This story reminds me of what happens when segregation of the minds happens. We are all susceptible of the same thing happening to us. If we don't use equilibrium in our daily choices we can become like the people in Tracketon or Roadville, leaning too much on one side and running the risk of tipping over. Both had excellent qualities and values in terms of family, friends and social. However they both lack the equilibrium necessary to "survive" and integrate outside their "bubble" of comfort.

I have to admit that i get an "allergic reaction" when i hear words being misspoken intentionally or with the excuse "it's part of my heritage" well cow pie!. I attented a bordering school of nuns for 8 years and the environment was very strict, and yes i loved it. The proper use of language was a must and the same was expected at home. The funny thing is that you get made fun of by others that think you are just a show of or is trying to come across as being better and superior to them. I always held firm to my believes and never changed my ways of speaking because someone felt inferior. I never made fun or tried to impress anyone except my dad. But it happens all the time we want to use proper language but the peer pressure is enormous. So we make fools out of ourselves so others don't feel like idiots. I do use the same type of language at school that i use at home, maybe the way i use certain phrases and the tone is a bit different for obvious reasons.

Home Lg. / Class Lg.

Before this class I use to analyze little stiuations or speakings between friends and co-workers but never thought of my home language variety. I come from a home very similar to the kids of Trackton. I was raised with parents who had a very strong appetite for the night life. When I was younger I thought it was the worst thing in the world, to have parents who at night go out with friends and in the day either work or sleep. I had no rules as a child and did what i pleased.

Now that I am older and can understand a lot more about my surroundings I am thankful to be raised in such an environment. I was forced to worry myself about my time management, school, work and time for play. The language that was used at my house was a lot of noise. There was never any structure and instead of correcting eachother we would laugh at the person for making a mistake. In school I was a totally different person I enjoyed engaging in learning and vocabulary. I loved the fact that when I would return home I could use these words that my mom simply wouldnt understand. It made me feel superior and exceptionally smart. These days I still bring some home language around with me but as far as I have analyzed I use what I've been taught in classrooms far more.

The interesting point about all this that I have come to realise is that when usually when kids are pushed in school and language they run away from it not caring, contrary to situations like mine when you aren't pushed at all it makes you care.

Home Lg. / Class Lg.

Although I've utilizes the label for this post, I'll leave the discussion of home/classroom language to my peers; however, I will state that as students, I feel it is incumbent upon us to at least become familiar with academic (classroom) language, as well as develop an ability to utilize it (even if only in a novice fashion).

To speak to the reading, as I mentioned to the professor before, I didn't really enjoy the "Way We Was" reading (or whatever it was titled). The only idea I derived from it is language is, in many ways, derived from culture, but in spite of this, the Chomskyian theories of universal grammar seem to prevail.

However, the Jordan and Lee pieces were very insightful; Jordan's description of the deployment of Black English as a political act was inspiring, and it was reassuring to see that discursive politics are still important in our age of apathy.

Lee's piece illustrated to me what I have for a long time considered a crisis - IM and text language being introduced into common usage - but I don't see it that way so much anymore (in large part due to this class). While I no longer believe we face a crisis, I do believe that there is still a need for educating students in the distinction between IM/Text language use and classroom language use.

I guess I have never really thought of this all before. We all think and ponder about everything we do but when were asked to analyze something we all dropped the ball. I often think too much and try to get more meaning out of simple tasks. We were to describe and analyze not just describe. I got caught up on the describe part and burnt out. I tried to fit the analysis at the end. On the subject of talk and different types of home talk. I feel like I speak farely normal at home and at school or work. I guess I am more relaxed with friends and don't care about what I say as much as opposed to at home I try to respect my parents by speaking to there level. At work I talk about boats all day so I'm sure to some it is a completely different language. I enjoyed the reading it opened my eyes to the fact that we all come from such diferent places yet when forced together we have level ground. Yet when we go our seperate ways we speak differently we are raised in different ways and our families function differently. We are all part of this writing without even knowing it. I am excited for our discussion today in class. I hope this all made sense it did to me but my thoughts are jumbled today!

Home Language vs. Classroom Language

I have never thought in depth about the kind of language used in the classroom being different from the language used at home. I don't really see more than a few slight differences. Maybe that comes from my mom being a school teacher? There were definitely some classroom rules enforced at home, more so than other kids I knew. I also knew kids that spoke Spanish at home and English at school, so there would naturally be a lot more contrast in that kind of situation. Though it has been many years since I lived at home with my parents, I don't think that my home language has changed much since then.

At home I tend to use much more sarcasm in my language than I do at school, or anywhere else. If I used the same sarcastic tone outside of the home, it would probably be interpreted by those I interact with as rude or ignorant. Though I tend to be quiet most of time, I find that when I have something I want to say, I will at least attempt to say (or write) it.

I have noticed that since beginning classes at S.L.C.C. that I am getting better at analyzing and questioning just about everything. I don't know that the surroundings I grew up in directly enforced a great deal of discussion. I was definitely taught to ask questions, as well as to question those that arrive at opinions and conclusions quickly. I prefer to let an amount of information soak in as much as possible before I make up my mind about where I stand on issues.

I don't like when "texting" language intersects with other types of writing. It is fine in it's place, used in quick one line conversations. But, outside of that it gives me the impression that the person using it is unintelligent. I could not stand to read an article or book written in that form. It would cause me to assume that the writer is young and immature. It will be interesting to see how that evolves further in the future, as the predominant users of this language get older.

I've decided I speak in quite a few dialects of English, and it all depends on the situation I'm in. I'll speak a different way with family, a certain way to my parents and a certain way to my siblings. I'll change my language at work and at school. I've found work to be the lightest of my conversation. Where school is probably the most serious. I've noticed the way I speak is also influenced by the situation I'm in. For example my vocabulary will magically grow when I'm in a serious situation. There are a lot of factors in language. One thing about the reading that bugged me was when the teacher said that words such as "cuz" and other forms of "IM'ing" were rude. I can see it as lazy but I really didn't see it as rude. The way I see it, the teacher is rude and lazy for not taking the time to see where the student is coming from. Language is how we can identify ourselves. How can we truly do that if we can't use our own language?

Home Language, Classroom Language, and Analysis

I never thought that the way I would speak growing up in my home had such an effect on the way that I interact with everything. With that said I had to think about this for some time. I have to agree that the language that I developed in my home as a child did very little if not acting as a detriment to the way that I gathered knowledge and interacted with people/situations/things out in public. Not to say that I was raised improperly or anything; In fact the neighbors children were brought up very conformed-like and strictly. They were also very religious which played a role in developing their own home-language. I kinda got off task defending the way I was raised, but what I was trying to say is that everyone's home language is going to make it a little more difficult to analyze something from an outside perspective. With our families we are assumingly very very comfortable with each other and that's why we are able to make such differing home-languages.

HOME LANGUAGE

It seems that when we are growing up in our homes, we adopt the habits of those around us. We learn what our parents show us and what we see from our friends. Many of us do not recognize differences in behavior or manner in home language of others. It would never ocurr to most children (even adults) to ask "what is interesting about that?"

For me, I now notice that there is a lot of interruption in my home language. There are also many expressions and phrases that I didn't realize other people outside of my family or community of acquaintances would not recognize. I would be willing to bet that some cultures in Europe or Asia or the Middle East would find habits of my home language very strange indeed. Really, unless a person is exposed to different behavioral types with language in different cultures, they really are likely to be oblivious to the existence of their own habits.

Home Language Brought to the Classroom

Home Language Brought to the Classroom

Being born in a foreign country with a different educational system and upbringing has probably influenced my ability to analyze at an academic level. As far back as I can remember, school has been a place where one goes to acquire knowledge from the teachers; teachers were always right. This approach did not leave much room for discussion. I believe, education in America, is more open to participation and opinions from students. The difference makes me wonder if the pedagogy of the education in my early years stifled my creativity to a certain degree.
Moreover, English not being my native language could also affect my ability to express ideas English. Or, it might merely be an excuse for not trying any harder. Whatever the reason is I expect to become better at it with practice, excellent guidance and feedback for improvement.
Honestly, I do not know what difference it would have made to have been brought up in the United States instead of my native land. I see some U.S. native-speakers struggling as much as those born in a foreign land. Reasons? I have no clue! But, I have to remind myself that our human brains’ capacity to learn and create is unlimited. I say, “we all put it to use, and we’ll be surprised with the results in discovering our potential.”

Jairo Toro

Home Language Classroom Language and Analysis

The ethnographic research of Roadville and Trackton clearly show how language passed on through stories affect the children’s perception of their world. As children easily do, they adjusted to different ways of communications outside their family circles and communities. The core values they are taught and the emphasis on the behavioral patterns to follow may not be completely replaced by the school system and culture. I believe that, the survival instinct of children kicks in and children from both towns now that in order to function in society, they must to comply with the different views proposed or imposed upon them. For a period or indefinitely, these views may be adopted in parallel to theirs. The children may also may blend them to different extend, thus, becoming an integrated person in the society.

In the June Jordan reading, the analysis the students undertake to understand their way of communicating takes them on a self discovery about the use of “their” language and the effect it has on society. The teacher helps them see and recognize that the African American way of communicating has its “own” standard. The fact that the student did not recognize themselves in the Color Purple seems to demonstrate that somewhere there is a feeling of not belonging to the larger, dominant, white culture. It is only by understanding and acknowledging their own culture that Ebonics could have a chance to be recognized and understood (respected even) by all.

Jennifer Lee’s article, gives us a strong example of a change of shift in language use. We are witnessing a dramatic change through technology. This shift separates the teenager from the adult or older people as nothing did in the past. Older people who do not have access to this computer technologies can not relate to the younger generations. The gap that this created may take us in new directions and socially, economically, & politically. This short hand or text message will make contacting people from all over the world have a sense of belonging, thus extending boundaries. I may just be far off. Just a though

Home Language Classroom Language and Analysis

I beleive the variety of home language that we come from makes it more challenging to analyze in the classroom. I think that we all analyze people through the way that we speak, act, and how we look. I think it is hard for many students to analyze an article or paper because it incorporates writing rather than just thinking. In some ways this should make it easier to analyze in papers because we have experience in other areas of analyzing. I think for myself analyzing an issue or paper is less difficult than it sounds, but can be distorted from home langauge. I see this when trying to describe something that is really interesting or really bad. I know the proper way to write but I tend to want to use slang words that will get some of my personality into the paper that will describe what I really want to say. I beleive this is similiar with many other kids. I think the power is to know when it is ok to use home language vs. classroom language. They are both important and that will hopefully mix together into classroom papers and in home speech that can be appropriate for both.

Language Anaylsis

Language varies from each part of our lives. As we grow up we learn to speak in different situations. In school, we learn about learning and being able to explain those ideas in a classroom setting. At home we discuss things that go on in our own lives. We live in different worlds of language. At home we use language that is familiar and that we are used to. The language that we use varies from our experiences in our own lives.
Because of the language that we use, it is important to be able to distinguish between them. Our home language is used because it is comfortable and easy. In a school setting it can be unsettling and hard something to discuss something to people that you do not know. So this can be a challenge. It is also hard for people that do not grow up in homes that do not discuss academics or have backgrounds where very little education is present.

It's all Greek to me

We learn language from the social group we interact with, generally speaking, first the family, then peers and other authority figures at school, church and so on, and perhaps a much larger group such as race or nation by way of mass politics and culture. At each stage, language use grows more complex, but at all times the rules are fashioned for the purposes and interests of the group. I am not a deterministic social constructionist on this point. Language is not a virus with which the helpess, passive individual is infected. All change in language does begin, after all, with some clever individual somewhere. but for the most part, the group rules, and the way a particular group uses language reflects the values of that group.

Take Trackton and Roadville, for example. At the end of the Ways with Words reading, I had the following epiphany: Trackton is a Homeric culture; Roadville a Biblical one. Recall that Homer was the ancient Greek poet credited with authorship of The Odyssey, whose hero, Odysseus, is admired for his cunning, strength, and resourcefulness. His virues, if you will, rather than his virtue. Heath's comment about storytelling in Trackton could apply to the Homeric tale as well: "Stories do not teach lessons about proper behavior; they tell of individuals who excel by outwitting the rules of conventional behavior." Trackton's emphasis on competition and creativity also recalls ancient Greece, whose great tragic drama was developed in a literally competitive environment.

Roadville on the other hand, uses storytelling as social glue. Stories are didactic. They inculcate the morals of the group. To quote Wilde's Miss Prism, "The good end happily, the bad unhappily. That is what fiction means." Of course, the Bible is central in Roadvilles stories.

Roadville and Trackton are like a microcosm of Western culture from ancient to modern, which retains a great tension between the Homeric (or pagan) and the Biblical.

Heath notes that Roadville is more concerned with literacy than Trackton. "Roadville parents believe it their task to praise and practice reading with their young children; Trackton adults believe the young have to learn to be and do, and if reading is necessary for this learning, that will come." He does not note the significance of this, namely, that in the Biblical culture literacy is necessary for social control and cohesion. Here is the secret behind our periodic literacy scares and obsession about reading in public schools, and also why we resist the entrance of popular culture, which belongs to the Homeric tradition, into them. Education is about proper socialization, not knowledge.

There is another language tradition represented in the reading, that of the author. I'm not sure what to call it: academic, analytical, Talmudic? This perspective can yield some important insights, but the scientific pretensions often create some unintentional hilarity by trying to render the banal in objective terms. "In Roadville and Trackton, all physiologically normal children learn to talk; yet the social and linguistic environments which surround young children as they grow into their language competence differ strikingly in a number of features." So, everyone learns to talk, but not in the same way. Really! (Note that my first paragraph is similarly afflicted wiht scientism.)

This third point of view is the language of the university. We are not taught it at home for two reasons. First of all because it is an outsider's perspective. It is natural to think critically when encountering a form of language different from our own, less natural to apply the same sort of thinking in our own home. Second, because it reveals the purposes and motivations behind language-use. It gives the whole game away.

The attitudes about storytelling in Trackton and Roadville had different functions. In the first, the individual is exalted and celebrated (often by way of degrading everyone else). In the second, the individual must be shown his proper place, taught to defer to the wisdom of the ages.

Is the analytical language of the scientist and professor purely distinterested, or does it have its own purposes, hidden even from itself?

Are we not taught to seek out and discuss....

Are we not taught to seek out and discuss the interesting elements in an array of experiences?


- Personally, I would say no. When I read this, I automatically start thinking about every personal story I've ever told and/or any conversation I've ever had. When I tell a story to some friends, I know I don't have to stop midway through and answer any questions...I know, that I can just keep going with the story and they on their own, will break down what I'm saying to stay on pace. They will "Summerize" the story itself, from the moment I start talking up until the end. They're not worried about finding the significance to the story, because that might take a little more time, or put them in jepardy of losing where I'm at in the story.
We haven't been taught to look in a finer detail with most dialogue. We just look for the things that are easily found and stick with them, so we in the end can see the big picture.

It wasn't till I read this particular sentence in this blog, that I realized how lazy we are with understanding exactly what people are saying. We never look into it, we only skim the service to get the "Jist" of it all - to create our own opinion.

- Mike Swain

Home Language, Classroom Language and Analysis

Hi Everyone,

This week, we're talking about home language and classroom language in a variety of contexts. The Ways with Words reading is an ethnography that examines the langauge practices of children growing up in two homogenous communities (Roadville and Trackton) and how those language practices interact with the expected norms of the 'townspeople' discourse that the kids encounter when they get into school.

For example, the Trackton kids grow up in a community with a high priority placed on imaginative, inventive storytelling that is competitive in focus. In Roadville, stories are only told by certain people, are based in fact, and have a moral resolution. Both of these children face conflict when they get to school where they are expected to be able to remain focused in their language practices (in other words, not get too inventive) yet also be able to think for themselves (in other words, get beyond the facts).

In the June Jordan reading, a conscious decision was made by the students to write a letter of protest to the police using Black English rather than Standard English. They knew that their letter would be ignored because of the "incorrect" language, because they didn't use the language of the police, but they decided that it was best to stay with their home language.

In the "IM-ing" reading, English teachers debate how to respond to student use of IM-type discourse in their school writing, a type of home language becoming more and more prevalent in our society (and used for humor in certain cell-phone commericals).

Yesterday, we talked about how our home languages have influenced our challenges in moving toward sophisticated analysis. We can all do the "breaking down and summarizing" part of the analysis just fine, but, we often have a hard time interpreting the summaries. We have a hard time figuring out how to determine what is interesting, and what might be significant.

This problem is not new to our class. It is probably the most common challenge of any person getting into college and struggling with the new expectations of academic thinking.

So, I'm really curious what it is about the variety of home langauges that we come from that make it more challenging to do this second part of analysis. Are there language practices involved in analysis that just were not prioritized in home languages that most college students experienced? Are we not taught to seek out and discuss the interesting elements in an array of experiences?

Please respond to this with your thoughts, considering how our home languages may not have prepared us for the classroom language of analysis.

Thanks,
Tiffany