Great observation about the realities future teachers face, Herb. We do
indeed have a well-entrenched, complex body of myth to deconstruct, and
this won't happen in a day, or in just one generation of newly-certified
teachers. It will take at least several generations of teachers. The
problem is the circularity that occurs when no exposure to linguistic
findings about the equality of grammars ever occurs in the education of
a teacher. Children learn the myth from their parents, then they also
learn it from their teachers, and it is reinforced in the rest of
society. This just continues round and round if we never try to break
the cycle.
Teachers will be a primary force in this struggle, and the more
linguistics they study, the better they will understand the knowledge we
want to replace the myth, and the more they may be impassioned to convey
it. The traditionalists _will_ eventually retire.
I have often compared the struggle to bring an enlightened view of
grammar to public ed. as similar to the struggle to bring enlightened
views of women, minorities, and multiculturalism into public ed. The
same kind of cycle had to be battled, since those in power were not
inclined to admit the new mindset. Also, you often had some level of
acceptance of the dominant ideology even by those who suffered from it
(blacks and women who believed in their own inferiority to white males,
e.g.). It's important to frame the 'good/bad language myth' as just
another example of prejudice. But I think the myths surrounding language
may be even harder to break because people aren't aware of how complex
language is and their eyes glaze over if you try to give them an
accurate picture.
This is another reason why I argue for rich grammar/language instruction
in middle and high schools--instruction which includes facts about
variation and social responses to variation. This starts kids early in
understanding how complex language is and how it is subject to attitudes
like other kinds of human behavior.
It is important for linguists and educators who favor the linguistic
point of view to make that view clear not just to their students but to
their friends and colleagues, and to take advantage of every single
opportunity they have to bring that view to the general public, e.g.
through letters to the editor, articles in the popular press, etc. The
Ebonics controversy provided terrific opportunities, but linguists could
not make themselves heard strongly enough over the voices of
backwardness to which the media gave equal time. The media,
unfortunately, also form an obstacle because they, too, have emerged
from English and Journalism departments and were educated in the same myths.
A lot of us have to have uncomfortable discussions (such as I have with
my friend who is trying to inculcate prescriptive attitudes in her
6-year-old), just as happened (and continues to happen) with the various
civil rights movements. What I wish we could do is educate the editors
of major newspapers and magazines. This would give us an important
outlet. Some progress has been made, but a lot of myth still gets
presented as having the same scholarly value as the
scientifically-supported points of view.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba Associate Professor, Linguistics
English Department, California Polytechnic State University
One Grand Avenue • San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
Tel. (805)-756-2184 • Fax: (805)-756-6374 • Dept. Phone. 756-2596
• E-mail: [log in to unmask] • Home page: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
