In one of the readings, a Deaf woman said, "When our language was acknowledged, we gained our freedom." How does this differ from speakers of Spanglish or Black English Vernacular's efforts to have those languages recognized?
Frankly, I had a hard time coming up with arguments to explain how they differ, because I see much in common between their struggles for identity and recognition; just as language is power, language is freedom, the point which the deaf woman has already stated; however, it seems apt to describe freedom in more specific terms, as liberation. I know this is a theme I return to time and time again, but language is an integral, material part of resistance to oppression, and to becoming liberated.
However, without further pontification, I decided that the difference lies in the minutia - that is, without recognition of their forms of the communication, the deaf remain in bondage, meaningless without a method to communicate. Conversely, speakers of Spanglish or Black English may still convey meaning even if only within their own respective communities. And although recognition is important for B.A. and Spanglish speakers, they do not remain "meaningless" as the deaf do without it.
I'll have to think about this more, but those are my preliminary thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment