Previously posted on the Young People For Blog.
The Oakland Resolution of 1996 states in the third resolved: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Superintendent in conjunction with her staff shall immediately devise and implement the best possible academic program for imparting instruction to African-American students in their primary language for the combined purposes of maintaining the legitimacy and richness of such language whether it is known as "Ebonics," "African Language Systems," "Pan-African Communication Behaviors" or other description, and to facilitate their acquisition and mastery of English language skills;"
Who is to say what is the most important or accepted or standard language? Who is to say that Ebonics is not good enough and should be used as a tool to teach children 'standard' english? Why is the historically white and Western language the precedent?
In a roundtable discussion meeting of the Multi-Racial Unity Living Experience (MRULE) the debate over ebonics and standardizing language created some fire. MRULE is an organization at MSU that provides students in Residence Halls opportunities to increase knowledge and understanding through open and frank discussions on controversial issues, informative presentations, and interactive exercises.
The Oakland Resolution was debated by students agreeing and disagree with the resolution. The idea that ebonics, sometimes called 'black english', can be used as a tool to help black children learn 'standard' english has its benefits and pitfalls. For one it ostracizes the students who speak ebonics and I would argue that it degrades their intelligence by saying you need extra help because you can't speak proper english. But who can? These children still know english, ebonics is not a completely different language. Ebonics does have its own set of grammatical rules and restrictions, but is not a separate language or even dialect from english. Ebonics only has linguistic features that make any difference.
The debate that black children in school need their teachers to speak ebonics in order for them to learn 'properly' is completely off target. But then this moves us into the question of 'What is the standard for language in the US?' Standard and proper and grammatically correct english is descended directly from the founding of the US and today if you want to succeed in the future, then you will need to be able to speak and write the language as is considered the norm. If you go into an interview and speak ebonics, you will most likely not get the job.
Sad, but true. I believe that it is important for children who speak ebonics to hold onto that tradition and culture, but to be able to operate in our reality they will also need to learn the 'standard' english. It is just like the idea that students in Europe learn multiple languages in order to have economic opportunity.
But what is the 'standard?' A standard language is defined by the selection of certain regional and class markers, and the rejection of others. This is the version of a language that is typically taught to learners of the language as a foreign language, and most texts written in that language follow its spelling and grammar norms. This includes features like a dictionary, recognized grammar, pronunciation, a canon of literature, and especially is taught in schools. So, we have a 'standard' descended from the chronicles of history, but who makes that the official and accepted standard?
I say that language is free, language is fluid, language has no boundaries as far as standards or official use. Language has to restriction, when you can make up a new word and have that added to the dictionary, then you know that language is free (as far as use).