When I was a child and teenager, some of my best friends were black. I attended a small Christian school which was made up of approximately equal percentages of blacks and whites. I even took a Black Gospel choir class. Even though I spent many years around Ebonics, that one semester choir class was the closest I ever came to speaking it. Looking back, I’m thankful for the exposure and acceptance I experienced at a young age of the African-American race. Where is this taking me? While I was exposed to, and was friends with many black families, I never attempted to speak Ebonics. I don’t think I judged it as a “lazy” way of speaking; however, it would have felt foreign for me to try to speak it. I see many similarities between the way many feel about Ebonics and the newly created IM language. I find myself fascinated with the new IM language used by many teenagers. Just as Ebonics, this innovative and technologically necessary IM language is perceived by many to be a lazy way of writing. However, if one takes the time to look up an instant message/text dictionary, he will soon realize that it takes some effort to become familiar with its ever growing lexicon. It doesn’t look like IM language is going to disappear in the near future; so, I ask the question: could a writing teacher be successful implementing IM speak in a multi-genre lesson?
I am creating a multi-genre lesson plan using IM as one of the genres. The students will have an opportunity to include an IM dialogue in their multi-genre piece which, I believe, will spark creativity. With the ever increasing use of technology, I don’t believe we should ignore the use of IM speak; it will not just disappear. On the other hand, what if we were to take the same approach with IM speak that John Rickford writes about in “Suite For Ebony and Phonics.” He describes the program used by Oakland School in California in its Standard English Proficiency Program, with the point being “not to teach Ebonics as a distinct language but to use it as a tool to increase mastery of Standard English among Ebonics speakers.” Could a teacher implement the same idea in a writing classroom using IM language?
Perhaps if, as Rickford writes, “the differences in the student vernacular [IM] and Standard English were made explicit rather than completely ignored,” students would increase their proficiency in Standard English.
I realize there is a big difference between Ebonics and Text language; however, I believe there are possibilities worth exploring. We often witness an increased native language proficiency in second language learners. For example, as I became more proficient in Spanish syntax, I more clearly understood that of English. I never had a firm grasp on direct/indirect objects until I took Spanish. To connect Ebonics further to IM vernacular, I would like to explore the claim of linguist David Crystal. In his essay, “Instant Messaging: The Language of Youth Literacy,” David Craig quotes Crystal:
To play with language requires that, at some level of consciousness, a person has sensed what is normal and is prepared to deviate from it . . . Language players are in effect operating within two linguistic worlds at once . . . It therefore seems very likely that, the greater our ability to play with language, the more we will reinforce our . . . meta-linguistic skills, and—ultimately—the more advanced will be our command of language as a whole. (124)
Crystal’s view of IM speak seems to reinforce Rickford’s statement. Again, perhaps if we choose to use IM as a tool to make Standard English rules more explicit and clear, along with allowing students some freedom, in some assignments, to write in IM speak, we could have a positive impact on this technological language that, no matter how much ridicule from teachers, parents and grammarians, is not going to go away.
I’m glad I found this article. It is funny because I was just reading some stuff from John Rickford because I am writing a paper about AAVE (ebonics) for my grammar class. Sadly, I must admit I used to think that AAVE was lazy and sloppy English, but thanks to college and expanding my frame of reference, I have now totally changed my mind! AAVE is just as systematic as SAE! It is 100% rule goverened! It is not sloppy. It is just different! I tried to learn it because I wanted to know what I was talking about in my paper, and I was attempting to write a short story off J. California Cooper’s novel, Family, and the novel uses a lot of AAVE. I spent days analyzing the language! It was hard, and it was frustrating. I still don’t know very much. It was a lot easier for me though when specific differences were pointed out. Studying AAVE also helped me learn more about SAE! It was an amazing experience. I don’t know much about IM language, except lol, and I still prefer “ha”, but, I can totally see where you are coming from. Why seperate the languages completely, and ignore one of them entirely? Why not look at one dialect and use it as a bridge for another?
[...] Comment [...]
I think a Multi Genre lesson on IM speak would be very interesting. My lil sis could help, she tends to use IM speak in everyday life and I have caught her using it in her homework. Honestly, I don’t know how she got so good at using a computer because she doesn’t seem 16 to me, but I think that students her age would handle well to a project like that. I think they would love that and they would actually have fun with learning something new.
I am African American, and I have been living abroad for several years now. I used to speak African American English as a child among friends, but I was forced to speak SAE by my parents and at school. I went through a phase where I shunned AAVE. I can still speak the dialect but it doesn’t sound natural anymore. I think people may be able to encourage widespread use of the dialect through classes for non-native speakers. Such a movement would emphasize the beautiful aspects of AAVE.