of a language/dialect frame of reference or the correct way for members to talk serves this purpose. The frame of reference becomes an important symbol of their collective identity. To return to Figure 1, box 5, in both immigrant and nonimmigrant minority speech communities, the minority dialects or indigenous languages co-exist with the standard English in a diglossia relationship. As noted earlier, both voluntary and involuntary minorities consider standard English to be "White language" and a symbol of White identity. They are fully aware that standard English or White English /s required for school success and good jobs. However, partly because of how and why they became minorities immigrant and nonimmigrant minorities interpret and respond differently to the requirement of mastering the standard English. Immigrant minorities are more willing and more able to learn standard English or adopt White ways of talking for two reasons. One is that before they left their places of origin they generally expected to learn English as the language would they need to succeed or "become somebody" in the U.S. The other reason is that the differences between their language frames and the frame of reference of White American speakers of standard English are not oppositional. Therefore, the immigrants do not think that accommodating White American ways of talking threatens their language identity. They do not imagine that it requires them to give up their own languages or 154
Beyond Language dialects to be able to learn the standard English. Instead, they interpret learning English as acquiring a new language to add to the ones they already have in order to achieve their emigration goals. Some immigrants more or less assume that it is their responsibility to learn to speak English the way White Americans do---which is, to speak it without a foreign accent. Nonimmigrant minorities are less willing and less able to accommodate White-American ways of talking for several reasons. First, they are not foreigners w h o expect to learn a new language. Second, after many generations of discrimination, they have come to believe that mastering proper English does not necessarily lead to goals associated with that skill. As a result, there is no strong incentive motivation for mastering proper English. Third, the relationship between their dialect or language frames and that of standard English speakers is oppositional. In this case, the language or dialect differences serve as boundary-maintenance mechanisms and provide the minorities with a sense of self-worth. As a result, nonimmigrant minorities do not interpret learning to talk like White Americans as acquiring a new dialect or skill to add to their own for achieving a goal. On the contrary, they seem to think that they are required to give up their own way of talking to be able to talk like White Americans. Accommodating WhiteAmerican ways of talking seems to threaten their sense of dialect identity. Furthermore, they more or less hold White Americans responsible for eliminating the problems caused by the dialect differences, because White people created the problems by depriving them of their original languages. Thus, while minority speech communities in the U.S. may be characterized by both bidialectalism and diglossia, in some there also exists an oppositional relationship between the frames of reference of the minority dialect or language and the standard English. The presence of an oppositional relationship has serious implications for learning and using the standard English. In the next section, I will illustrate the oppositional situation in the fifth type with my study in Lafayette, a Black speech community in Oakland, California. At the time of the study (1988-1990), Lafayette people did not call their dialect ebonics. 8 Nor did I and my researcher assistants use this concept in our study which was completed some 5 years before the "ebonics controversy." Lafayette people referred to their dialects as "slang" or "slang English" and, occasionally, as "our regular English," "Black English," or "rap." In my presentation below I will use their folk terminologies interchangeably. Although there is some diversity in ways of talking in Lafayette, I will focus my analysis on the dominant patterns of dialect beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of the members of the speech community--adults and children. My presentation is not about individual or subgroup differences. Certainly, not everyone in Lafayette talks slang English the same way or believes the same thing about it or about proper (standard) English. Moreover, the fact that the two dialects of English co-exist means that Lafayette Blacks can speak slang English as well as proper English. 155
Ogbu
Another point to bear in mind is that the case study is not about dialect forms or structures. That is, it is not a linguistic study of grammar, phonology, vocabulary, and syntax of slang English or proper English in this community. Rather, it is a study of the dominant beliefs and attitudes of Lafayette Blacks toward their slang English and proper English and their behaviors. It is also about the folk histories of these dialects, rather than their scientific histories. L a f a y e t t e : A Black S p e e c h C o m m u n i t y Purpose of the Study Over the years, I have developed an explanation of school performance of minority groups, which I call cultural-ecological theory. This explanation posits that there are two sets of factors influencing minority school performance: how society at large and the school treat minorities (the system) and how minority groups respond to those treatments and to schooling (community forces). The theory further posits that differences in school performance between immigrant and nonimmigrant minorities are partly due to differences in their community forces. This case study is a part of a larger comparative study which examined the community forces of immigrant Chinese-American, nonimmigrant BlackAmerican, and semi-immigrant Mexican-American minorities in Oakland and Union City, California. My research assistants and I used an ethnographic approach to discover how these minorities perceive and respond to their histories, treatments, and schooling. This article focuses on dialect perceptions, beliefs, and responses. There are several reasons for using the case study to illustrate the fifth type of speech communities. One is to show that in this inner city Black speech community slang English and proper English co-exist in a diglossia relationship but in oppositional frames of reference. Second, the study will show that the dialect beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of Lafayette students at school are the same as those of their parents and other adults. The children's dialect attitudes and behaviors are not merely those of the "street." The third objective is to show that Lafayetteparents do not and cannot teach their children standard English because they themselves do not speak it at all or speak it well. Fourth, the case study will show that the persisting difficulty of Lafayette people with standard English is due, in part, to their incompatible beliefs about proper English. Finally, I hope that the overall presentation will shed some light on the dialect beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of Lafayette parents and other adults. The last objective is particularly important, considering the role that educators and researchers usually assign to parents in teaching their children standard English. Methodology
The Setting
My research assistants and I studied two Black speech communities, but this article is about only one, Lafayette? Lafayette is a low-income Black 156
Beyond Language
neighborhood in West Oakland. By cornrnuniCy I mean the attendance area of an elementary school. Participants in the study. We (from now on, my research assistants and I will be referred to as we or the researcbers), observed many more people, speech events, and situations but formally interviewed 33 parents and grandparents as well as seven other adults. The adults we interviewed were people we met at various events during the participant observation phase. We also interviewed 76 students: 12 elementary, 28 junior, and 36 senior high students; these included 40 females and 36 males, t Research assistants., recruitment and training. I was assisted by three ethnographers: a senior researcher with a doctoral degree in linguistics and two junior ethnographers. My senior assistant served as my associate director of the Lafayette study, was responsible for adult study, and supervised the junior assistants. A male junior ethnographer studied male students, and a female junior ethnographer focused on female students. The male ethnographer had some college education and worked extensively with adolescents; the female assistant had completed college. All the research assistants were Black Americans who had either grown up or lived for many years in Oakland. I deliberately selected my assistants with this background because I believed that it would enhance the study. For example, they both brought to the study indigenous knowledge and informants through personal networks. The researchers received an intensive training in ethnographic research for 3 months. The training was divided into four parts: (a) a study of the research problems, which involved reading and discussion. (b) Several months of a 2-hour weekly workshop on how to do ethnographic research. The trainees read some past ethnographic research accounts for discussion at the workshop. (c) The associate director supervised a weekly fleldwork practice. (d) Each week a 1-hour weekly feedback session with me or the associate director was conducted to discuss the practice fieldwork. Procedures and data collection. The researchers spent about 2 years (1988-1990) collecting ethnographic data in the community. The long period of fieldwork enabled us to become "members" of Lafayette community through both informal and formal interaction with the people. We attended community events, including religious services, meetings on special issues, informal gatherings, weddings, funeral services; we hung out in barber shops and salons and visited families. These participant observations helped us to learn about community forces from actual behaviors, to learn what further questions to ask besides the ones we started with, and to learn what to emphasize in ethnographic interviews. Furthermore, participant observations allowed us to compare what we were told in interviews with what we saw the people actually do. We developed our interview questions partly from the theoretical framework of the study and partly from the what we learned through participant observation. Our phrasing of the questions was influenced by our dialect experience during participant observation phase. 157
Ogbu The principal investigator drafted the initial interview questions and had the assistants review them. The final version was the result of team discussions, testing, and revisions. Adults and students were asked the same questions, but the questions were phrased to elicit adult or student perspectives. The questions were open-ended and informants' responses were audiotaped. We encouraged our informants to elaborate in their answers to questions. Interviews were scheduled at the convenience of the informants. The interview usually took place in the informant's home. Before the interview began, the researcher explained the purpose of the study and answered questions the informant might have about the study. After the interview, the researcher might continue talking with the informant, asking for clarification or elaboration of some points made in the interview. We also conducted the research in school. During the participant observation phase, researchers served as teacher aides, assisted with school plays and other programs, and supervised children's activities on the school grounds and during field trips, school sports, and so forth. We attended schoolboard meetings, collected documents and statistics on school attendance, disciplines, academic performance, and partidpation in extracurricular activities. For classroom observations, we made charts of students' sitting arrangements and observed and recorded students' interactions with one another and with the teacher. We interviewed some teachers, counselors, and other school personnel. Only the student interviews are used in this article. Permission was obtained from parents and school officials to interview students. Transcripion and coding. The audiotaped interviews were transcribed by trained transcribers. After their training, transcribers followed specific written instructions on how to transcribe the interviews, including when and how to make insertions in the transcripts. They met weekly with their supervisor to discuss specific or general problems encountered in the transcription. I developed a coding system for the ethnographic interviews, participant observational descriptions, and other qualitative data. My coding categories were derived both from the conceptual framework of the study and from new categories that emerged during the fieldwork. The associate director of the entire comparative study went for a special training in computer coding of ethnographic data. She then trained and supervised five coders using the Textbase Alpha program. The coders had a reliability of over 80%. Data analysis and interpretation. In the coding system, each topic was assigned a code. For example, "Dialect Differences and Dialect Frames of Reference" (see Table 1) was assigned the P code. This was further divided into 15 subcodes. Thus, the subcode P06, "How Black People Talk," is the perception of Black parents and Black students of the differences between how speakers of Black English talk and the way speakers of standard English talk. n Code DD (Table 2) contains categories on dialect and identity. The 158
Beyond Language Table 1

P Code: Dialect Differences and Dialect Frames of Reference
Subcodes POl. P02. PO3. P04. P05. P06. P07. P08. P09. P10. Pll. P12. P13. P14. P15. Dialect differences between group and Whites Educated Blacks and White talk Educated Blacks and Black talk Communication problems with White people How White people talk How Black people talk Interpretations of dialect differences (see PO1) Pressures to speak standard English Pressures against speaking standard English Group's dialect at home Group's dialect at school No perceptions of class differences in dialect Asian language barrier Learning English Speaking Spanish Parents 36 13 3 12 9 8 0 0 8 2 3
1
Students 65 0 0 0 6 7 0 0 16 0 3
0
2 0 0
2 0 0
c o d i n g a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n of this c a t e g o r y are similar to the p r o c e d u r e f o l l o w e d in C a t e g o r y P. T h e p r o c e d u r e for data analysis w a s t r en d analysis. Thus, for analysis o f C o d e P for Lafayette parents, the first thing w a s to s u m m a r i z e t h e entry for e a c h s u b c o d e ; t h e n the entries for the entire P c o d e
Table 2
DD Code: Dialect Differences/Frames of Reference and Schooling
Subcodes DD01. DD02. DD03. DD04. DD05. DD06. DD07. DD08. DD09. DD10. DDll. DD12. DD13. DD14. DD15. DD16. DD17. DD18. N04. Dialect differences and school adjustment and performance Dialect differences between group and the schools How group's students feel about English courses Parents' communication problems with teachers Group's English at school Reactions to dialect denigration Perceptions and reactions to dialect differences Code switching No perceptions of dialect differences Multiple views of dialect differences How to overcome dialect differences in school No perceptions of dialect differences causing problems Parents see need for basics Parents' opinions of English courses How dialect differences affected informants Learning and using standard English Learning English for a non-native speaker Speaking Spanish at school Group members "acting White" Parents 17 23 14 10 0 0 24 7 14 3 12 23 3 15 0 7 0 0 44 Students 16 4 41 0 3 2 22 9 3 0 8 14 0 0 13 25 0 0 106 159
Ogbu
were summarized. During the summary of a subcode or the entire code, dominant patterns of beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors in the data were noted. The search for trends or patterns was guided by the theoretical framework. The same procedure was followed in the analysis of the students' code. The trends for the two subpopulations (e.g., parents and students) were subsequently compared. The comparison of the trends allowed the researchers to reach some conclusions about the dialect beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of people in the Lafayette speech community. But the conclusions were also based on the researchers' construction of the big picture of the dialect situation in Lafayette. This construction, in turn, was based partly on the Lafayette people's point of view and partly on the impressions they gained about dialect over the long period of participant observation. The researchers' understanding of the Lafayette people's beliefs and attitudes came from paying attention to the cognitive distinctions the people themselves made about their o w n and White people's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. In this article, I am presenting the researchers' (and my) understanding of the dialect beliefs and attitudes of Lafayette adults and students. Findings There are three findings 12 in the Lafayette speech community that will show how the Type 5 speech community differs from others. The first is how the people perceive the diglossia relationship between the standard English and their English dialect; the second is the dialect dilemma of the Lafayette people due totheir incompatible beliefs about proper English; and the third is their equivocal attitude toward mastering and using proper English. Bidialectalism and Diglossia in Lafayette It is c o m m o n knowledge among adults and children in Lafayette ~3that there are two English dialects in the community: slang English and proper English (Figure 2). Both parents and students agree that some members, as parent 9L notes, can speak proper English; others can speak only slang English: Parent 9L: We, s o m e . . . I mean, I guess it's okay. Some people speaks proper, and some people use their own regular English.
White Talk Versus Black Talk
Adults and children alike describe the way White people talk ~4 as proper English or correct English and the way Black people talk as slang, slang English, Black English, and so forth. White people's proper English differs from Black people's slang in vocabulary, accent, and attitudes. Furthermore, Whites and Blacks tend to interpret the same statements differently. For example, a Black person may say something that sounds harsh, but Blacks will not feel threatened, whereas, if a White person utters the same 160
Beyond Language
BIDIALECTALISM AND DIGLOSSIA IALIAS: "SLANGENGLISH" "BLACKENGLISH" + "RAPTALK" ]"PLAINENGLISH" ,"B_LACK_~___~__~_~__G_LJS_H_'L_ +
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"FOREIGN"/ HIGHERLANGUAGE: WHITEMOTHER-TONGUEENGLISHOR "PROPER ENGLISH" "CORRECTENGLISH" "STANDARDENGLISH"

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE DIALECT DILEMMA I INCOMPATIBLE BELIEFS I ABOUTPROPER ENGLISH
[I n s t r u m e n ~ m b o l i c Endorsement I I Rejectin I \ f EquivocalAbout Learning I & Using ProperEnglish ]

I
Figure 2. Bidialectalism, diglossia, and collective identity in the Lafayette speech community
statement, a White audience is likely to assume that there is a real threat of harm. Parent 28K illustrates this difference with the following hypothetical example. We're "sitting, and we're talkin' [with] my friends; w e ' r e talkin', and, say, well, I call s o m e b o d y up, 'Ah, man, you tell that o1' motherfucker to go to hell . . . . ,,,]5 The difference most c o m m o n l y mentioned is that White-American English is more proper or more correct: .6 Parent 24L: They're... more proper lin their speechl. With [us], you know, and not all of us but a lot [off u s . . . just be plain talkin' English . . . Plain talkin'. It makes you feel comfortable, I guess, just talk the way you feel comfortable. 1~
When Lafayette people say that White Americans talk more proper they do not mean only that White speech is more formal. Likewise, w h e n they say that their o w n speech is "just plain talkin'," they don't mean only that their speech is more informal and nonstandard. What they mean by these statements is that proper English is White-American English dialect and "plain English" is Black-American English dialect or mother tongue. Lafayette children, like their parents, believe that there are differences b e t w e e n White-American English and Black English. Only in 3 of the 65 excerpts did Lafayette children deny that the two dialects are different. Like their parents, they believe that the most important difference is that White 161
Ogbu
Americans speak proper or correct English, whereas Blacks speak slang English. Lafayette children explicitly disguished standard English from slang English in 17 of the 65 excerpts, as can be seen in the following excerpt. Interviewer: Student 446: Um-hm. Is there a difference in dialect or ways of speaking? Yes, they speak, you know, correct English, and they speak polite, and Blacks, you know, they talk slang dialect.
The most distinguishing feature of Black English is that it is "slangier." Five students and several adults explicitly called Black English slang. Student 434 provides a g o o d example of how Lafayette children perceive Black dialect in their speech community: Interviewer: Student 4 3 4 : Interviewer: Student 4 3 4 : How about dialect and ways of speaking? Dialect? Slang. Yeah? Slang. There's a lotta slang.
In n o n e of the 65 student interview excerpts on dialect differences did a n y o n e mention that Lafayette Blacks use proper English in the community. Lafayette p e o p l e feel that their slang English is "natural to them," whereas White proper English is "natural" to White Americans. According to Parent 28L, "White p e o p l e are born to talk proper English," whereas "Black p e o p l e have to learn it." Parent 28L: U m . . . some Black people they was born with that way, the slang when they talk, but I did. White people just seem to be born with that culture baby talk. It's just their natural way. They're not puttin' on. And I believe that colored was born with a more, a little lower form of you know, speech [i.e., slang]. As they grew, they learned to use their dialect better. Blacks, uh-huh. It's just a way, where they come f r o m . . . But we grow, we've grown, you know, to learn how to better it, whereas I do believe, even the oldest White person, was born talkin' like that.
US. Society Ranks the Two English Dialects

The majority of Lafayette adults and children think that society accords White p r o p e r English a higher social value than Black slang. Student 420 is representative of this category. According to him, slang English and proper English are just different ways of talking, but proper English has c o m e to be seen as a better dialect to which people should aspire to speak: 162
Beyond Language
Interviewer: Student 420: Interviewer: Student 420: How 'bout dialect or ways of speaking, you know? Black people are more slang. Yeah? And I think that's, it's not, I can't say it's good, and I'm not gonna say that's bad. But I think if Black people would, like, speak better or speak with a better vocabulary, then we would relate to what White people are talkin' about.
Although American interprets slang but
some White people also speak slang English, called "valley," society ranks the White slang higher than the Black slang and it differently. In the words of Student 10, society equates Black not White slang with ignorance. White people, I wouldn't say they speak English . I mean, what is English really? Proper English. Everybody has a way of, uh, expressing themselves. Black people use slang. And they use incorrect English. White people do the same thing except it's not considered slang. It's considered "valley talk" or "prep talk" or "half-way talkin'" and "Boopsie and Mittens" and "oh-my-gawd" and "gag me with a spoon" and all that kind of stuff and it's blood, you know what's up. Uh-huh. So what you're saying is that, when they don't speak proper English, it's accepted. But when Black people don't, it's not accepted. No. It's not. It's considered slang and ignorant.
Student 10:
Interviewer:
Student 10:
White Proper English Is Equated With Standard English

Both Lafayette adults and children equate White proper English with standard English or school English. They themselves rarely use the term standard English to describe how White people talk or to refer to the English in school. But the equation is readily seen w h e n parents or students discuss required English courses. For example, Student 442 explains that most children cannot relate to English courses at school because they do not s p e a k proper English. The few w h o speak proper English and can relate to the English courses are called "Oreos," implying that they are talking like White people.
Slang English and Proper English Have Separate Functions

Black slang English is used for everyday communication in the family and community. Speaking slang English makes Lafayette p e o p l e "feel more comfortable;" w h e n questioned, they usually say that they "just talk the way they feel comfortable." The people do not initiate communication a m o n g themselves in the family and community in proper English. 163
Ogbu
They consider proper English more appropriate for school, workplace, and communicating with outsiders. As we shall see later, it is mainly because p e o p l e need proper English to succeed in school that parents and children e m p h a s i z e the need to learn proper English in school. Mastering p r o p e r English also increases one's chances of getting a g o o d job. Thus, Parent 25L2 cites job opportunity as the reason for learning to speak properly. Some, like Parent 419L, use p r o p e r English to disguise their racial identity in situations where they anticipate discrimination: Parent 419L: ]Talking properly] is not a problem for me because I can change my tone of voice and speak in a different, well, appear to speak in a different--with an accent. Certain [White] people don't really know who they're talking to. Okay. Whereas if they were to see me, they would not [have agreed to what I said].., because of the Afro.
Interviewer: Parent 419L:
Children's e n d o r s e m e n t of proper English for education and jobs will be discussed later.
Cultural Rules for Using Slang and Proper English

There are separate rules for using slang English and p r o p e r English in Lafayette. Perhaps the most important rule is about where each dialect should be used. The community believes that slang English is the appropriate dialect for everyday life. People are expected to talk slang with m e m b e r s of their families and with relatives, friends, neighbors, and other Lafayette people. They are criticized or ignored if they speak proper English with p e o p l e from their community. Some parents express annoyance w h e n their children talk proper to them, especially if the children try to correct the parents' slang English by telling them to use the proper English expressions they learned in school. One example given by parents is w h e n a child says to his or her mother, "That's not the w a y the teacher say we should say it." Parent 17L says that it gets on her nerves w h e n her child continues tO s p e a k at h o m e the w a y she learned to talk at school: "The teacher teach the kids h o w to talk p r o p e r . . . Yeah. And it works on my nerves . . . 'Cuz w h e r e I c o m e from, we all got our o w n voices." The community prefers that people use proper English w h e n c o m m u nicating with "outsiders," especially at school and other White controlled institutions. Outsiders include Black and other representatives of White institutions: teachers, police officers, social workers; they also include p e o p l e w h o s e job brings them to Lafayette or w h o c o m e to "distribute flyers." Lafayette children sometimes make fun of the p r o p e r English of the visitors. When Lafayette adults visit school or other White institutions, they are 164
Beyond Language
o b l i g e d to listen to p r o p e r English. T h e y m a y r e s p o n d in s l a n g English o r p r o p e r English, d e p e n d i n g o n their level o f e d u c a t i o n , t y p e o f job o r profession.IS More e d u c a t e d residents o c c a s i o n a l l y initiate c o m m u n i c a t i o n in p r o p e r English outside the community. Rarely d i d Lafayette i n f o r m a n t s u s e p r o p e r English w h e n w e i n t e r v i e w e d t h e m in their c o m m u n i t y . Children k n o w the rules of dialect-switching. Six o u t o f n i n e s t u d e n t s a d d r e s s i n g this rule r e p o r t practicing i t - - s p e a k i n g slang English at h o m e a n d p r o p e r English at school. Student 436 explains. Interviewer: Yeah. In other words, what I mean by that is, say, like the way you know, you and the fellas might just be rappin,' and then you go down, and you start reading your textbook. The way that y'all were rappin' and the way you know it in the textbook, it seems like two different dialects there. Yeah. It's definitely two different l a n g u a g e s . . , and, and for some people it's cool. Like for me, I can s w i t c h . . . I can talk to my buddies on the phone and stuff, and I'm talkin', speak my language . . . and then go in and read [in proper English], you know, and you know, go on . . . .
Student 436:
S t u d e n t 448 s w i t c h e s dialects with different a u d i e n c e s o r situations. H e r m o t h e r also s w i t c h e s codes. Interviewer: Student 448: How do you feel about learning proper English and using proper English? I use proper English when I'm around, you know, in a public place and around a lot of White p e o p l e . . I use proper . . . . But when I'm around my friends, and I'm around my neighborhood, ain't nobody gonna be watchin' me but them, b u t . . . I like to talk the way, you know, it's about time people talk the way we talk. My own mother, she was talkin' real crazy slang s t u f f . . . And she answers the phone in a little high-pitched v o i c e . . , and her voice is like very deep . . . she changes her voice everywhere she's talking. And it kills us because we start laughing. [Laughs,] Depends on who she's talking to? Yeah.
Interviewer: Student 448:
D i a l e c t - s w i t c h i n g also g o e s o n at school, w i t h s t u d e n t s u s i n g p r o p e r English in the c l a s s r o o m a n d slang English in the hallway. S o m e p a r e n t s d o not t h i n k that their c h i l d r e n h a v e l a n g u a g e p r o b l e m s in s c h o o l b e c a u s e their c h i l d r e n k n o w w h e n to use slang English or p r o p e r English. Both Parent 30L a n d Parent 37L s p e a k to this: 165
o8~
Parent 30L: Yeah. I mean, we have a lot of slang words that we use, that urn, they don't want you to use at school. They prefer you to use the correct English, but, as long as the person knows the correct English and the slang, they know when to use the[ir] language and when not to use it. Good point. And you k n o w - - y o u get in, in a class, you English class, you're talkin'. But when you hallway, you still [say], "Give me five, man." "Hi, how doing?" or "Hello." Its's not a, stopping'em from learning. go into hit that It's not, it's not
Interviewer:
But do you think it affects---let's for, for an example, a child has to write a composition, a paragraph or a couple of paragraphs, or a couple of pages of composition. And it's been said that many Black children write the same way they speak. No. Because if you notice, and you say you in the school. Every--read a composition. It's always wrote into the White language. It's never wrote in rap. But I bet you, if one was to write it out in raly---and you read it and listen to it, you'd hear where that boy or girl is coming from. Do you think that the majority of Black children know the difference between the slang and the correct language, correct English? Yes, the majority. The majority do.
Parent 30L:
Interviewer:
Parent 37L:
W h e n a n d Where Children Learn Slang a n d Proper English

Slang English a n d p r o p e r English are t e a m e d sequentially, in different settings a n d from different p e o p l e . Lafayette c h i l d r e n learn slang English before t h e y l e a r n p r o p e r English. T h e y l e a r n slang English in their family a n d c o m m u n i t y . It is the dialect t h e y h e a r a n d learn v e r y early in life b e c a u s e it is t h e d i a l e c t s p o k e n a r o u n d t h e m from birth. It is also t h e dialect t h e y l e a r n f r o m p e o p l e w i t h w h o m t h e y a r e m o s t intimate. It is for t h e s e r e a s o n s Lafayette p e o p l e claim that slang English is their "natural dialect" o r m o t h e r t o n g u e ; t h e y a r e " b o r n w i t h it" a n d feel m o r e c o m f o r t a b l e s p e a k i n g it. P r o p e r English is like a n "alien dialect" h e a r d a n d u s e d o n l y o n certain o c c a s i o n s a n d o u t s i d e the h o m e a n d c o m m u n i t y . Lafayette c h i l d r e n d o not l e a r n it in their family a n d c o m m u n i t y from birth. T h e y start l e a r n i n g it w h e n t h e y b e g i n s c h o o l at the age o f 5 or a little earlier if t h e y a t t e n d p r e s c h o o l . M o r e o v e r , Lafayette c h i l d r e n learn p r o p e r English from outsiders, e s p e c i a l l y s c h o o l teachers. F r o m the p o i n t o f v i e w o f Lafayette p e o p l e , t h e r e is a division of l a b o r in d i a l e c t socialization. As p a r e n t s a n d c o m m u n i t y , they are r e s p o n s i b l e for
166
Beyond Language
teaching slang English to their children. Teachers and the school are responsible for teaching proper English. Our observation and general impression is that Lafayette parents do not usually and probably cannot teach their children proper English because they themselves do not speak it or do not speak it well enough. Another thing we observed is that the proper English Lafayette children learn in school and preschool is not reinforced by their dialect experience in the family and community because proper English is not the dialect of everyday communication in the family, community, or among peers. Furthermore, as has been noted, some parents even discourage their children from practicing proper English at home. We have already seen that Parent 17L complains when her child continues to talk at home the way she learned to talk at school.
Problems Due to Differences Between Slang and Proper English Communication. Parents encounter problems in communicating with teachers because of dialect differences. Parents say that they can express their ideas well in slang English and they expect teachers and White people to understand them. The problem is that they themselves do not understand teachers and other people who talk proper English, for several reasons: Speakers of proper English use "big vocabulary words"; they talk differently; and they don't understand what teachers talk about. Parents 38L and 33L have the following to say about these problems:
Parent 38L: Interviewer: Parent 38L: Parent 33L: Yeah, I've had some problems understanding teachers. I've had . . . Because of the way they talk? Yeah, the way they talk, and what they talk about-And I had that happen sometimes. I'll stop and ask 'era, I say, "Now, what did you mean when you said that?" That-And it's just something simple. But it's just--they're used to using that big vocabulary. And I have a problem [withl school dialect, because--they use a lot of--letters. You know, a lot of times they don't say a whole lot.
Another barrier to communication is that Lafayette people suspect that speakers of proper English think they are ignorant because of their slang English. As will be seen later, Lafayette Blacks believe that society equates their slang English with ignorance. The suspicion makes Lafayette people hesitant and ashamed to talk to speakers of proper English. It is partly for this reason that parents are hesitant to talk with teachers about their children's education. Teachers might be thinking that they are ignorant and probably will not believe what parents tell them about their children) 9 167
Ogbu School performance. Lafayette parents and children report that the dialect differences cause learning problems at school. Some parents not only believe that the school English is "White" but also suspect that White people set up the proper English requirement so that Black children will have problems. There are suggestions from parents about reducing or eliminating learning problems caused by dialect differences. These include teaching children how to switch from slang English at home to proper English at school. But as one parent points out, some problems will remain: Lafayette children will not fully express themselves or their ideas in proper English like they will in slang English. Students are more specific in discussing the academic problems caused by the dialect differences. In 6 out of 16 interview excerpts, students' reported problems including poor grades, difficulty with speaking and writing in proper English, and learning difficulty in general. Student 437 explains how he struggled to minimize the interference of slang English in his written work.
Interviewer: Student 437: In what ways have the dialect differences affected your own school work? Me, personally? I speak, you know, a lot of slang, and then, when you get to school, write these papers and stuff, you know, you have to put a little more efforts to make sure that the slang was out of it, you know.
The Dialect Dilemma: Proper English and Identity The communication and learning problems described above are generally known to Lafayette adults and children and are due to differences in dialects per se: vocabulary, grammar, social perceptions, and so on. But Lafayette Blacks face another dialect problem of which they are apparently not aware; not once did they mention it to the researchers. The problem which the people of this community are not aware of I will call their dialect dilemma. The dilemma is that Lafayette Blacks hold incompatible beliefs about proper English: (a) They believe on the one hand that it is necessary to master it for education and job success, (b) but they also believe that mastering proper English threatens their slang English identity, their bonafide membership in their community and racial solidarity; furthermore, mastering proper English for education and jobs is a requirement imposed on Black people by their White American oppressors. These incompatible beliefs raise the question of how to succeed in school and in the job market, both requiring proper English, and yet retain slang English identity, bona fide membership in Lafayette community and racial solidarity as Black people in America. a What follow next are the contradictory beliefs about proper English.
Beliefs Endorsing Proper English for Education and Jobs

Throughout the study we did not know of anyone in Lafayette w h o did not 168
Beyond Language
e n d o r s e mastering p r o p e r English for education and jobs. Parent 5L speaks for m a n y w h e n she states: "I think w e s h o u l d be taught p r o p e r English and go forth o n that a n d leave j a r g o n . . , and slang w o r d s out." Lafayette p e o p l e say emphatically that they w a n t the public school to teach their children p r o p e r English. Parent 22L expresses the c o m m u n i t y sentiment w h e n she says: "As far as I [am concerned] they [the teachers] s h o u l d teach the kids the p r o p e r w a y s [to talk] and vocabulary." They w a n t schools to begin teaching p r o p e r English in the early school years. Teachers s h o u l d teach children h o w to switch b e t w e e n Black English at h o m e and p r o p e r English at school. T h e y should be firm in correcting children's speaking and writing. The children also e n d o r s e d p r o p e r English for e d u c a t i o n and job opportunity. Student 446 e c h o e s the general students' desire to learn p r o p e r English and to be corrected. Interviewer: Student 446: Okay, how do you feel about learning and using standard English or proper English? Yes. I like to learn proper English like if we go in our English class, you know, we get corrected, you know. 'Cuz we usin' like outside and things, we talk different. We talk, and so when we go to English class we get our English corrected.
Students e n d o r s e p r o p e r English for job opportunities in 10 o f the 25 excerpts a b o u t w h y they s h o u l d learn and use p r o p e r English. Again, Interviewer: Do you agree that many Black students feel that going to school is really a waste of time because they will not get good jobs when they finish school? Yes, most think like that. But to me, it's not a waste of time. Uh-hm. 'Cuz, if you don't go to school, you ain't gonna know the proper English or nothing That's why you not gonna get a job. But you know, you come in, when you graduate from school you know, they have some that look . . . , and you know they be asking you, "Why you think you qualified?" But you know and then they, in some job, you know, some of the . . you know, job interviews, they ask how high, I mean you know, when did you drop out of, did you graduate? And you don't wanna say you dropped out 'cuz they, you know, 'cuz then you might really don't get the job. So going to school is not a waste of your time.
Student 446: Interviewer: Student 446:
Beliefs Opposing Proper English for Various Reasons

Lafayette o p p o s i t i o n to or ambivalence about p r o p e r English stems partly 169
Ogbu from their interpretations of (a) the origin or history of proper English and (b) what p r o p e r English stands for in contrast to their slang English. The following are their contradictory beliefs about proper English. Origins of proper English and White superiority attitudes.The reader is reminded that the following accounts of the origins of proper English and slang English are not factual but folk beliefs of Lafayette people. The folk histories of the dialects in Lafayette are based on the people's memories of the language experiences of their forebears under slavery and subsequent oppression. According to them, White p e o p l e went to school and learned to talk p r o p e r w h e n Black p e o p l e were slaves and could not go to school. White people, thus, had the opportunity first to be educated and then to learn to talk proper. In those days, talking proper was a symbol of being educated and knowledgeable. Eventually, talking proper b e c a m e the White w a y of talking or their natural talk; p r o p e r English b e c a m e their mother tongue. Under this circumstance, White Americans b e g a n to feel that they w e r e superior to and better than Black p e o p l e w h o were not educated and could not talk proper. Because Blacks lacked these two attributes, White Americans concluded that Black Americans were inferior and ignorant.
Tal~'ng proper English among Blacks signifies adopting White attitudes of superiority. Lafayette people are o p p o s e d to talking p r o p e r in the
c o m m u n i t y because the speaker is suspected of thinking like White p e o p l e that he or she is superior to or better than other Blacks. The Black speaker of p r o p e r English probably thinks that he or she is m o r e educated, more knowledgeable, and better than other Blacks. Several p e o p l e like Parents 12L, 27L, and 8K describe h o w their community would react to m e m b e r s w h o talk p r o p e r in the community. According to them, talking p r o p e r is the clearest evidence of acting White, which is not a p p r o v e d by the community. Parent L12: Interviewer: Parent L12: Interviewer: Parent L12: You know, talkin' all--you know, talkin' like White people. Oh, talking--so people would not be interested in that... No. Ok. Well, how would they treat them? Probably stand-offish . . . . Ignore t h e m . . . Because they're trying to [show that they arel better than they a r e . . . Maybe that type of attitude. People in the community will say, "He thinks he's smarter than everyone else, or he thinks he's White." We don't want to listen to this. I don't want listen to this thing or that. They [other Lafayette Blacksl would probably tend to be somewhat prejudicial of someone speaking very proper English, and they would probably make an assessment on that person's character as being
Parent 27L:
Parent 38L:
170
Beyond Language
Parent38L: "uppity" or . . . she is trying to be White, or something like that, you know.
Like the adults, Lafayette children also disapprove of talking p r o p e r because it signifies that one feels superior to or better than other Blacks. Children's awareness of the different meanings of proper and slang English is evident in 22 interview excerpts on the meanings of the dialects. These excerpts also indicate that some children have internalized the invidious distinctions. Some children and parents worry about the denigration of their dialect; they also worry about what White people think of Blacks w h o speak slang. These worries affect h o w some parents prepare their children for participation in White controlled institutions. Take, for example, the advice given to Student 434 by his father about how to behave and talk before White people to avoid being looked d o w n on: Student 434: Interviewer: Student 434: Interviewer: Student 434: My father would say, "You have to dress a certain way for the White man." Right, right! "Put on slacks and stuff, sit down and write, talk to him like you got some sense." Uh-hm. Instead of sittin' down, goin', layin' back over and Iookin', Iookin' around, and when he asked you like, urn, "How can you help this firm for us?" you know, "What can you offer?"... Say, "Yo, man, I can offer my talents, and yo man, l gotta go in a couple of minutes. Hurry up with these answers", and stuff like t h a t . . , that wouldn't work.
Talking proper English is "puttin' on." People object to talking proper because it is not the natural way of talking for Lafayette Blacks; talking proper is the natural way for Whites. White Americans are born to talk proper bcause it is a dialect they hear from birth in their family, community, and a m o n g their peers. For this reason, proper English is the mother tongue of White children and their natural dialect. When a White person is talking proper he or she is not "puttin' o n " - - t h a t is, not pretending to speak proper English; it is his or her natural way of talking. I contrast a Lafayette child born into a family, community, and peer g r o u p where he or she hears slang English from birth. For this reason, slang b e c o m e s his or her natural dialect. So, w h e n a Lafayette person speaks slang he or she is not puttin' on or pretending; it is his or her natural w a y of talking. Equally important, the Black slang speaker is not claiming to be superior to other Blacks. Lafayette people are not born to speak proper English, a dialect they learn later in life from outsiders. They can never learn to s p e a k proper English like White people. Therefore, w h e n a Lafayette Black is talking proper, he or she is puttin' on or pretending to be White or
171
Ogbu
to talk like W h i t e p e o p l e . T h e c o m m u n i t y o b j e c t s t o p u t t i n ' o n b y t h o s e w h o try to talk p r o p e r . P a r e n t 25L2 says that it is insane to pretend to be White a n d , like P a r e n t 38L, d e s c r i b e s h o w t h e c o m m u n i t y w o u l d r e a c t to s u c h a person: Parent 25L2: I t h i n k . . . [for] a lot lot'] Black people w h o are Black it is literary insane and stuff [to] see Black p e o p l e w h o pretend to be White. Um hum. [We] get very angry [when s o m e o n e pretends] to be White by talkin' proper . . . . A lot... Very a n g r y . . . A n g r y . . . B e c a u s e . . . they're proud of their being Black. And to see s o m e b o d y else who's Black actually put it d o w n and try to hide it. . Because I feel that way [i.e., angry] too. It's . . . [like you're] feeling that bad about being Black that you want to hide it. Yes. Don't do that to us . . . . You [know] what you're really doing is to hurt yourself. Yes. Because if you ever step into a White man's world, he's gonna think what? What a White man gonna appreciate you w h e n you don't appreciate your o w n people? English because t h e y a l s o t h i n k it is a
Interviewer: Parent 25L2: Interviewer: Parent 25L2:
Interviewer: Parent 25L2: Interviewer: Parent 25L2:
Students oppose talking proper p r e t e n s e , o r fake. Interviewer:
Do you think Blacks' English should be included? You think Black, I mean that we should be able to speak Black English outside among ourselves? We do speak it a m o n g ourselves. But I'm sayin', outside of ourselves? Well, me myself, l don't try ta put on a fake, you know, well, in all this, this, I just talk the way I talk. Ok. So d o y o u . . , so are you saying that, that usin' standard English should be a put-on? To me it would. I mean, not standard . . . not standard English, b u t . . . Being proper you mean? Or using big words? Tryin' ta, tryin' ta be proper and use big words, cuz
Student 217: Interviewer: Student 217: Interviewer: Student 217: Interviewer: Student 217: 172
Beyond Language
Student 217: I wasn't taught that, but say when I go ta college, and learn more, it's p r o b . . , hard to say.
Accommodation of proper English is a displacement process. Lafayette Blacks claim that they inherited slang English from their forebears. They strongly hold onto it because it has always been a part of their collective identity--what gives them a sense of w h o they are and where they belong. Parent 30L claims that she has been Black long enough to k n o w that Black people have always spoken slang English and will always speak it.. Their accounts of the origins of proper English and slang as well as the meanings of these dialects lead me to speculate that, after many generations, the dialects have b e c o m e symbols of collective oppositional identities and boundary-maintaining mechanisms. We will see later that the fear of some Lafayette p e o p l e that accommodating proper English threatens their slang identity and racial solidarity is real. They point to Blacks, including family members, w h o n o w talk proper English and no longer talk slang. Furthermore, some Blacks w h o master proper English prefer to hang out with White p e o p l e or e v e n m o v e out of the community. For these reasons community puts pressures on its members against using proper English. It is also partly because proper English is a symbol of White people and partly out of fear of community reactions that some people w h o can talk proper do not do so readily, as Parent 37L explains:
They [White people] talk very properly, you k n o w . . . And we could, if necessary, we could talk very properly. But you know, you're used to hearing it f r o m . . . White p e o p l e . . , talk that way. Talking proper is discussed in 21 of the 106 students' excerpts on the conflict b e t w e e n acting White and group identity. Because students interpret acting White as rejecting "your color" or "your race", many unequivocally c o n d e m n those w h o talk proper.. Interviewer: Student 460: What do you think of the way they act? I hate them. They don't fit too well. I know one of them. She walks around. She is fake, and she is smart. But they are gettin' the same education we are gettin'.
Student 421 wonders why anyone would want to reject his or her color by talking proper like White people. And I met them. And you know, why [do] they want to be like that? You know, I can understand them going to school with all these Whites, but, you know, being friends with them, I say, how can you talk like that? You know, I can see you having your slang, but how could you want to act White when you were born and raised in a Black place? And you had a Black family. You only go to school with these people six hours a day, and you're talking like them, you acting 173
Ogbu
like them. And you just rejecting your own color. That's not like you. If I could just, it's fine for you to have White friends and your Black friends. You talk that White slang, you know, Valley talk. You know, but don't reject your people that way. Not like, you say, you Black people is like White people, just like you. Many children were fully aware of the negative perceptions of and treatment of their community by those w h o talk proper in the community. Learning proper English results in dialect assimilation. A related belief is that learning proper English is a one-way dialect assimilation. Lafayette people have proof that mastering proper English results in loss of slang English. Grandparents like 26L report that their grandchildren growing up in predominantly White communities no longer talk like them: "Well, sometimes they [children] change. They start talkin' like other races, 'Cuz I have some grandchildren out in the southern part of California, and they don't talk like us; they talk like Whites." Hanging around mostly White people also results in loss of slang English. The public school is singled out as an agent of dialect assimilation; it is an institution which replaces slang identity with proper English (White) identity. Lafayette people believe, or at least suspect, that the real reason the school requires proper English is that White people want to make Black people "civilized before they can be acceptable to Whites. ''2~ One way of civilizing Blacks is to change the way they talk by replacing their slang English with proper English. Parent 14L explains how the school successfully performs this function on behalf of White Americans. Parent 14I.: When one get a certain degree of education and they get into this White system because see, the White man sets up the education system... But anyway, the thing of it is, when you get into this educational mode, you're automatically being taught to be like White people. Because it's their system. You see what I'm saying? So, when you start, you know, when you're raised and born in the ghetto and you're talkin' the slang and blah blah and whathave-you, and then you get into the college, and then you, that this the way. You're not supposed to use "ain't," and you're not supposed to do this, and you're not supposed to do that. This [is] the rules of the English dialect. As to what the White man say. So, do you think the dialect differences are causing problems for Black children in school? Oh, that's because of what White folks say. You see, you see what l'm saying? That's because of what they say. Here you've got a Black man that's born and raised in the ghetto usin' "ain't", "what," and whatever, you know, dangling participles and everything else. Then he gets into the school. He finds out that's
174
Beyond Language
Parent 14L: not the right [way]. He's reading this White man's book that he devised as to what he feels like the English dialect is supposed to be. So now you are talking like White folks . . . .
The point here is that some Lafayette parents apparently do not see learning proper English as acquiring another dialect in order to achieve a goal. Some also do not believe that proper English can co-exist with slang English in the same individual. Instead, they believe that proper English will displace their slang English w h e n e v e r the two meet. Parent 28L is a m o n g those w h o fear that in the contest of dialect socialization teachers will win over parents. As a result, Lafayette children will end up preferring to talk White proper English. Speaking of cultural learning in school, including dialect learning, Parent 38 laments that displacement of Black culture and dialect by the superior White culture and dialect is inevitable. Proper English is an imposition on Blacks by White people. Still another reason for opposing talking proper is that proper English is White people's dialect which the Whites impose on Black people. If Lafayette Blacks had a choice, they might not choose to learn it, but they have no choice and are forced to learn it. The statement by Parent 14L, cited earlier, reflects the belief that even the English requirement at school is a White imposition. 22 Some children also believe that learning proper English is a White imposition. They say that the school wants Black students to learn proper English only and does not teach them African languages.
Equivocal Attitude Toward Learning Standard English

O n e sees, then, that Lafayette people hold incompatible beliefs about proper English. Parents strongly endorse it for education and jobs and communicate the importance of learning it to their children. But they also communicate to their children opposing beliefs about school or White English. Due to these incompatible beliefs, Lafayette parents and children are ambivalent about learning proper English even at school. The equivocal attitudes of parents show u p w h e n they discuss their children's English courses. For example, a parent would declare emphatically that he or she wants the school to teach children proper English so that they achieve academic success and later get good jobs. Later in the same interviews, the parent would express some fear that mastering proper English is an assimilation detrimental to slang identity. Take the case of Parent 14L. In the early part of our interview, he reports telling his children that slang English would not help them succeed in school or get g o o d jobs; it is necessary for them to learn proper English. Later in the interview, however, he reports telling his children that proper English is imposed on Black people by White Americans. He admonishes them to treat it as a g a m e for survival in the White man's world. His equivocal attitude can be seen in the following statement: Parent 1 4 L : Getting back to (the dialect thing)--you know. 175
Ogbu
Parent 14L: Seriously, that, to m e . . . proves true that (proper English] is imposed on Black people. This is what I tell my cbadren: "If this is what you have to do [i.e., learn proper English]--okay, to make life easier for yourself, go through these rituals. Okay? Because--Right now, this is [the White man's] dialect, his lingo and his s y s t e m . . . Get into his system [schooll, and learn the game [how to talk properly], just like Monopoly (emphasis added). 23
T h e c o u n t e r m e s s a g e about p r o p e r English from Lafayette parents is probably p o w e r f u l e n o u g h to generate their ambivalence in their children about learning a n d using p r o p e r English. T h e researchers did not observe parents e n c o u r a g i n g their children to practice p r o p e r English at home. Some parents, like Parent 28L, actually object to children s p e a k i n g p r o p e r English at h o m e b e c a u s e it causes conflict in parent-child c o m m u n i c a t i o n . Parent 28L: It can [be a source of conflict], because the Black parent might be teachin' the Black child one way and he goes to school and the White teacher.., says things like, "I shall not." And, you know, the child will come home and tell the parent, "You don't say it that way Mama. We say it this way lin school]." And the Black parent will say, "I don't care what she Ithe teacher] told you at school. You say it so-and-so way." So it's causing conflict in the home sometimes? U h - h u h . . . I'll say, "Nicky lher daughter], don't do that, don't say it that way." Well, she might go to school, and the teacher tell her, "It's not because, it's becooz." IShe pronounces it like that, imitating a White teacher. The interviewer and the parent both laugh.]~4
Later in the interview, this parent recalls her a n n o y a n c e b e c a u s e she could not stop her d a u g h t e r from correcting her slang English: And she didn't catch on to what I'm talkin' about. But she'd come in and tell me, "Now Mama, you do [say it] this way." And I'll be sayin' to myself, ~I just told her [not to correct me] the other day!" Parent 33L complains that the school is pulling a w a y Black children and immigrant children from their m o t h e r t o n g u e s but is glad that, unlike the immigrants, Black children are resisting learning White p r o p e r English. Lafayette children w h o share the contradictory beliefs o f their c o m m u nity are also equivocal about learning and using standard English. As noted earlier, s o m e children e n d o r s e learning p r o p e r English in school; s o m e d o not. In 18 o f 41 interview excerpts o n English courses, students feel g o o d 176
Beyond Language
a b o u t their English c o u r s e s b e c a u s e t h e y like the t e a c h e r a n d t h e curriculum. In 10 others, t h e y dislike the c o u r s e s b e c a u s e t h e y d o n ' t like the t e a c h e r o r t h e curriculum. Most o f the others c o n s i d e r the English classes b o r i n g . S o m e s t u d e n t s ( a n d p a r e n t s ) r e p o r t that m a n y Lafayette s t u d e n t s d o not like English c o u r s e s b u t t a k e t h e m b e c a u s e t h e y are required. Interviewer: Student 452: Are there certain classes that Black students do not like and try to avoid? U h . . . urn, as far as avoiding them, most of them don't have that much of a choice, because it's on the curriculum to graduate. But most of them don't like English... because, u h , . . , they don't like t o . . . they don't like to read. And we a r e n ' t . . , we don't have to read that much, but, u h . . . U r n . . . b u t - - w h e n we do have to read, they--they usually read slow, because of lack of practice. , . you know, so they don't like to read. A n d - - a n d also, urn, American Government, we have---more people transferred [outl to avoid--I forgot, but more people transferred in from American Government . . . .
S o m e s t u d e n t s resist l e a m i n g p r o p e r English b e c a u s e t h e y feel that t e a c h e r s s h o u l d learn a n d t e a c h t h e m in slang English. S t u d e n t 460 s u m s u p t h e attitude o f s u c h s t u d e n t s as follows: Interviewer: In what ways have the dialect differences affected your own schoolwork? In other words, when you are doing a paper or something? How does it affect you? We used to have that when we used a little small slang words. Well, I know what I am talkin' about, but you don't know what I am talkin' about. So therefore, I think you should just know what I am talkin' about, instead of me tryin' to adjust to what you are doing. If I am adjustin' to what you are doin', I am adjustin' my ways, and I don't want to change my ways. You will have to come down to my level or find another way to teach me, or somethin'. Yeah, ok. You are here, and we are usin' these slang words every day, but, when you come in class, you've got to be like: "Oh, I will not jump over the bus. I won't jump over the bus." That's how I am going to talk to you, simple, just like Black English. That's it, you know.
Student 460:
Interviewer: Student 460:
T h e beliefs a n d attitudes e x p r e s s e d b y p a r e n t s a n d their c h i l d r e n in t h e s e interview excerpts, t o g e t h e r w i t h the e t h n o g r a p h e r s ' o b s e r v a t i o n s , 177
Ogbu lead me to conclude that the dialect dilemma makes Lafayette people equivocal about learning the standard English. The dilemma lies in the incompatible beliefs about proper English. Note, however, that the contradictory messages and incompatible beliefs about proper English that Lafayette parents communicate to their children about proper English are not due to bad or faulty language socialization. From a sociolinguistic perspective, the incompatible beliefs about and equivocal attitudes toward proper English are a part of the normal dialect situation in Lafayette speech community. In order to become competent speakers in their community, Lafayette children acquire not only the dialects in their community but also the beliefs and attitudes associated with slang English and proper English. The children, like their parents and other members of their community, grow up with these contradictory beliefs and, like them, are equivocal about mastering and using proper English at school. Sending their children contradictory messages about proper English is a normal course of dialect socialization and acquisition in Lafayette speech community. Implications Lafayette people themselves identify two problems arising from dialect differences, and they also suggest how these problems should be solved. One is a communication problem with teachers and other speakers of proper English. They recommend that teachers should use simpler words and talk in a way that parents and teachers can understand one another. The second problem is that dialect differences cause some leaming problems for students. Students themselves report that their slang English interferes with their ability to speak or write proper English. Both parents and students suggest the following solutions: (a) school should introduce programs to teach children proper English from their early years; (b) teachers should correct children when they use slang English in school; (c) school should teach students how to switch between slang dialect at home and proper English at school; (d) students should try harder to keep slang English from interfering in their speaking and writing lessons; and (e) parents who can should teach their children proper English. I suspect that neither parents nor students are aware that they hold incompatible beliefs about proper English and the effects of such beliefs on their attitudes toward mastering proper English or their ability to do so. The Task Force on Black Students' Education in Oakland and the participants in the national discourse on the "ebonic resolution" did not address the dialect dilemma because they were probably not aware of it. I believe that the dialect dilemma must be recognized and addressed in order to enhance the standard English proficiency of Lafayette children and Black children from similar communities. One prerequisite for resolving the dialect problem is to recognize that Lafayette and similar Black communities are bidialectical speech communities. as Slang English is the children's mother tongue, which they leam before they start school. They acquire proper English as a second dialect after they 178
Beyond Language
b e g i n s c h o o l o u t s i d e their family a n d c o m m u n i t y . O n e i m p l i c a t i o n o f the s e q u e n t i a l dialect l e a r n i n g r e c o g n i z e d b y Lafayette p e o p l e b u t p r o b a b l y not b y t h e s c h o o l o r s t u d e n t s of l a n g u a g e acquisition, is that Lafayette c h i l d r e n d o n o t lag in d e v e l o p i n g s t a n d a r d E n g l i s h - - t h i s is n o t t h e dialect t h e y h a v e b e e n d e v e l o p i n g . If m a i n s t r e a m W h i t e c h i l d r e n w e r e a s s e s s e d o n d e v e l o p m e n t o f slang English o n e n t e r i n g school, t h e y w o u l d p r o b a b l y not p e r f o r m well. W o u l d it n o t b e an error to c o n c l u d e that t h e y lag in dialect d e v e l o p m e n t , b e c a u s e slang English is not the dialect t h e y h a v e b e e n d e v e l o p i n g f r o m birth? A n o t h e r p r e r e q u i s i t e is to r e c o g n i z e the i n c o m p a t i b l e beliefs a b o u t p r o p e r English. This r e c o g n i t i o n s h o u l d result in a p p r o p r i a t e p r o g r a m s to e l i m i n a t e the c o n t r a d i c t o r y beliefs. Children, parents, a n d the c o m m u n i t y s h o u l d b e c o m e a w a r e o f their i n c o m p a t i b l e beliefs a n d their c o n s e q u e n c e s . T h e y s h o u l d p a r t i c i p a t e in s e a r c h i n g for w a y s to a d d r e s s the p r o b l e m . Ultimately, the q u e s t i o n for the s c h o o l a n d for the Lafayette p e o p l e is h o w to h e l p Black c h i l d r e n learn a n d use p r o p e r English for s c h o o l s u c c e s s a n d g o o d job o p p o r t u n i t y a n d still k e e p their slang English a n d r e m a i n b o n a fide m e m b e r s o f their c o m m u n i t y . Notes The preparation of this article was supported by the University of California faculty research funds and by grants from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the W. T. Grant Foundation, the Russell Sage Foundation, and the Spencer Foundation. I also wish to thank my research assistants and other staff members of the Minority Education Project. tThis is an expanded version of a paper presented at the Faculty Seminar, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, February 3, 1997. 21 am a member of the Oakland Unified School District Task Force on the Education of African American Students. However, this paper is written from my perspective as a researcher. It should not be construed in any way to reflect the views of either Oakland Unified School District or its task force. YI'he exceptions include S. U. Philips, 1983, and S. Brice-Heath, 1983. 4D. Hymes (1967, p. 18) writes: "The sharing of code rules is not sufficient: there are many persons whose English 1 can interpret, but whose message escapes me. Nor is sharing speech rules sufficient." ~The concepts language and btlfngualism used in the theoretical discussion here, will be replaced by dfalect and bidalectaltsm in the next section describing the case study of a Black-American speech community. 6Ferguson and other scholars use language in their discussion of diglossia. This author is using dialect instead of language because his focus is on the relationship between the varieties of the same language, English, found in the same speech communities. He assumes that the diglossia relationship between co-existing languages is similar to the diglossia relationship between two dialects of the same language. ~In discussing Fishman's (1967) typology, 1 will adhere to his discussion of bilingual situations partly because I do not have appropriate examples of bidialectical situations for his typology. Ebonfcs is a term that the Oakland Task Force used to designate the way Black Americans in Oakland talk. The way Blacks in Oakland talk is the same Black talk that linguists, sociolinguists, educators, etc. have called other names. For example, sociolinguists call it BEV or Black English vernacular (see Labov, 1972). 9Data were also collected on Black Americans outside the two communities but not consistently or in great details. The loci of the study were the Howard and Lafayette communities. 179
Ogbu
~There was also a quantitative part of the study. This included more than 1,300 students from Lafayette and other Black-speech communities. ~The Code Frequencies in Table 1 contains research subjects' responses for each subcode in Code P, "Dialect Differences and Dialect Frame of Reference." The frequencies in Table 2 are their responses to each subcode in Code DD, "Dialect Differences/Frames of Reference and Schooling." The subcodes are given meanings and are organized for each population in the study, which in Tables 1 and 2 are Black parents a n d Black students. O n e reason for comparing responses of Black parents a n d Black students is to determine the extent to which the dialect beliefs and behaviors of the students at school are similar to those of their parents or adults in their community. ~For the remainder of this article, I will use the term dialect rather than language for the variety of English spoken in Lafayette community. References to language in our interview excerpts have b e e n replaced by dialect. t3There is only one language in Lafayette, English, But there are two dialects of the English language---slang English and proper English. I*rhe beliefs and attitudes of the informants about slang English and proper English were obtained in the same interview. In this ethnographic study, the researchers were not performing an experiment o n dialect perceptions. For example, they did not try to audiotape speaking slang English a n d proper English in different settings to confirm or disconfirm their perceptions of which dialect they used with w h o m and under which circumstances. As ! note later in the text, many of the informants do not speak proper English or speak it well. And it is not necessary to carry out such an experiment to discover their beliefs and attitudes about o n e dialect or the other. ~SThe author does not claim that the interpretation of this statement by Parent 28K varies along racial lines. He presents the statement simply as an example of what Lafayette Blacks belteve, not as his o w n conclusion. ~6To reiterate, the author is describing the beliefs of Lafayette Blacks or what they perceive as the major differences in their speech and the speech of White Americans. The author is not claiming that there is no diversity of expressions among Black Americans. Even within Lafayette speech community, there is a diversity of expression. To begin with, there exists more than o n e English dialect,, slang English and proper English. But there are different rules for using the two dialects, as I show in the text. l~The insertions are the author's. The purpose is to make what the informant is saying more intelligible. They do not affect the meaning of the passage. 18Lafayette Blacks may also communicate in proper English with outsiders visiting their community, if the latter initiate the communication in proper English. But Lafayette Blacks would not take the initiative to start the communication in proper English in the community. tgThe author has encountered this suspicion among inner city Black parents for almost 30 years. See The Next Generation: An Ethnography of Education m an Urban Neighborhood (Ogbu, 1974). 2There is some evidence that Blacks in some other communities hold similar incompatible beliefs about proper English a n d are faced with similar problems in learning the standard English in school (Fordham, 1997; Luster, 1992; Ogbu, 1974). It appears that some Black educators and authors share the incompatible beliefs about teaching the standard English to Black children. For example, Steele (1992) says that asking Black children to master the standard English in order to succeed in school is an "assimiiationist offer" (pp. 68-78) by the school. This author has heard a similar criticism from some other Black a n d White professionals and advocates, Including teachers, w h o are genuinely c o n c e r n e d about the low school performance of Black students. For Lafayette Blacks and these professionals and advocates, the reality of the situation is a dilemma: As Luster points out, the realtty is that school demands and rewards only a certain way of speaking, namely, standard English, that is definitely the "White way." The community, the professionals, and the advocates strongly endorse standard English for school success and job opportunity. But then, they interpret learning the standard English by Black children as resulting in a loss of Black dialect and criticize the school for requiring the mastery of standard English because that is dialect assimilation and a threat to Black English identity a n d racial solidarity (L. L. Luster, 1992, p. 154). 2tLafayette Blacks are not alone in interpreting learning proper English in school as 180
Beyond Language
language assimilation. The author found the same belief a m o n g Blacks in Stockton, CA. Stockton students resisted learning proper English because it ("White man's language") would displace their rap identity. A Black school administrator in Stockton reported that he usually admonished the students: "Do your Black thing [rap identity] but know the White man's thing [proper English)." Claude Steele, a psychologist at Stanford University, in an article in The Atlantic Monthly in 1992 implied that teaching Black children proper English in school is an assimilation. It is generally believed that the process of language assimilation and displacement of Black English identity is most complete with college education. The following scenario described by Becknell (1987) illustrates the community fear of the detrimental effect of college education. When I encounter a group of Blacks on the street in my home community, I can't go up to them and say, "Good afternoon, gentlemen. How are you doing today" (i.e., greet them in proper English]? They would laugh at me and then feel sorry for me. They'd think, "Poor Charles, when he left here for college, he was ok [i.e., he talked like us in rap and had his Black identity intact]. But now, look at what they've [i.e., White educational institutions] done to him"[i.e., they have made him learn to "talk proper" and thereby destroyed his ability to "talk Black English" like us]! (p. 36) 22A Black parent in the GEE) program in San Francisco expresses a similar community belief that proper English is imposed on Black people by White people: Yeah, because if you notice the way they write books.., they're in [it is in White people's] English. What they say [is in] White people's language, and we . . . Black people have to learn that language . . . They expect us to change our language, not [for them to) change it [their language] . . . (We have] to learn their language and to speak their language, to act out with their language. 231nsertions are the author's but they do not change the meaning of the excerpt. 24Transcriber's insertions. Z~l am basing my conclusion here on my research findings, not o n my membership o n the Task Force of Oakland Unified School District. References ARC Associates. (1982). Baingual education in a Chinese community:final research report (Contract No. 400-80-0013). National Institute of Education, W a s h i n g t o n , DC: Author. Baratz, J. C. (1970). T e a c h i n g reading in a n u r b a n Negro school system. In F. Williams (Ed.), Language and poverty: Perspectives on a theme (pp. 11-24). Chicago: Markham. Baratz, S., & Baratz, J. C. (1970). Early c h i l d h o o d intervention: T h e social science b a s e o f institutional racism. Harvard Educational Review, 40, 29-50. Becknell, C. E. (1987). Black in the workforce: A Black manager's perspective. A l b u q u e r q u e , NM: Horizon C o m m u n i c a t i o n . Blank, M. (1982). Moving b e y o n d the difference-deficit debate. In L. Feagans & D. C. Fan'an (Eds.), The language o f children reared in poverty: Implications f o r evaluation a n d intervention (pp. 245-252). New York: Academic. Brice-Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words.. Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press. Cazden, C. B. (1976). Dialect differences a n d b i l i n g u a l i s m In J. I. Roberts & S. Akinsanya (Eds.), Educational Patterns and cultural configurations (pp. 353-386). New York: David McKay. Crawford, J. (Ed.). (1992). Language loyalties: A source book on the official English 181
Ogbu
controversy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dillard, J. L. (1973). Black English: Its history and usage in the United States. New York: Vintage Books. Dorsett, C. (1997). Black English: Looking to the future 21st century Racism? In Hooked on ebonies. Ebonic Net @aol.com. Feagans, L. (1982). The development and importance of narratives for school adaptation. In L. Feagans & D. C. Farran (Eds.), The language of children reared in poverty: lmpl~cattonsfor evaluatton and intervention (pp. 95-116). New York: Academic. Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15, 325-340. Fishman, J. A. (1967). Bilingualism and diglossia. Journal of Social Issues, 23(2), 29-57. Folb, E. A. (1980). Runnin" down some lines: The language and culture of Black teenagers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fordham, S. (1997). Black out. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gumperz, J. J. (1981). Conversational inferences and classroom learning. In J. Green & C. Wallat (Eds.), Ethnography of language in educational setting (pp. 2-23). Norwood, NJ: ABLEX. Gumperz, J. J., & Cook-Gumperz, J. (1995). Language in education, changing views of anthropological perspective. International Encyclopedia of Education, 6, 3235-3238. London: Pergamon. Gumperz, J. J., & Hernandez-Chavez, E. (1972). Bilingualism, bidialectalism, and classroom interaction. In C. B. Cazden, V. P. John, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Functions of language tn the classroom (pp. 84--108). New York: Teachers College Press. Gumperz, J. J., & Gumperz, J. C. (1995). Language in education, changing views of anthropological perspectives. In The International Encyclopedia of Educational Research, 6, 3235-3238. London: Pergamon. Hymes, D. (1962). The ethnography of speaking. In Anthropology and human behataor (pp. 13-53). Washington, DC: Anthropological Society of Washington. Hymes, D. (1964). Introduction: Toward ethnography of communication. In The ethnography ofcommunica~on (pp. 1-34). Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association. Hymes, D. (1967). Models of the interaction of language and social setting. Journal of Social Issues, 23(2), 8-28. Hymes, D. (1971). On linguistic theory, communicative competence, and the education of disadvantaged children. In M. L. Wax, S. Diamond, & F. O. Gearing (Eds.), AnthropologicalperspectWes on education (pp. 51--66) New York: Basic Books. Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in soctolfnguistfcs. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press. Kochman, T. (1981). Black and White styles in conflict. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Labor, W. (1972). Language In the inner citF: Studtes in the Black English vernacular. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Leap, W. L. (1993). American Indian English. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Luster, L. (1992). Schooling, survival, and struggles: Black women and the GED. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford Univerity. Macnamara, J. (1967). Bilingualism in the modem world. Journal of Social Issues, 23(2), 1-7. Mehan, H. (1983). Handicapping the handicapped. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Oakland School District. (1996). Average 1995--96 language NCE by language category. Oakland, CA: Division of Planning, Research, Evaluation & Policy
182
Beyond Language Development. Oakland School District. (1996). Number of limited English projqcfent (LEP) and fluent English proflent (FEP) students by language. Oakland, CA: Division of Planning, Research, Evaluation & Policy Development. Oakland School District. (1997). Programs for exceptional children, annual summary--disabaity Oppes by ethnic category. Oakland, CA: Division of Planning, Research, Evaluation & Policy Development. Ogbu, J. u. (1974). The next generation: An ethnography of education in an urban neighborhood. New York: Academic. Ogbu, J. U. (1980). Children's acquisition of dtscou rse and narrative skills among the Igbos of Nigeria: The role of folklore. Unpublished manuscript, University of Delaware, Newark. Ogbu, J. U. (1982a). Societal forces as a context of ghetto children's school failure. In L. Feagans & D. C. Farran (Eds.), The language ofchadren reared fnpoverty: Implications for evaluation and intervention (pp. 117-138). New York: Academic. Ogbu, J. U. (1982b). Cultural discontinuities and schooling. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 13(4), 290-307. Ogbu, J. u. (1995a). Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations and consequences----Part One: Theoretical background. The Urban Review, 27(3), 189-205. Ogbu, J. U. (1995b). Cultural problems in minority education: Case studies--Part Two: Case studies. The Urban Review, 27(4), 271-297. Ogbu, J. U. (1997). Speech community, language identity and language boundaries. In A. Sjogren (Ed.), Language and environment.. A cultural approach to education for minority and migrant students (pp. 17-42). Boykytrka, Sweden: Multicultural Centre. Ogbu, J. u., & Matute-Bianchi, M E. (1986). Understanding sociocultural factors: Knowledge, identity, and school adjustment. In Beyond language: social and cultural factors tn schooling language minor#y students (pp. 73--142). Los Angeles: California State University, Evaluation, Assessment & Dissemination Center. Orr, E. W. (1987). Twice as less: Does Black Engltsb stand between Black students and success in math and science? New York: Morton. Osser, H. (1970). Biological and social factors in language development. In F. Williams (Ed.), Language and poverty: Perspectives on a theme (pp. 248-264). Chicago: Markham. Philips, S. U. (1983). The invisible culture: Communication fn classroom and community on the Warm Springs Indian Reservation. New York: Longmann. Phillips, J. E (1990). The African heritage of White America. In J. E. Holloway (Ed.), Africantsms fn American culture (pp. 225-239). Bloomington, Indiana University Press. Piestrup, A. (1973). Black dialect interference and accommodation of reading instructions in first grade. Unpublished manuscript, University of California. Simons, H. D. (1976). Black English dialect, read~ng interference and classroom interaction. Unpublished manuscript, University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center. Steele, C. (1992, April). Race and the schooling of Black Americans. The Atlantic Monthly, 269(4), 68-78. Stewart, W. A. (1970). Toward a history of American Negro dialect. In F. Williams (Ed.), Language and poverty: Perspectives on a theme (pp. 351-379). Chicago: Markham. Stewart, W. A. (1973). More on Black-White speech relationships. The Florida FL 183
Ogbu Reporter, 11(1), 35--40. Tesch, R. (1990). QualttatWe research: Analys~s types & softword tools. New York: Falmer. Williams, F. (1970). Language attitude and social change. In F. Williams (Ed.), language andpoverty: PerspectWeson a theme (pp. 380-399). Chicago: Markham. Williams, F. (1970). Some preliminaries and prospects. In F. Williams (Ed.), language and poverty: Perspectives on a theme (pp. 1-10). Chicago: Markham.
Manuscript received May 8, 1997 Revision received January 6, 1998 Accepted September 1, 1998
184

Obgu Article

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Obgu Article

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

American Educational Research Journal

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

University o f California, Berkeley

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

asic research, evaluation of intervention programs, and common sense

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

1. BOTH DIGLOSSIA AND BILINGUALISM

2. BILINGUALISM WITHOUT DIGLOSSIA 4. NEITHER DIGLOSSIA NOR BILINGUALISM

5. DIGLOSSIA, BILINGUALISM AND COLLECTIVE IDENTITY

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Beyond Language Table 1

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

White Talk Versus Black Talk

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

"FOREIGN"/ HIGHERLANGUAGE: WHITEMOTHER-TONGUEENGLISHOR "PROPER ENGLISH" "CORRECTENGLISH" "STANDARDENGLISH"

THE DIALECT DILEMMA I INCOMPATIBLE BELIEFS I ABOUTPROPER ENGLISH

[I n s t r u m e n ~ m b o l i c Endorsement I I Rejectin I \ f EquivocalAbout Learning I & Using ProperEnglish ]

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

US. Society Ranks the Two English Dialects

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Although American interprets slang but

White Proper English Is Equated With Standard English

Slang English and Proper English Have Separate Functions

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Parent 419L:

Cultural Rules for Using Slang and Proper English

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Student 448:

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Parent 30L:

W h e n a n d Where Children Learn Slang a n d Proper English

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Parent 33L:

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Beliefs Endorsing Proper English for Education and Jobs

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Student 446: Interviewer: Student 446:

Beliefs Opposing Proper English for Various Reasons

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Parent 25L2: Interviewer: Parent 25L2:

Interviewer: Parent 25L2: Interviewer: Parent 25L2:

Students oppose talking proper p r e t e n s e , o r fake. Interviewer:

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Parent 14L:

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Equivocal Attitude Toward Learning Standard English

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Parent 28L:

Downloaded from http://aerj.aera.net at INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA on December 8, 2009

Interviewer: Student 460:

T h e beliefs a n d attitudes e x p r e s s e d b y p a r e n t s a n d their c h i l d r e n in t h e s e interview excerpts, t o g e t h e r w i t h the e t h n o g r a p h e r s ' o b s e r v a t i o n s , 177