As I read Lippi-Green’s chapters about the abstractions of non-accent and standard language, I was fascinated to learn that everyone speaks with an accent. There can be L1 and L2 accents, as well as accents that stem from linguistic varieties within the same language. Because language always changes, it is impossible to maintain a single standard variety of language. McKay and Bokhorst-Heng provide several examples of language variation, including idioms, discourse styles, hybridization, and grammatical features. However, Lippi-Green asserts that “in spite of all the hard evidence that language must be variable…people steadfastly believe that a homogenous, standardized, one-size-fits-all language is not only desirable, it is truly a possibility” (44). McKay and Bokhorst-Heng also recognize this issue and state that ideological assumptions guide the view of what is considered “standard” (139). I think that the value placed on “standard English” can frustrate and discourage English language learners, as well as devalue speakers of nonstandard English, such as James Kahakua in Hawai’I (Lippi-Green 44-45). As a teacher, my job is to encourage students to understand differences within a language rather than tear them down for using nonstandard variations in their speech.
I have taught several adult students who have told me that they hope to speak English like a native speaker someday. (By saying “native speaker,” they refer to someone who speaks standard English rather than AAVE or another dialectal form.) Although the desire to attain native-like language ability can motivate some students, it’s often quite frustrating when adult students discover that they no longer have the tools necessary to build the standard English Sound House that Lippi-Green describes. No matter how fluent their English becomes, these students will always speak with at least a slight L2 accent. I try to encourage these students to improve their pronunciation insofar as it helps them communicate clearly; I also tell them that they should not worry about having an L2 accent. Yet even as I say that, I know that they will be judged according to the way they speak. As Lippi-Green says, “the standard/non-standard dichotomy is so firmly entrenched both in the literature and in the minds of the speakers, it is not possible to simply replace it” (61). Even if a student’s L2 accent is not strong, some native English speakers may use it as an excuse to marginalize or misunderstand the student.
These issues surrounding the abstraction of standard language made me think of a conversation I recently had with a man from India. I had heard some people pronounce his name in two different ways, so I asked him how to pronounce his name. Instead of telling me the pronunciation, he simply told me that some people say it one way and some people say it another way. So I then asked him which way he preferred. He told me that either was fine, but because I felt the pronunciation of a name was important, I decided to push him to tell me which way he pronounced it. I was surprised to find out that neither pronunciation people used matched his pronunciation of his name! He told me that he thought his name might be too foreign-sounding to Americans, so he chose not to correct anyone who pronounced his name incorrectly. In other words, his pronunciation of his name did not follow what he viewed as the standard English pronunciation. Although this example deals with a name rather than a specific word or linguistic feature, I think it supports the idea that speakers of “nonstandard” English can devalue their own way of speaking in light of the emphasis placed on “standard” English. As a teacher, I think my challenge will be helping students recognize language variations and maintain an open-minded attitude toward speakers with these variations. Ultimately, I want my students to focus on communication without promoting hierarchies among language.
No comments:
Post a Comment