Abstract
In this essay, I used peer-reviewed and scholarly text to disprove the notion that there is a “perfect English” and that other dialects are wrong. This essay is against dialect discrimination in the United States and discusses how dialects are adaptations of the English language over time.
The Origin of Dialects and the Imperfect Nature of the English Language
The English language is used by various populations in the United States. English, like all languages, has a set of rules on spelling, pronunciation, and grammar. However, this language is not spoken the same, and when people from different regions communicate with each other, they perceive each other as having an unusual dialect. Often times people consider others’ manner of speaking English erroneous, strange, even foreign. Dialect discrimination is the byproduct of a belief in a “standard English” system which is perceived as the only set of proper rules for the English language. Dialects are variations that are a result of adaptations of the English language as it evolved over time and thus, there is no such thing as a perfect standard system of English.
First, one must acknowledge that there is a common misconception about dialects and that this is not an issue on the language, but on the social aspects of it. Because of the tendency for any regional dialect to stray from some of the socially standardized rules of English, it is considered to be a substandard version of English. According to Voices of America: Accent, Antidiscrimination Law, and a Jurisprudence for the Last Reconstruction, a peer-reviewed article from The Yale Law Journal by Mari J. Matsuda, these differentiations are considered by speech pathologists as “an unfortunate deviation from a standard. This deviation is at once labeled disease and declared curable with a series of exercises and manipulations” (Matsuda 1365). While her article focuses on accents and how people with different accents are discriminated against, she also states that “much of the analysis is also relevant to dialect, or word choice” (Matsuda 1360). The purpose of Matsuda’s article is to challenge the way accents are seen as a deviation of a standard English system and to inform the reader how different accents are discriminated against and how the notion behind it is wrong, and she states that this applies to dialects as well as accents. The author uses observations such as people getting rejection for job occupations because they sound different or how professionals can view this as a disease that must be cured to support her argument. The main idea is that speech that even somewhat differentiates from societal expectations on a “proper” style of English is discriminated against and is incorrect, unprofessional, and not the true manner of speaking the language.
Dialects are no strangers to this treatment of inferiority compared to a set of standards. According to an article from Encyclopedia Britannica by David Crystal and Pavle Ivić, it reads, “Frequently, the label dialect, or dialectal, is attached to substandard speech, language usage that deviates from the accepted norm…” (Crystal, Ivić, 1). Dialects are considered substandard versions of English with errors, uncommon formalities, and are more of deviations of the language itself. But dialects are not necessarily defined as deviations from the English language as a set of rules. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the definition is written as “Dialect, a variety of a language that signals where a person comes from. The notion is usually interpreted geographically (regional dialect), but it also has some application in relation to a person’s social background (class dialect) or occupation (occupational dialect)” (Crystal, Ivić, 1). Dialects are more of a way of speaking English depending on a certain person’s background, and they differentiate among regions, so instead of interpreting dialects as substandard speech, it is much more accurate to interpret them as variations of diction among certain populations. Crystal and Ivić wrote this article to inform the reader about the definition of the term “dialect,” and describes how they apply to the real world, its etymology, and most importantly for this essay, the social implications behind dialects. They write about how dialects are seen as substandard, which contrasts with the definition of a dialect. The peer-reviewed article and this encyclopedic definition both acknowledge and support that these variations of the English language are discriminated against and treated as erroneous instead of diverse, but they depend on one’s background, so they are adapted from English, which defeats the idea of a “perfect” standard English as it is spoken in different ways instead of just one.
There are dialects spoken in multiple regions within the United States, and to support the idea that dialectal variation is universal within the English language and therefore, there is no perfect standard English, one can look at a map of the nation with the regional dialects graphed. According to a dialect map named North American English Dialects, Based on Pronunciation Patterns created by Rick Aschmann, every region has a color-coded dialect such as Northern New England or Greater New York City, and these dialects themselves contain sub-dialects within them, thus furthering the variation among diction and syntax within the English language (Aschmann 1). A system of “standard English” for the United States cannot exist if every region speaks the language in a different way, especially when different areas of said regions have their own manner of speaking English.
Aschmann created this map to inform the viewer of the different types of regional dialects and sub-dialects spoken throughout the United States (and most of Canada) of the English language. This connects to the definition of “dialect” from Encyclopedia Britannica as the dialects come from all different regions of the United States just like the definition states that for every geographical region a language is spoken with a different dialect. Once again, the idea of a perfect “standard English” system is defeated as everyone speaks with a dialect in the United States since they differ within every region.
The fact that an English dialect is spoken in every region is acknowledged throughout numerous different texts such as Everyone Has an Accent by sociolinguist and American author Walt Wolfram, who specializes in English dialects in the United States. Despite the title, he actually discusses more dialects and how English has always been differentiated over the years and what appears incorrect today was perfectly acceptable in the past. English Wolfram states, “It is impossible to speak English without speaking some dialect of the language. Skilled dialectologists trained to detect the nuances of language variation affirm that the notion of a ‘pure’ English, safeguarded in dictionaries and grammar books, evaporates as soon as we open our mouths to speak” (Wolfram 3). Wolfram challenges the idea of a perfect standard English throughout the text, and those who are experts on dialects also agree with him as he stated in the text. His purpose in writing is to inform the reader how everyone speaks a certain dialect of English and why it is a result of adaptations of the English language over time. A “perfect” standard English is once again proven impossible, as now it can be acknowledged that everyone speaks English in a different manner, especially of diction and syntax.
Another text that discusses the same topic with practically the same argument is English Belongs to Everybody by Robert MacNeil. MacNeil also discusses how English as a language constantly changes and these dialects are the result of it. His main claim is that change “…is inevitable in a living language and is responsible for much of the vitality of English; it has prospered and grown because it was able to accept and absorb change….” (MacNeil 192) and when he talks about certain features different dialects may contain such as double negatives, or perhaps errors that would never be accepted in a perfect “standard English” system today, he mentions that accepted English included these. According to MacNeil, “These ‘errors’ have been with us for at least four hundred years, because you can find each of them in Shakespeare. Double negative: In Hamlet, the King says: Nor what he spake, though it lack’d form a little, Was not like madness. Double comparative: In Othello, the Duke says: Yet opinion…throws a more safer voice on you” (MacNeil 193). MacNeil writes about this to inform the reader that English constantly evolves over time as a language, with double negatives and double comparatives as modern errors that were old formalities. He uses evidence from old works of English literature to display these errors, just like Wolfram. As a matter of fact, this perfectly matches the text from Wolfram, as he states,“And early masters of literature, including Chaucer, routinely used the ‘double negative’ – as in They didn’t go nowhere – without fear of sounding illogical or conveying unintended meanings. Contrary to the popular belief that standards of language are fixed forever, they respond, like any other aspect of culture, to the dynamics of social change” (Wolfram 2). The texts from Wolfram and MacNeil both agree that the English language is constantly changing and that there is no perfect standard English as it always changed, and that was considered correct back then, is wrong now.
Dialects are a result of adaptations of the English language as it evolved over time. Certain aspects of the English language such as grammar or syntax, for example, have always been accepted and soon rejected. A perfect standard system of English cannot exist as English itself is imperfect, it changes constantly and is spoken differently amongst its speakers, whether closely or hardly similar. Even the definition of the term “dialect” describes it as a means of speaking a language, English in this case, regarding one’s background, not proficiency. Overall, the texts shown build upon this universal idea of the evolution of the English language resulting in various dialects spoken among all regions where it is spoken.
Works Cited
Aschmann, Rick. “North American English Dialects, Based on Pronunciation Patterns.” The
Aschmann Clan, https://aschmann.net/AmEng/.
Ivić, Pavle, and David Crystal. “Dialect.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 22 July 2014, www.britannica.com/topic/dialect.
MacNeil, Robert. “English Belongs to Everybody.” How Does Language Change (Whether We Like It or Not)? pp. 192–196.
Matsuda, Mari J. “Voices of America: Accent, Antidiscrimination Law, and a Jurisprudence for the Last Reconstruction.” The Yale Law Journal, vol. 100, no. 5, 1991, pp. 1329–1407., doi:10.2307/796694.
Wolfram, Walt. “Everyone Has an Accent.” Teaching Tolerance, 1 Sept. 2000, www.tolerance.org/print/10962/print.
Cover Letter
There were many meaningful insights I gained in this phase regarding language, rhetoric, and writing. For language, I learned that even though there are rules that structure the basics of a language such as grammar, syntax, and diction, these rules are not always abided by and as a result, a language can shift as people use it differently, and thus the rules change, as well. Essentially, language as a whole always adapts to current conditions. Rhetorical insights I gained include how I used cause and effect to describe how the English language as changed over time with the cause being people speaking it in different ways that opposed the rules of a so-called “perfect” English. I use these numerous times throughout my essay to show how dialects are a result of constant change within a language. Insights on writing I gained include how I can inform the reader about the English language and its imperfect nature as it constantly changes among its speakers, and connect it to the origins of dialect, as well as my thesis on how there is no such thing as a “perfect English.”
Terms that impacted my learning include “context,” which is something I struggled with in the past, but I believe that I improved on it as I was able to give a general description of the articles that I cited for evidence right before I showed the quoted text, and in the end, it al connected with my thesis and the fluency of the writing was better than in my previous written works.
This phase’s assignment helped me achieve the goal of composing texts that integrate my stance using strategies such as summary, critical analysis, interpretation, synthesis and argumentation as I connect multiple texts to each other, the context, the claims, and most importantly, the thesis.
