On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:
_government publications_, I think this problem is solved by anarchy. Short of anarchy, I don't see how any government larger than a truly tiny core set can possibly pubish official documents, ballots, traffic signs, driver's license tests, and so on, in the several dozen languages that the basic brown types are now clamoring for.
But Tim, you've just hit on the perfect solution! How 'bout each year the CPunks lobby for another language to be protected? When no law can be passed without being first translated into over 1000 languages, lawmaking will be impossible, and our work will be done. Seriously, though, most of the discussion of the Ebonics issue on this list has been based on a dangerous misconception. At no point has _anyone_ suggested that courses be taught in Ebonics, that Ebonics be taught as a language, or that all faculty be fluent in Ebonics. What _has_ happened is that Ebonics has been added to the list of languages which some students are coming into the school program speaking better than they speak English. Ebonics just goes alongside Spanish, several dialects of Chinese, and a number of other languages whose native speakers may get help from the school district in learning English. I think this approach is foolishness, as it stigmatizes and seperates a group who are not already cut off from the rest of the community, unlike speakers of other designated languages. (Unlike Laotian or Spanish, a `native speaker' of Ebonics can understand `standard' english). This is a far cry from the `mandataed speaking of Ebonics' which CPunks seem so up in arms about. No such program exists or has existed. At any rate, as someone already pointed out, the main reason for the designation of Ebonics as a language is that it overnight doubled the number of students whom Oakland can count towards federal matching funds for ESL... -- Jim Wise jim@santafe.arch.columbia.edu http://www.arch.columbia.edu/~jim * Finger for PGP public key *