On Language- A Response to Geneva Smitherman

In her essay "English Teacher, Why You Be Doing the Thangs You Don't Do?", Geneva Smitherman discusses the importance of dialect and and the negative implications of forcing 'Standard English' and grammatical correctness in schools.

Prompt: Write a journal entry identifying two of Smitherman's arguments and why you agree, disagree, or simply have questions about each one

---

(The following is an excerpt from an imagined conversation in a Guyanese dialect, with translations)

‘Ey bai. Bring duh sheet ova suh fuh meh nuh? Me skin feelin’ col col.’

Hey, (boy), can you bring that sheet/blanket over there for me please? I am very cold. (Adjectives are often repeated to add emphasis.)

‘Meen able. Get it yuhself.’

I’m not able/ I don’t feel like. You get it yourself.

‘Man! Why you stay suh ?’

(‘Man’ is commonly used as an expression of annoyance). Why are you like that?

The above exchange is one that no Guyanese would consider out of the ordinary. To the untrained, underexposed eye, only a few words may be immediately recognizable as part of the Standard English lexicon. The other terms (‘bai’, ‘meen’, ‘ting’), though seemingly peculiar, are important parts of the dialect spoken in different circles across the country. Admittedly, though I pride myself on exemplary use of standard, ‘proper’ English, even I find myself reverting to this Guyanese variation when around family and friends. It is familiar. It is comfortable. In some cases, it is home. Removing this sense of familiarity would mean removing a part of Guyanese norms and culture, so I certainly understand Geneva Smitherman’s ideas about the importance of maintaining black dialects in the United States, even in the face of continuous nitpicking at grammatical correctness by educators nationwide.

Smitherman presents a five-point plan that might be implemented by teachers in the United States to address the specific literary needs of black students. Two parts of this plan have to do with emphasis on reading and emphasis on the more important aspects of rhetoric such as content and message, specificity, variation of word choice and originality.

Smitherman notes that black dialects should be celebrated. When teachers focus solely on enforcing the rules of Standard English and dismissing the rich cultural implications of these dialects, they continue to perpetuate the silencing of these students’ true inner voices. I believe this raises an important question: How can we expect students to do well if they feel like every part of their culture is being repressed, and if the modes of expression they are accustomed to are constantly erased? Grammatical correctness means very little in an environment where culture is repressed and subject matter is not relatable. Thus, it is important for educators to understand the relationship between these students’ dialects and their culture.

Another important point that Smitherman brings to the conversation is that audiences are moved more by ‘message and style of delivery’ than anything else, and I agree with this wholeheartedly. It is possible to write the most grammatically correct exposition that is completely void of rhetorical appeal and consequently has no effect on the reader. I don’t think that this argument is meant to devalue the rules of grammar in any way; rather it seeks to identify aspects that are more vital to writing and expression than correct spelling and punctuation; the richness of ideas, the logical expression of these ideas, style, specificity, sentence structure and originality, among other things.

Ultimately, I believe that grammar and language identity should work in tandem to foster good literary practices, but that much more emphasis needs to be placed on students’ critical thinking and analytic skills instead of only identifying the faults of their language. Educators must be willing to set aside their preconceived notions about dialects, such as those used by the black community, if this heightened level of literacy is to be achieved.