402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

1/8

Running head: DIALECT V. STANDARD 1

My Dialect, Your Standard

Matthew R. Savinda

Community College of Allegheny County

ENG 101-DT90

Ms. Jessica L. Legg

October 29, 2011

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

2/8

DIALECT V. STANDARD 2

My Dialect, Your Standard

Standard English is a complex and confusing idea, the implications of which are probably

impossible to fully grasp. The idea of a standard language is so difficult partly because it is

different to individuals and groups, and partly because it is in a state of constant flux, but mostly

because it is dictated by those who have the authority to do so and much importance is tied up in

controlling the perceptions of language. Standard English is perceived through many different

lenses; the most common and, arguably, most important of which are race, class, and gender.

These things influence the language in ways verbal, vocal, and cultural.

The idea ofStandardEnglish is just an abstraction of the English language that people

speak. It is thought to be the way that all Americans aresupposedto speak and write. Having a

standard is useful in codifying our language so that we have a source that encourages

understanding and communication between different dialects. A dialect is defined as a form of

a language spoken in a particular geographical area or by members of a particular social class or

occupational group, distinguished by its vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation (Collins

English Dictionary, 2009) by the World English Dictionary. Some American dialects are

virtually incomprehensible to others. Though some people do speak Standard English it is

important to distinguish that it is still only one dialect of American English-speakers. Having a

standard gives a goal to which all can relate when speaking cross-dialect.

The highly educated and those in political and cultural positions of power have set

Standard English, through education and societal perception - encouraged through media, to be

the true and correctEnglish. The consequence of this is that those who are perceived to speak a

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

3/8


dialect other than Standard English are often unfairly looked down upon as inferior in education,

stature, and bearing (Chaika, 1994).

Spoken Standard English is heavily influenced by its written counterpart. In writing,

Standard English offers very specific rules of spelling, grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary.

This serves to maintain uniform reading and writing skills and therefore written communications

among a population. Linguist John McWhorter (1998) postulates that having a codified, written

language slows down language change and maintains coherency among the many dialects of a

language; which, given time, would become another language entirely and, therefore, depart the

realm of mutual understanding. Those who speak Standard English are generally perceived to be

better educated and upwardly mobile, because they tend to hold positions of power and influence

or positions where they have considerable public exposure, such as newscasters and politicians.

Standard English is also dynamic in its application, just as any other language is. Which is to

say, what is standard today may not be standard tomorrow. McWhorter (1998) shows this in

how, not all that long ago, we used the word you only in the plural sense. The word thou

was the present-singular pronoun. This is no longer the case and no one speaks or even thinks of

it. You has become the acceptable form and the rules of grammar have followed suit.

Changes like this, and others, are constantly happening to all forms of language, Standard

English included. Another, more recent, example of standard speech change in America is that

of /r/ pronunciation in such words as carorbar. Before, roughly, 1960 the northeastern /r/-less

speech was considered rightbut with the growth of western and mid-western universities and

shifting perceptions /r/-full speech has become standard. A good comparison of this being John

F. Kennedy versus his younger brother Edward Ted Kennedy, respectively (Chaika, 1994).

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

4/8


Standard English is not, as is generally understood, thepure ororiginalEnglish. What

one might call the original English orOlde English is, in fact, almost a foreign language. One

would need a translator to communicate with a speaker of Old English as compared to Modern

English (McWhorter, 1998). Standard English is not a betterform of English than any other

dialect. It is perceived that way by those that speak it. This is the prerogative of people who

hold power or position, I have power and influence in society so my way of speaking must be

the right way might be how the thinking would go. Standard English has no legitimizing

factor that sets it over another dialect other than public perception.

All of this is not to say that Standard English does not serve a purpose. It certainly does.

As noted Linguist Elaine Chaika (1994)showed inLanguage: The Social Mirrorwhen people

wish to seem more suitable to upward mobility or if they plan on leaving their place of origin

they will discard many elements of their native dialect in favor of the perceived standard so that

they will be more relatable in their travels. Also, as McWhorter (1998) has already shown us,

without the benefit of intercommunication and at least some of a population attempting to ascribe

to some kind of standard, in a, relatively short, 500 years or so, different dialects will become

completely different languages. This would make things like governance, commerce and trade,

and travel exceedingly more difficult. Imagine going on vacation to, say, Florida, and needing to

hire a translator upon leaving the resort!

On a more negative note, Standard English can be abused by those with power and

influence to set themselves above non-Standard English speakers. A non-standard dialect may

be stereotyped as being lower-class or uneducated. For instance, black people who speak

Standard English are perceived to be intelligent and hard-working because Standard English is

the language, supposedly, taught and used in the classroom, and those who do not speak

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

5/8


Standard English are perceived to be working-class and uneducated, much like inner-city

hoodlums.

Race is a hot-button issue in America and our language is not immune from this.

Americans define race mostly by the physical differences that are apparent in different peoples,

but also through such things as ethnicity, ancestral location, and cultural identity. Historically,

America has had to deal with serious issues involving race, not the least of which is the

enslavement of Africans in the South. For many, this issue has not yet seen resolution and new

problems arise all the time. On top of these things, race dynamics also change with the times.

Those who were considered non-white, such as the Jews, pre-World War II, became white

afterwards because there was a gap in the middle-class that America needed to fill (Brodkin,

2002).

Black Americans have evolved their own form of the English language referred to as

Black English, Black Vernacular, or Ebonics. The way that they speak the English language is

derived from three main sources: the plantation owners, who were likely not standard dialect

speakers themselves, white indentured servants who worked among them; these were non-

standard-British-dialect speakers, and creole-English speaking slaves from Barbados. Black

English has influenced Standard English in many ways through interaction, pop culture (rap

music), and even poetry. Many black slang terms have made their way into American culture

(McWhorter, 1998).

Minorities who have found success in America have had to develop an ability which is

called code switching. They are able to transition between their native dialect and a more

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

6/8


standard dialect as the situation demands. This enables them to be viewed as educated and

intelligent among professionals and still be accepted in their hometown communities.

Class is defined in our nation by how much money and/or influence one possesses.

America is an exceptionally affluent State. We possess much of the worlds wealth and most of

that wealth is concentrated with the richest 1% of Americans. Even so, thepoorin this nation

lay claim to far more than the worlds poor could ever hope to see. Those in the upper-class tend

to hold jobs and positions of power and influence. They are doctors, lawyers, politicians, CEOs

of businesses large and small, and those in the entertainment industry: actors/actresses, singers,

and so on. These people earn annual incomes of more than $250,000. Those in the

lower/working-class hold jobs like janitors, housekeepers, laborers, and other, mostly physical,

menial jobs requiring little education. They earn less than $20,000 per year. The middle-class

fills everything in between: managerial positions, engineers, bricklayers, landscapers, teachers,

and just about everything else. They, obviously, earn somewhere between $20,000 and $250,000

in a given year (Gilbert, 2003).

Class is another thing that influences language. Specifically, the upper-class in a society

are the ones who get to define what the standard is. As one might imagine, it is the dialect that

the upper-class speaks that becomes the standard dialect. In America, we have a small upper-

class, a fair amount less-small lower-class, and a substantial middle class. Typically in our

country, the upper class defines the standard dialect, the middle-class comes close to, and

ascribes to the upper-class dialect, and the lower-class speaks dialects that are looked down on.

Slightly more than half of the population of the United States of America is made up of

people of the feminine persuasion. Yet, America remains a patriarchal society. In some circles,

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

7/8


women are treated as second-class citizens based on nothing other than the fact that they are

women. For instance, when men and women work in the same positions with the same

qualifications and responsibilities; in fact, all other things being equal, and the only difference

being sex, women tend to be paid less than men. Certain positions are viewed as being male-

appropriate: politicians, doctors, bosses; and others are viewed as distinctly female: nurses,

nannies, housekeepers.

Linguist James Gaffney (1995) claims in She Who Laughs Last: The Gender Inclusive

Language Debate that, unlike racism, none have ever experienced language without sexism. He

even goes so far as to say, If dealing with racist language is like dealing with an infection, sexist

language is more like the result of a defective gene (Gaffney, 1995, pg. 9). The problem is that

such speech has become so ingrained in our society that it would be tremendously awkward to

effect its removal. He/shes and such notwithstanding, McWhorter (1998) asserts that a

significant problem regarding this subject has already been resolved with the use of the word

they in the third-person plural. Rather than saying Has someone dropped his or her pen?

which is obnoxious and still begs the question of which sex is represented first and why, people

already say Has someone dropped theirpen? So, grammarians aside, yay for America.

To conclude, language is complicated. There are so many facets to it, all of which are

dynamic in time and space. People, the arbiters of language, are eternally causing and solving

problems of all kinds, even, and sometimes especially, in the realm of language. I dont know

what the answers are to many of these problems, but I suspect that those of us who are willing to

ask the questions, and seek truth, with love for our fellow-man (and fellow-women), will find

them.

7/28/2019 402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8

8/8


References

Brodkin, Karen. (2002). The Social Construction of Difference: Race, Class, Gender, and

Sexuality. Rutgers University Press

Chaika, Elaine. (1994). Language: The Social Mirror (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle

Publishers

dialect. (n.d.). Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. Retrieved

October 27, 2011, from Dictionary.com website:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dialect

Gaffney, James. (1995). She Who Laughs Last: The Gender-Inclusive Language Debate.

America, 173(5), 8-12.

Gilbert. (2003). The American Class Structure: In An Age of Growing Inequality (6

th

ed.).Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth

McWhorter, John. (1998). Word on the Street: Debunking the Myth of a Pure Standard

English. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dialecthttp://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dialect

Documents

402a40b96bc44c3ea40455732d9d40e8