Too funny for words.

:lol:

Actually, for that type of business, that could be quite appropriate. Having the phone answered with your slogan by your very own pimp daddy would give you a solid corporate identity.

It is often all in how it's said vs. what is said. I've attended conferences and seen PhDs who were born and raised in Brooklyn. Brilliant men, but they sound like cabbies, so you really have to listen more closely to the message to take them seriously.

Ok. It's a language. It's a language associated with ignorance, lack of education, lack of couth, and lack of class. You want to speak like a stupid hick? Go ahead. You want to speak like a stupid, know-nothing ebonic-speaker? Go ahead. It's a free country. Just don't get upset when I treat you like a moron, don't hire you, or dismiss your opinions as unlearned. PEOPLE MAKE IMPRESSIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE BASED ON A LOT OF THINGS! Speech is one of them. You don't have to like it, but it's there. Pretending like it shouldn't be an issue doesn't keep it from being an issue. You think it's "fucking sad" that I wouldn't associate with an ebonic-speaker? I think it's sad that you would. Vive la difference!

Mine would be a "Maison Derriere"--a nice place with no pimps, just a hooker with a heart of gold.

I think that you have just contradicted yourself.

If your beloved AAVE is language, then piss christ is art, and there is no distinction between fine and foul.

Multiculturalism is teh l337!!!!!!11!!eleven

Actually, I have taken multiple college-level linguistic courses and have studied (although am not yet fluent in) over 5 languages. I also have over 8 college-level courses in Psychology, Educational Psychology, Cognitive Learning, and Cultural Anthropology.

This is true. Language has shifted, and at certain points in history, it has shifted more quickly than others. Usually languages that utilise print as a medium shift more slowly than strictly oral languages. But that does not mean that it is getting *better* as it shifts.

This is also true. Why would they be apalled, do you think?

Does that make them better people? No. Does it mean they were actually using a fuller, better structured and less slang based version of the language? Absolutely.

It means that the verbage, vocabulary and grammar used "nowadays" is less rich, and generally is not "as good" as it was even 50 years ago. Most linguists agree that the English of Shakespeare's time was probably the peak of the language, and especially American English is now in decline.

Serbo-Croatian, however, is actually splitting into two separate languages, Serbian and Croatian. It's rather like British English and American English, only they are independantly becoming more rich, we're seeing additions to the language, instead of bastardizations and laziness inherant in the dialects of American English we are seeing recently.

So overall, yeah, I think it is a reflection of the society in question. :)

From Grants link, confirming Brianna's point about their choice to be different:

edit: It occurs to me that this reflects the whole "African-American as a distinctive cultural subgroup" mindset as opposed to American folks who happen to be black.

Art is creation and expression. It is not essential for everyday life. There are very extensive discussions of art vs. Art. I'm not sufficiently versed in art and art criticism to discuss it thoroughly.

However, art and language are very different things. Artistic merit is usually determined by conformance to a desireable style or audience perception. Language, by definition, shows consistent internal logic and structure. You can observe the speech of a group and then methodologically determine beyond doubt it's status as a language(or not a language), and whether it is a creole or a pidgin. You can classify the observed speech in a heirarchy of other languages. Linguistic analysis is concrete.

Language can also be art. Shakespeare, Chaucer, Alighieri, ad nauseum. Language as art is different to all people and there is very little universal agreement on the true masters. Is Def Poetry art? Are newspaper headlines and clever advertising tag-lines?

Intelligence and education are usually determined by conformity to a desirable style of speaking and the perception the listener has of the speaker.

To answer the two above questions: NO and, NO.

A little experiment for you, grant. Start posting in ebonics. See what happens. Double-dog dare you.

Do you think if they were accepted in to mainstream society they would have a need to subvert the mainstream language? They didn't choose to be brought here, they didn't choose to be marginalized. So it's partly the fault of those who brought them here. And partly the fault of mainstream society for maintaining the pressures that engendered the subversion. Yes, they partly choose to maintain the AAVE language but pretty much everyone tries to maintain their cultural identity which language plays a huge part of.

I classify dialects as legitimate entirely on whether they're adding or taking away. Adding vocabulary and slang is one thing. These are words that don't exist elsewhere, and presumably there wasn't a word that effectively conveyed the same meaning before. But refusing to conjugate verbs is doing nothing but simplifying the language and communicating less information. "He be going" in AAVE can equal "He is going," "He will go," "He went," "He often goes," and more in standard English, depending on the context.

Here'syo' post, Brianna.

The entertaining but trivial argument about what constitutes language an' da entirely different subject o' making value judgments as ta da worthiness o' one language over da other has been amusing ta watch.

Y'all jet on an beat each other up over NOTHING! I'll just sit back here an' laugh at yo' pointless exercise. Ya' dig?

Ok, BigV. Now, was that ebonics or Uncle Remus? Or, both?

Oh, and the challenge is to "start posting"--meaning more than one. So, you'll keep posting like that, right, BigV?

I'm in a group setting once a week. There are all sorts of people in this group. One woman refers to her boyfriend as, "mah niggah." No one says anything about this, probably because the woman is black. I wonder what would happen if I referred to MY boyfriend like that...

And is not necessarily worse.

For the same reason many people are turned off by AAVE. It's different. It calls itself english but isn't the same english. My grandparents say things like, "I can't understand what kids are talking about these days", about what you would probably call mainstream english. Quite a few words have been added to mainstream english in the last 30 years alone. In the last 500 we've only LOST a handful. Many of these words have no equivalent in past dialects of english. Things as simple as Hip, Dig, Honky and Bogus.

Linguistic diversity is now being destroyed because of all of the standardization. We're heading back to another Tower of Babel situation.

Absolutely not. What you call a less slang based language was actually using the slang of THAT day. It goes in cycles. The longer a language is in existence the more rich it becomes. Did you know that most words left in English from Old English(spoken ~5th century to 1066) are 4-5 letters or less. Did all that borrowing of words cause our language to become less expressive and rich?

I suggest you take some Linguistics courses. Courses on the study of language itself not on particular languages. You'll learn that no natural language is structured better than any other language.

See...I'm talking about Descriptive Linguistics not English Pedant Linguistics. Apples and Oranges.

Can you define what differentiates additions and bastardizations and inherent laziness? It all looks like your average everyday language shifts and changes to me.