Should+Writers+Use+They+Own+English_
Introduction
Article title: "Should Writers Use They Own English?"
Author: Vershawn Ashanti Young
Published in: Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, Volume 12, Issue 1, 2010
Background of Argument
Discussion of language use in academia, particularly among students.
Young critiques Stanley Fish's perspective on language.
Fish argues for teaching a single standard language for students to avoid prejudice.
Advocates for abandoning students' rights to their own dialects, suggesting they become vulnerable if they don't conform.
Critique of Standard Language Ideology
Young's response emphasizes that prejudice arises from attitudes of those in power, not from the dialects themselves.
Claims that linguistic prejudice leads to discrimination against speakers of non-standard dialects.
The study of language must consider the societal implications, not only the technical aspects.
Key Points on Language Diversity
Young argues for the acceptance of multiple dialects in writing and speaking, rather than strictly enforcing standard English.
Denunciation of the dominant language ideology, which posits that standard English is the only effective means of communication.
To learn effective communication, students should be educated in multiple dialects.
This includes blending regional, cultural, and personal variants of language.
The Concept of Code Meshing
Definition of Code Meshing: the blending of multiple dialects within speech or writing.
Differentiation from Code Switching: where one shifts between languages or dialects based on context.
Young supports teaching code meshing as a natural representation of communication.
Examples of Code Meshing
Young cites examples from politicians (e.g., Senator Grassley) and academics who utilize vernacular and standard English effectively.
Illustrates that even in professional settings, language blending occurs.
Specific incidents highlight that such examples challenge the prescriptive view of language.
The Need for Linguistic Flexibility
Advocates for attention to language diversity in educational settings.
States that people are often multi-dialectal and should not be forced into a single-mode of expression.
Emphasizes that mastering one dialect cannot equate to effective writing for everyone.
Conclusion
Young encourages a shift in perspective on what constitutes "good writing" beyond standardized forms.
Promoting acceptance of linguistic diversity can help reduce prejudice.
Final assertion: A holistic understanding of language and rhetoric can improve communication skills across varying contexts.