L
Are you suggesting that people who speak with an English dialect are losers?
I'm serious.Are you serious, or are you just trying to cause trouble?
There are many dialects of the English language spanning many races.How typical...trying to divert the issue and win the conversation by labeling me as a racist.
I was merely looking for clarification.That tactic has been done a million times before on VB. Thought it might be different here. Why don't you compare me to the Nazi's too, while you're at it?
All the words before these words were unnecessary, quite frankly.No, it was an analogy....
Giving the loser a trophy when he didn't win may make him feel good about himself, but it doesn't do anything to help him do better the next time he plays the game.
For one thing, not all people who speak different dialects are "losers" (i.e.
Is it a dialect though? I've met plenty of black people in the U.S. who don't speak this way and get along fine.
There has been debate in this country for at least the past decade whether or not it would be appropritae to teach Ebonics in classrooms. I'm pretty sure it's not taught as an acceptable form of the language, so why use it? Other minority populations in the U.S. maintain beautiful accents and their cultural identity without mauling the American English language when communicating. Why can't others do the same?
It was an analogy...and I was specifically referring to Ebonics.
Okay then: not all people who speak the African American Vernacular English (or 'Ebonics') dialect are "losers" (i.e. some are financially successful if that's the standard you're going by). And yes I understand it wasn't meant literally, but I don't think the analogy fits.
Boston Brahmins "maul" the English language as much as any AAVE speaker, yet I have never heard an outcry over that. What's acceptable and what's not in terms of language/dialect reflects a lot of class and racial assumptions and standing.
If you understood the analogy, why did you ask the question?
The fundamental premise of the analogy is simply that a greater number of them will do better in life if they learn standard English. Why is that so hard to accept?
Furthermore "to lose" and loser" have different connotations in different context. Why did you choose to assume the worst possible interpretation?
\Furthermore "to lose" and loser" have different connotations in different context. Why did you choose to assume the worst possible interpretation?
That's accent versus "dialect". No special grammar bending rules required.