Some languages communicate beetter than others.

Usually the most versatile and effective is face to face

Thoughts are the basis for communication

My best friend Lemuel.

a good source

Rubba, Johanna. "EBONICS: Q & A." cla.calpoly.edu. 02 Feb
1997. Cal Poly University, Web. 28 Oct 2009.
.
In this article, Dr. Rubba conveys some of the major questions and answers surrounding Ebonics. She first defines it and its origins, and then addresses some of the major controversial aspects, and finally she affirms the reliability of the professionals (linguists) and goes to them to get an educated scope of the controversy. This article is a powerful one in that it adequately informs any onlooker on the major aspects of Ebonics. It is entirely helpful as a stem for further inquiry into any one of the multiple aspects that it addresses. This seems to be the intended purpose, considering the extent of the bibliography compared with the amount of the information presented. The only downfall of the article is the bias of personal opinion (seeing that Dr. Rubba is entitled to a highly regarded opinion as a linguist, this bias carries great weight) regarding the equality of Ebonics to other languages. She holds that it is entirely equal as a language, and is therefore entitled to equal treatment. This is an unsound judgment because it denies the benefit (and even the possible existence of benefit) of having a uniform language, universal communication. Dr. Rubba’s article was very helpful in giving a sense of the broadness of the subject, and articulating particular arenas of further study. She highly recommends the following literature: Dialects and Education: Issue and Answers by Walt Wolfram and Donna Christian.

ebonix nucca

When one looks into language a bit further, it’s interesting to note different accents. When you go to Alabama, Texas, Wisconsin, New York, and even particular places within New York you can hear variations within pronunciation and syntax. In every one of those places though, a particular form of variation is found among African American people. Despite age, gender, Religious views, and education, African Americans have their own form of English. It was coined “Ebonics” by an African American Doctor named Robert Williams in a conference called ‘the Cognitive and Language Development of Black Children.’ “One reason linguists don't use the term "Ebonics" very happily is that it is very vague, and so such questions are hard to answer. We generally use the term ‘African American Vernacular English’, or AAVE, instead to mean the kinds of speech characteristically spoken by working-class U.S. African Americans, within their community, at occasions calling for intimacy or informality,” says Professor Peter L. Patrick of Essex University in the UK. For this blog, I will use the words ‘Ebonics,’ ‘AAVE,’ and ‘African American Vernacular English’ synonymously. African American Vernacular English can be defined as its own dialect of English. So is this an African American language exclusively? Why is it particular to that race? Does race have anything to do with it? How is it transferred? Does being with or without it mean anything about your acceptability within African American subculture? These are some of the questions that this blog will be looking into. Various tangents and ideas may lead to other questions, but we will retain focus on Ebonics.

Just starting to think about language

Just starting to think about language a little bit about Language
Ok, I'm going to rant for a second. I HATE MY HUMANITY COURSE.
The professor is intelligent and organized. The Work is changeling as well as though provoking. When I sit in class, I know that having a side conversation would be a major mistake, because the lectures are so filled with content. Although I have very little access to the professor because of the class size, he still manages to answer my emails with helpful advice or information.
NOW
The reading would truly be enjoyable as well, except for one small aspect. EVERY OTHER WORD is MADE UP. They just use complex English words that usually have ambiguous definitions adding "izm", or "istic" to the end, making it useless without a humanities dictionary included in the glossary. For instance, what the heck is 'ethnocentricizm'? (Microsoft Word says that’s spelled wrong, but it doesn't have any suggestions either. Hmm…) What about 'cultural materialism," or possibly the ergonomic 'culturally relative humanistic determinism'? Then we've got the complete other side of the spectrum. Some words would seem to have self explanatory meanings, but somehow (through the magic of anthropology professors I suppose) define entirely ambiguous genres of thought like 'Culture'. According to many anthropologists, ‘culture’ can never be clearly defined by any standards because every aspect of the way an individual thinks and expresses those thoughts and the feedback from those actions in the world around them is implemented in culture. Therefore, to understand culture, you'd have to fully understand every aspect of everything. Or how about this: 'intelligent design creationism'. How about 'God'?
Despite my personal problems with the class, we have been looking at some pretty interesting things lately, and they’ve raised some questions in my mind regarding language. So Ill be considering those a little more in depth as time goes on.