Do Educators See and Honor Biliteracy and ... - Springer Link

Early Childhood Educ J (2013) 41:133–141 DOI 10.1007/s10643-012-0538-5

Do Educators See and Honor Biliteracy and Bidialectalism in African American Language Speakers? Apprehensions and Reflections of Two Grandparents/Professional Educators Gloria Swindler Boutte • George L. Johnson Jr.

Published online: 4 July 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Abstract Educators often do not recognize biliteracy and bidialectalism in African American Language (AAL) speakers. Chronicling the experiences of twin four/fiveyear old AAL and emergent Standard English speakers, we discuss the importance of recognizing and building on the routines and identities of African American children and families. We present three strategies for supporting the learning of African American children who are biliterate and bidialectal. Using the academic literature which illustrates African American children’s communicative virtuosity as a backdrop, we use language samples from twin AAL-speakers to illustrate key points. Emphasis is placed on the importance of building on African American children’s communication styles in classrooms and helping them to negotiate and move between two different discourse communities for both oral and written language. Keywords Language African American language African American English Biliteracy Bidialectalism Code-switching Contrastive analysis Literacy

On any given day, four-year old Jaliyah can be found ‘‘reading’’ stacks of books to her twin sister,

Janiyah,1 or to her imaginary students. Jaliyah’s reads in the den where there are typically four to six other people watching television, conversing and laughing with each other, texting, and talking on the telephone. These multimodal, multiliteracies occur simultaneously. Someone unfamiliar with Jaliyah’s family’s culture might view this home setting as chaotic or overstimulating. Re-examining the scene in Jaliyah’s home through culturally responsive lenses, however, identifies a home that supports the development of multi-processing skills and the ability to focus in an environment filled with activity. In this very active setting Jaliyah is able to process the books that she avidly reads. We notice her love for literacy and can assume that her family supports mainstream literacies—such as reading—since books are readily available. The multimodal nature of Jaliyah’s home is not unique to African American families in this fast-paced twenty-first century. However, what is distinct are aspects of African American language such as overlapping and co-narrating which permit more than one person to speak at once (Boutte 2007). We can also detect other African American legacies and strengths which value oral/verbal aspects of language, multiple literacies (e.g., music, dance, song), extended family, communalism, verve, and expressive individualism (Ball 1996; Boykin 1994). While the 1

G. S. Boutte (&) University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA e-mail: [email protected] G. L. Johnson Jr. South Carolina State University, Orangeburg, SC, USA e-mail: [email protected]

Jaliyah and Janiyah are the authors’ grandchildren. Their mother granted permission to write about them. We are intrigued by their preference for African American Language (AAL) even though Standard English (SE) is also spoken in their home and by most family members. While it is interesting to explore why they find AAL more compelling than SE, the purpose of this article is to think about ways teachers can support their emergent biliteracy and bidialectalism.

123

134

particulars of Jaliyah’s home may be unique, the cultural legacies and literacies are common in many African American homes and communities. In this article, we discuss the importance of recognizing and building on the routines and identities of African American children and families. We share glimpses of twin sisters’, Janiyah and Jaliyah, family’s routines and literacies to ‘‘reveal everyday people, living ordinary lives…with dignity, and great verve…with the full range of harmony and chaos any human being can extract from life’’ (Dr. Andrea Hunter, personal communication, March 25, 2010). First, we discuss disconnections between home and school literacies. Second, we define African American Language as a systematic, rule-governed system that is governed by distinct phonological, syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic principles. It is also referred to as ‘‘Black English,’’ ‘‘African American English,’’ ‘‘Black English Vernacular,’’ ‘‘Ebonics,’’ and a host of other names (Boutte 2007). Jaliyah and Janiyah’s primary language is African American Language (AAL) and they are also emergent Standard English speakers. While most educators view the language of AAL speakers as one-dimensional, we encourage educators to recognize the twins’ biliteracy and bidialectalism. Third, we present three strategies for supporting the learning of African American children who are biliterate and bidialectal. To demonstrate that the examples of AAL used by the twins are not isolated events, we share examples from the academic literature which illustrate African American children’s communicative virtuosity through musical and poetic use of language (e.g., daily storytelling, church routines, and handplays). We share ideas about how teachers and family members may support children’s emerging biliteracy and bidialectalism. We emphasize the importance of building on African American children’s communication styles in classrooms and helping them to negotiate and move between two different discourse communities for both oral and written language.

Disconnections Between School and Family/Community Literacies (I)f school considers someone’s language inadequate, they’ll probably fail. Delpit 2002, p. xvii A contemporary song comes on the radio and four-year old twin sisters, Janiyah and Jaliyah, confidently and un-self consciously sing along, ‘‘There goes my baby (oooo girl look at you).’’ They both have a strong sense of agency that may not be apparent to most teachers. They are confident, love talking, and are proficient in African American Language. They effectively use their language to communicate

123

Early Childhood Educ J (2013) 41:133–141

in a large variety of ways from bossing others around (‘‘Sit down girl. You know better than that!’’) to making a request (‘‘Can I type my name really, really quick?’’ or ‘‘Can you please read me this book?’’), to expressing affection (‘‘I love you, ‘Dear’’’—an abbreviated version of M’Dear, referring to their grandmother). While all of the other family members speak both Standard English and African American Language, Jaliyah and Janiyah use African American Language as their primary mode of communication. While wanting the twins to add Standard English to their linguistic repertoires, their family’s biggest worry is that teachers using school assessments will misinterpret their language variety as a language deficit and the twins will come home from school one day and lament, (as Wynne (2002) summed up, ‘‘We don’t talk right’’ (p. 203). Two important premises are important for bridging the disconnections between schools and homes on issues of language differences. First, all homes have language so teachers can try to determine the nature of existing literacies. Second, children who may seem quiet or do not speak Standard English in school are often verbally competent outside of school. So the question is what is happening (or not happening) to silence these children in school? When educators are not able to identify with children’s language and literacy skills because they are not familiar with AAL or other home languages, evidence shows that the teacher’s behavior toward that child is different, as compared to the teacher’s behavior toward children whose language they consider to be ‘‘normal’’ (Hilliard 2002; Smitherman 1999/ 2001; Volk and Long 2005). The teacher might spend less time engaging the child in conversation and pay less attention to the child’s activities. ‘‘It is this teaching behavior and not the language of the child, no matter how different, that creates the problems for learners’’ (Hilliard 2002, p. 101). Like all children, culturally and diverse children have been learning since birth and are ready to learn at anytime (Purcell-Gates 2002). Therefore, when teachers observe children in home or school settings, the common process of looking only for ‘‘standard’’ developmental milestones should be reversed. Being guided by narrow norms about ages and stages can limit teachers’ vision and ability to see the uniqueness and beauty of a wide range of possible literacies. Instead, educators can carefully observe the children first and derive the respective ‘‘norms’’ (developmental/cultural) from them. In this way, teachers’ observations will reflect the families’ standards, self-definitions, and self-valuations rather than commonly used Eurocentric norms. If we are to build more comprehensive models of literacy development, we will have to ‘‘expand what we notice, measure, and study’’ (Orellana and D’Warte 2010, p. 298). Typically, preschool or kindergarten children are assessed to determine their placements or ‘‘ability levels.’’


Many mainstream assessments used in schools consider only single dimensions of student knowledge and abilities and often do not reflect students’ prior home experiences (Hilliard 2002). Such assessments may not detect the wide array of existing transcultural, multimodal, multilingual, and globalized literacies that children bring. A barrier to developing solid relationships between schools and homes with culturally and linguistically diverse students is that schools have focused on what the children do not have or cannot do rather than what they do have or can do (Boutte and Hill 2006). So, for example, if a teacher were interested in identifying children’s existing vocabularies, she or he may ascertain what words Jaliyah and Janiyah do know rather than what words they do not know. This acknowledges that the words on any given assessment represent a small sample of possible words that can be known in any given context. Rather than starting with formal assessments which seek to evaluate their vocabularies based on an outside standard, the teacher can begin with language samples from the children (Hilliard 2002). Returning to the opening scene of Jaliyah reading amid a variety of familial interactions and activities, a prolonged study of her home over time would find that Jaliyah and her twin sister, Janiyah, are biliterately engaged in both conventional mainstream activities (e.g., looking at books or using the computer) as well as culturally specific activities (e.g., dancing, hand jives/plays). A typical day at home for the twins includes watching both television shows (children’s and adult), being read to during the day and at bedtime, playing outside and inside, singing, dancing, coloring, writing, painting, engaging in various physical activities, and learning specific information (e.g., the letters of the alphabet, their names, address, numbers, colors). While both girls have been able to perform a host of ‘‘school skills’’ such as counting and naming letters by age two, equally impressive are the number of sophisticated, culturally-specific language proficiencies they possess such as knowing all the words to lyrics of contemporary songs. The challenge for their teacher is to ensure that the children have opportunities to continue building skills in both AAL and SE. This can be done by honoring both their culturally-specific language skills and helping the girls develop mainstream literacies (Boutte 2007; Delpit 1995). For example, the twins’ teachers may engage girls in discussions about different ways of communicating—e.g., AAL; Standard English. In early childhood classrooms, teachers can show appreciation of a wide range of literacy possibilities via ongoing discussions about language diversity. A good way to start is by introducing children’s literature that is written in AAL (e.g., Flossie and the Fox, McKissack 1986). Before reading the book, the teacher may cue the children in that Flossie uses AAL and the fox uses SE. She can ask them to listen for examples of AAL. When reading AAL

135

examples such as, ‘‘How do a fox look?’’ (McKissack 1986, no pagination), the teacher may query, ‘‘Who remembers what AAL is? and emphasize,’’ Flossie is speaking AAL. Can someone translate it to SE?’’ Ongoing informal exchanges and discussions can be useful in helping Jaliyah and Janiyah learn to translate AAL to SE. Likewise, SE can be translated to AAL so as not to privilege SE as a superior language system rather than one of many possibilities. At home, Janiyah’s and Jaliyah’s grandmother develops their emergent biliteracy and bidialectalism by engaging them in a game in which the girls enthusiastically participate. She may start by saying something like, ‘‘You is….’’ She interrupts herself, laughs, and says to the girls, ‘‘What did I just say?’’ The girls typically respond with laughter and pride in their ability to ‘‘help’’ their grandmother who obviously is not as smart as they are, ‘‘Uh oh, you said ‘you is’.’’ ‘‘How can I say it another way?’’ queries their grandmother (careful not to say, How can I say it correctly?). In unison, the girls have learned to respond, ‘‘You are…!’’ Sometimes their grandmother builds on comments that the girls make (e.g., ‘‘Them are the best friends forever and ever.’’ or ‘‘Nobody cannot tell me nothing.’’) by saying, ‘‘What did you say?’’ This usually prompts the girls to translate. It is important to note that teachers will have to carefully observe to know when opportunities exist to help children translate from their first language to their second and when to simply write down language samples for later ‘‘lessons.’’ While it may seem counterintuitive to ECE teachers to give clear and direct examples of differences between the rules for both language systems—AAL and SE, children developing biliteracy and bidialectalism benefit from explicitness versus recasting that is typically recommended in ECE professional circles (Boutte 2007; Delpit 1995; Souto-Manning 2009). The first grader, George, in the examples below demonstrates that simply recasting the target language (usually Standard English) or assuming that the child knows the differences in the underlying rules of the second language frequently misses the point. Example 1 Jordan: Would you like to sit down? George: You know, you aks (sic) me if I want to sit down, right? Jordan: Yes, please. George: So then, this a question or you tellin’ me to sit down? Jordan: I am asking you to sit so that I can get on with calendar. George: Then just tell me sit down. Jordan: Then I’d be rude. George: Not in my momma home. You want me to sit. I will. You don’t care if I wanna sit. It just a different way

123

136

of aksin’, you know. I get it. In kindergarten I didn’t know. But I ain’t dissin’ you or you momma. (SoutoManning 2009, p. 1090) Example 2 George: No, I don’ want none. Anna: I don’t want any? (correcting) George: I already said, I don’ want none! Anna: Mrs. Manning, George is yelling at me. Teacher: Anna, in Brazil, we say ‘eu na˜o quero nenhum’, it’s just like I don’t want none. I think that George is yelling because he is frustrated that you repeated what he was trying to tell you. George: She said the same thing. Teacher: George, it might have sounded the same, but you said ‘I don’t want none’ and she said ‘you don’t want any?’ Both ways are okay. George: dependin’ where you be. (Souto-Manning 2009, p. 1088) As George’s teacher pointed out, AAL has distinct rules just as Spanish and other languages do. In the first example, the pragmatic rule is ‘‘use direct (vs. indirect) commands.’’ The second syntactic example demonstrates that double negation is allowed in AAL—and Spanish. Seeing African American Language as a Rule-Governed System There is an extensive knowledge base that acknowledges AAL as a rule-governed language system with distinct patterns and complexities (Boutte 2007). AAL is not ‘‘broken English’’ or slang (Boutte 2007; Kinloch 2010a, b). Children who speak AAL and SE are developing dual language and literacy systems (Kinloch 2010a, b) and thus can be considered biliterate and bidialectal. AAL is not a ‘‘pass-through language, only to be used to get to Standard English’’ (Perry and Delpit 1998, p. 15). Given this backdrop, children’s linguistic fluency in AAL and SE should be sought and honored (Boutte 2007; Kinloch 2010a, b; Perry and Delpit 1998). Research by Wheeler and Swords (2006) suggests three strategies for helping AAL speakers add Standard English to their linguistic repertoires: (1) use scientific inquiry to closely examine the language patterns that children use; (2) teach children to code-switch; and (3) use a variety of contrastive analysis activities. Each of these will be discussed with examples from Jaliyah and Janiyah’s language.

Use Scientific Inquiry and Closely Examine the Language Patterns that Children Use Educators can use scientific inquiry to investigate the underlying structure of children’s language. Teachers and

123


children can collect language samples and look for patterns such as the ones in Table 1. It is important not to think of these patterns as errors. Table 1 contains scenarios and samples of Janiyah’s and Jaliyah’s language which were gathered by one of the authors (G.S.B.) over a 1-week period in December 2010. Educators can collect language samples such as the ones above. Analysis of the language samples will give educators a glimpse into the children’s use of AAL and thinking. When teachers look for and learn children’s language patterns, they can be more responsive to children’s social, familial, community, and cultural identities (Kinloch 2010a, b). Teachers may prefer to tally and categorize examples from the language samples to determine which patterns are the most prevalent and which to focus on when doing code-switching and contrastive analysis activities. Code-Switching After gathering patterns of children’s language, teachers can begin to teach children how to code-switch. One idea is to build on what children already know by discussing how they use language during formal and informal activities (Wheeler and Swords 2006). Even young children are typically involved in a spectrum of activities that go from informal to highly formal (e.g., sporting activities, church, dining out). Focusing on formal versus informal does not single out AAL nor does it privilege SE. Teachers can lead children in discussions, role-plays, storytelling, and other activities to help them differentiate between formal and informal clothing, speech, and behavior. Children can practice speaking for different settings during daily classroom activities. Just as some clothing may be inappropriate for certain settings, language can be effective or ineffective and appropriate or inappropriate, depending on the setting. For example, in informal setting, a person may use the word, ‘‘ain’t’’ which may be inappropriate if giving a formal speech. For older children, certain time periods may be dedicated to either formal or informal speaking and writing activities. Once children get the idea of different registers (formal/informal), they (children) can become language detectives and collect language samples to be used for contrastive analysis activities. Contrastive Analysis For most children, modeling alone is insufficient and ineffective for adding on a second oral and written language system (bidialectalism and biliteracy). Teachers need to explicitly compare and contrast the applicable rules for children who are developing literacy in two or more language systems (Delpit 1995; Wheeler and Swords 2006). Contrastive analysis (explicit comparison and


137

Table 1 AAL language samples from twin four-year olds 1—Linking Verbs 1. I not want any broccoli. 2. I not like that book. 3. Yeah, I done. 4. I not want any spicy gum. I want the other gum. 5. We not babies. We big girls! 6. There were two candles and that means he two! (After attending a birthday party, the twins disagreed about how old the child was. Janiyah’s comment settled the argument. Analysis—Since the same sentence structure is repeated over time in different examples, we come to understand that the girls have inferred the syntactic rules of their primary language—AAL—which does not require a linking verb. 2—th sound (phoneme) 1. What does dat say? 2. Bof (both) of us…. 3. One day after being picked up from daycare, Janiyah noticed one of her friend’s mothers walking into the child care center. She exclaimed, ‘‘That’s ___’s mother!’’ As three other parents walked up, Janiyah added, ‘‘Ooooo, A lot of mudahs !’’(mothers). Analysis—These language samples indicate that the girls substitute the ‘‘th’’ sound with the ‘‘d’’ sound. This is not unique to AAL and often French people also substitute the sound (e.g., with = wiz; the = za; this’ zis). Although both language systems are following the same rule of substituting a sound that does not exist in their first language with one that does, AAL speakers are often stigmatized while French speakers are not (Boutte 2007). 3—Pronoun Usage 1. Them is big. 2. Her hit me. 3. Janiyah, you gonna break them door. 4. All the time….them do their homework. Analysis—Here we note that the girls do not tend to use pronouns in the SE way. Differential pronouns use is one feature of AAL; however, misuse of pronouns could also be developmental since the girls are four. The teacher in this case may watch pronoun use over time to determine if it is developmental or dialectical. 4—Subject/Verb Agreement 1. They is big. 2. We is big girls. 3. This are dear’s papers. 4. This are the largest suitcase ever! Analysis—The pattern here is subject-verb disagreement with the verb ‘‘to be’’. Typically, ‘‘is’’ is overregularized and used regardless of whether the subject is singular or plural. The third and fourth examples which use ‘‘are’’ could be a case of hypercorrection—an attempt to use SE. Language Sample 5—Double Negation 1. Nobody better not bother my homework. Nobody! 2. Nobody can’t reach it. 3. Nothing is not so good. 4. Nothing is not polite. Analysis—The pattern is double negation, a common AAL feature. As with the previous example with the th sound, this feature is not unique to AAL. Linguistically, both French and Spanish allow for more than one negative marker in sentences (e.g., French: Je ne sais pas—I do not know). Ne and pas are both negatives and are allowed (Boutte 2007). Language Sample 6—Interest in SE/School Learning and Literacy 1. I gotta watch everything at daycare. 2. I gotta write all my homework. 3. This is not my homework. 4. What are you writing? 5. I don’t know what that says. 6. I tried to write some of my friends’ names. That says Luke.…. I didn’t have time to finish. 7. Jaliyah is older than her twin sister by a few seconds. She was overheard telling Janiyah, ‘‘I’m the oldest and I do not need to listen to anyone—except grownups’’ (the latter comment was added for my benefit) (Boutte, December 27, 2010).

123

138


Table 1 continued Analysis—Both of the girls are immensely interested in school literacies. They have always loved books, but since starting Montessori preschool, they have become writing fanatics—writing hundreds of notes and messages each week. Although they use some colloquial expressions, the language samples indicate their interest in writing and some of their SE usage. This makes the point that the girls are indeed going back and forth between two language systems and would benefit from activities which honor both and which can broaden their abilities to express their ideas in a variety of forms (Ball 1996). Figures 1, 2, 3 show the girls engaged in a range of biliterate activities.

contrast of the communication styles of mainstream and nonmainstream language systems) has been shown to be effective in increasing children’s use of SE (Wheeler and Swords 2006). To help Jaliyah and Janiyah navigate between the two communication styles (AAL and SE), their teachers can encourage them to notice the different features of their home and school languages during read alouds, storytelling, dramatic play, and other activities (Boutte 2007). It is important to note that speaking AAL should not be referred to as speaking incorrectly since AAL follows a different set of rules and patterns than AAL. Instead, the goal is to help children translate from their home language to school language at appropriate times. Books written in AAL can be ‘‘translated’’ by children to SE and vice versa. It is important to translate AAL into SE and SE into AAL. Sample books that can be used for contrastive analysis are listed and described below. An extended list of other books with examples of AAL features appears in Wheeler and Swords (2006). While reading books, teachers can ask children to listen for examples of AAL patterns that have been discussed previously. 1.

2.

3.

Flossie and the fox (McKissack 1986). Synopsis: A wise, young Flossie outwits a clever fox on her way through the woods to deliver a basket of eggs. This book captures both AAL and SE. The heroine, Flossie, speaks in AAL and the fox speaks in SE. Rural setting; historical folktale. Sample AAL features: verb tense; subject-verb agreement; cultural nicknaming—e.g., Big Mama. Don’t say ain’t. (Smalls 2003). Synopsis: In 1957 Harlem, New York, Dana’s grandmother insists that she attend a integrated school, where she is forced to learn how to combine her home life of double Dutch and the word ain’t with her new world and language style at school. The story occurs in an urban setting during school desegregation. Dana, the main character, learns the value of biliteracy when she observes her teacher (whom she assumed only spoke SE) speaking AAL in an informal setting. Sample AAL features:verb tense; deleted ending sounds—sayin’; ending sounds—e.g., chile for child. So Much. (Cooke 1994). Synopsis: In this colorful tale, family and love are at the center as a baby boy is

123

visited one day by family members. Contemporary book focusing on an African American family celebration and the baby of the family. This book uses a version of AAL typically spoken in the Bayou (Louisiana). AAL features: verb tense; repetition of adjectives—e.g., big, big, big.

Fig. 1 Jaliyah and Janiyah sorting books for their makeshift library. Spontaneous play reveals interest in mainstream literacies

Fig. 2 Janiyah and Jaliyah writing ‘‘important’’ words


139

5.

6.

7.

Fig. 3 Jaliyah and Janiyah engaged in African American handgames

8. 4.

The barber’s cutting edge.(Battle-Lavert 1994). Synopsis: Rashaad’s trip to the barbershop and a word game with his barber, Mr. Bigalow, demonstrates the support of education in the African American community. Contemporary storyline about a barbershop featuring a male character. Good use of figurative language and other semantic features of AAL—e.g., You’re hot today! (You are getting most of the answers right today).

9.

The Black snowman. (Mendez 1989). Synopsis: Jacob’s self esteem is lifted when he takes a journey through his history and heritage with a snowman made of gray snow and wrapped in magical Kente cloth. AAL features: double negation; pronoun use. ‘Twas the night b’fore Christmas: An African-American version. (Rosales 1996). Synopsis: Images of a Black family grace this adaptation of a Christmas Eve tale. AAL features: AAl pronunciations (e.g., b’fore, stirrin’, wit [for with]). Nathaniel Talking. (Greenfield 1988). Nathaniel talking. Synopsis: Using rap, poetry and blues, 9 year old Nathaniel expresses his feelings and curiosity about his life, from the passing of his mother to the friends he has made. AAL features: subject-verb agreement; pronoun use. Nappy Hair. (Herron 1997). Nappy hair. Synopsis: This book is written to point out the beauty and strength of African American hair. AAL features: call and response; verb tense; pronoun use. Working Cotton. (Williams 1992). Synopsis: Set during the slavery period in the US, this book depicts the day in the life of a little girl, whose family has migrated to work in the cotton fields of central California. AAL features: plurality; pronoun use; subject-verb agreement; habitual be.

Table 2 Examples of African American literacies 1. Storytelling—Instead of ‘‘school-type’’ narratives, stories are usually about familiar people and contexts (as opposed to remote, unfamiliar topics) (Heath 1982b/1992; 1999/2001). Stories tend to be episodic (focusing on episodes) rather than topic-centered (Ball 1996; Delpit 1998). Hence, a story may start with the beginning, ending, or most emotionally-heightened part to get the listener’s attention. Families may or may not have a collection of children’s books. However, other reading materials are typically available (e.g., magazines, Bibles). Responsive Teaching Practices: Teachers can devise home-school activities which build on the existing oral strengths and types of reading materials that are available (Heath 1982a). For example, teachers can use stories to teach and stories told at home could be written in books. 2. Language Play—Rope-jumping chants; cheers; hand games; rapping (see Fig. 3). Responsive Teaching Practices: Teachers can observe children’s use of language play and plan ways to build on it. 3. Nature of Discourse—There is a strong emphasis on oral tradition and the ability to use the language in a powerful and often improvisational manner. Co-narration and overlapping is allowed in conversations. Children are often oriented into culture-specific literacy conventions such as proverb-use, adages, songs, and elaborate stories rich in figurative language (Hilliard 2002; Lee 1995; Smitherman 1999/2001). Heath (1982b/1992) observed that children speaking AAL asked more open-ended versus closed-ended, school type questions (e.g., ‘‘What is that like?’’ vs. ‘‘What color is the sky?’’) Use of call and response–the audience is involved in the conversation or dialogue (Delpit 1998; Smitherman 1999/2001). Responsive Teaching Practices: The stylistic form of discourse (e.g., talking while another person is speaking) is not accepted in some school settings and children who use it may be wrongly disciplined. Teachers can help children become aware of the differences in mainstream and AAL discourse so that they can code-switch as appropriate. Heath (1982b/1992) found that it was beneficial to teach teachers and parents to use both types of questioning and labeling in home and school. This facilitated mastery of literacy skills. 4. Semantics–Children develop extensive vocabularies as they modify lexicons (vocabulary and expressions) with ever-changing words and sayings (Smitherman 1994). Responsive Teaching Practices: Many African American children have dynamic vocabularies. Astute educators will recognize this organic ability to learn new words and use this strength to help children build conventional vocabulary. Because of this distinctive feature, many people erroneously think AAL is ‘‘slang’’. However, the semantic feature is only one aspect of AAL and every language has slang—even SE. 5. Music–Typically, children listen to whatever is being played in the home (e.g., gospel; hip hop; rhythm and blues). Responsive Teaching Practices: Teachers can integrate various musical genres into the classroom. This will require educators to deliberately listen to and study a wide variety of music.

123

140

10.


Mirandy and Brother Wind. (McKissack 1988). Synopsis: In this historic folktale, Mirandy is determined to catch and dance with brother wind to win the junior Cakewalk. AAL features: pronoun use; verb tense; subject-verb agreement; double negation.

African American Literacies Discussions about AAL tend to provoke strong emotions and people typically fall into two broad categories: (1) those who dislike the language and hold it in low regard or (2) those who find it appealing and hold it in high regard (Baugh 2000). Part of the dilemma in thinking about AAL as a child’s first and primary language has to do with negative stereotypes about African American people (Perry, Steele, & Hilliard 2003) and anything associated with them—including their language which is typically stigmatized (Boutte 2007). While we have shown parallels which demonstrate the linguistic legitimacy of the phonological (th sound) and syntactic (double negation) rules governing AAL, we will now look at other examples (pragmatics and semantics) in Table 2. None of the information should be considered hard and fast rules and educators will need to get to know individual families to determine what is relevant.

Conclusion As with other children during their early years, African American children very astutely acquire the language of people around them (typically family members). Like Janiyah and Jaliyah, they are capable of communicating effectively and may not be aware of Standard English until they enter school. Effective teachers build on children’s language skills communicating respect for the children, their families, and their communities. This article explained the rich elements of AAL and its beauty and agility which may be overlooked or misunderstood by educators. Both AAL and ‘‘conventional’’ literacy skills can be used as the building blocks for young children’s literacy development (Orellana and D’Warte 2010).

References Ball, A. F. (1996). Expository writing patterns of African-American students. English Journal, 85(1), 27–36. Baugh, J. (2000). Beyond Ebonics. Linguistic pride and racial prejudice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Boutte, G. S. (2007). Teaching African American English speakers: Expanding educators and student repertoires. In M. E. Brisk

123

(Ed.), Language, culture, and community in teacher education (pp. 47–70). London: Routledge. Boutte, G. S., & Hill, E. (2006). African American communities: Implications for educators. New Educator, 2, 311–329. Boykin, A. W. (1994). Afrocultural expression and its implications for schooling. In E. R. Hollins, J. E. King, & W. C. Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse populations: Formulating a knowledge base (pp. 243–273). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Delpit, L. (2002). Introduction. In L. Delpit, & J. K. Dowdy (Eds.), The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom (pp. xv–xxiv). New York, NY: The New Press. Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children. Cultural conflicts in the classroom. New York, NY: The New Press. Delpit, L. (1998). What should teachers do? Ebonics and culturally responsive instruction. In T. Perry & L. Delpit (Eds.), The real ebonics debate (pp. 17–26). Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Heath, S. B. (1982a). What no bedtime story means. Narrative skills at home and school. Language in Society, 11(1), 49–76. Heath, S. B. (1982/1992). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Hilliard, A. G. (2002). Language, culture, and the assessment of African American children. In L. Delpit & J. K. Dowdy (Eds.), The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom (pp. 87–105). New York, NY: The New Press. Hunter, A. G. (2010, March 25). Revealing subjugated knowledge: Black feminist thought and the study of African American families. In G. S. Boutte & S. Long (Eds.), African American equity symposia series. Symposium conducted at the University of South Carolina. Columbia, South Carolina. Kinloch, V. (2010a). Suspicious spatial distinctions: Literacy research with students across school and community contexts. Written Communication, 26(2), 154–182. Kinloch, V. (2010b). ‘‘To not be a traitor of Black English’’: Youth perceptions of language rights in an urban context. Teachers College Record, 112(11), 103–141. Lee, C. (1995). Signifying as a scaffold for literary interpretation. Journal of Black Psychology, 21(4), 357–381. Orellana, M. F., & D’warte, J. (2010). Recognizing different kinds of ‘‘head starts’’. Educational Researcher, 39(4), 295–300. Perry, T., & Delpit, L. (1998). The real ebonics debate: Power, language, and the education of African-American children. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Perry, T., Steele, C., & Hilliard, A. (Eds.). (2003). Young, gifted, and Black: Promoting high achievement among African-American students. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Purcell-Gates, V. (2002). ‘‘…As soon as she opened her mouth!’’ issues of language, literacy, and power. In L. Delpit & J. K. Dowdy (Eds.), The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom (pp. 107–120). New York, NY: The New Press. Smitherman, G. (1994). Black talk. Words and phrases from the hood to the amen corner. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Smitherman, G. (1999/2001). Talkin that talk. Language, culture and education in African America. London: Routledge. Souto-Manning, M. (2009). Acting out and talking back: Negotiating discourses in American early educational settings. Early Child Development and Care, 179(8), 1083–1094. Volk, D., & Long, S. (2005). Challenging myths of the deficit perspective: Honoring children’s literacy resources. Young Children, 60(6), 12–19. Wheeler, R. S., & Swords, R. (2006). Code-switching. Teaching standard English in urban classrooms. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Early Childhood Educ J (2013) 41:133–141 Wynne, J. (2002). We don’t talk right. You ask him. In L. Delpit, & J. K. Dowdy (Eds.), The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom (pp. 203–219). New York, NY: The New Press.

Children’s Literature Battle-Lavert, G. (1994). The barber’s cutting edge. San Francisco, CA: Children’s Book Press. Cooke, T. (1994). So much. Cambridge, MA: Candlewick Press. Greenfield, E. (1988). Nathaniel talking. New York, NY: Black Butterfly.

141 Herron, C. (1997). Nappy hair. New York, NY: Knopf. McKissack, P. (1986). Flossie and the fox. New York, NY: Dial Books For Young Readers. McKissack, P. (1988). Mirandy and brother wind. New York, NY: Knopf. Mendez, P. (1989). The Black snowman. New York, NY: Scholastic. Rosales, M. (1996). ‘Twas the night b’fore Christmas: An AfricanAmerican version. New York, NY: Scholastic. Smalls, I. (2003). Don’t say ain’t. Watertown, MA: Charlesbridge Publishers. Williams, S. A. (1992). Working cotton. New York, NY: Harcourt.

123