Schema application

Title

Student’s name

Instructor

Course

Date

PEER REVIEW FINAL

It's a common complaint that today's youth are illiterate and that immigrants should take the time to acquire good English grammar and syntax. These complaints assume that there is just one proper manner of expressing oneself verbally and in writing. The prevailing view nowadays is that everyone needs to educate themselves in the art of excellent English speech and writing. Current conventional rhetoric, from which this view of writing stems, emphasizes a formulaic, prescriptive approach to teaching composition based on the assumption that there is only one acceptable method to express any given idea in writing or speech. However, scholars in writing studies have spent the better part of the last several decades investigating how the report is embedded in a dialectical connection with self, form, and context. Put another way, the conventions of writing change depending on the audience, the context, and the subject matter. When speaking to different people or in different settings, people are aware that they alter their tone of voice. All three articles below emphasize the concept that the "identity, style, genre, and culture" of the people for whom a piece of literature is created interact dialectically. 

Anjali Pattanayak, “coordinator of the Academic Enrichment program in the Office of Multicultural Student Affairs at the University of Wisconsin–Platteville,” writes in her article "There is one correct way of writing and speaking" that the correctness in the language in our minority educational system increasingly serves to devalue and separate the identities and cultures that don't conform to the common practices. Pattanayak's primary purpose in writing the piece was to defend the view that there is more than one acceptable manner of expressing oneself through writing. Many persons from various cultural origins may not use "proper" English (Pattanayak, 2017).

According to Pattanayak, these 'unspoken norms,' which have their origins in white upper/middle-class society, change depending on who is engaged and where they live. To elaborate on this theme, she gives the example of how most people alter their communication style when interacting with different groups of people, such as "from bosses to work colleagues," and how topics that might be suitable for discussion over a private dinner might be off-limits in the workplace.

Pattanayak exemplifies why it is crucial to do away with ideas of right and wrong speech. She says that those who don't speak or write what has historically been considered the "King's English" have their intellect and character discounted. As time progresses and other cultural and socioeconomic influences enter the picture, it is only logical that English will change as well. Alterations in society and culture have a knock-on effect on the variety of English spoken today. Pattanayak says that it is our responsibility as a community to be more tolerant of those who speak varieties of English that diverge from "King's English." Moreover, Pattanayak not only cites cultural and socioeconomic distinctions as causes of many varieties of English but also outlines how present conditions, such as who you may be with, will influence the variety of English now being said.

Using J. Elspeth Stuckey's notion that, even at an early age, children feel that they are different from others because of their identity and background, Pattanayak successfully appeals to the reader's emotions. In Stucky's opinion, this does nothing to improve minority students' prospects for success in the job market. Pattanayak elaborates on this point by highlighting the difficulties faced by English language learners and demonstrating how most educational institutions fail to include "social mobility" as a goal in their curricula.

Pattanayak also discusses how young and senior authors' English language choices may be used against them because of the assumptions that might be made about them. That is to say, Pattanayak contends that you shouldn't judge someone more harshly as a person or lessen your respect for them because they use a variant of English with which you disagree. The fact that this is even being considered as a standard by which to evaluate people, she contends, reveals a lot about the intolerance that permeates our culture. Whether you disagree with someone's words or actions does not give you the right to judge their character or value as a human being based on those differences. She also uses this fact to back up her central argument: that the United States educational system must be more accepting of wide varieties of English. Many people's writing reflects the speaker's cultural and social background just as much as the speaker's speaking style. She argues that it is not right to judge someone harshly because they were exposed to a non-"traditional" upbringing or life experience. If people of different cultures think they are not welcome in the United States, they may decide to leave. This sends the message that America is intolerant. This is a major issue for the United States since our country's cultural diversity is a major element of what makes us unique.

The author argues that the insistence on a single correct writing style devalues all other forms of communication. People from lower socioeconomic backgrounds feel embarrassed by the widespread devaluation of written and spoken expression. They were making just one writing style acceptable, and expecting people from diverse social backgrounds to write that way caused tension. The author continues, "In the context of educational settings, the cultures and identities of academics are prized more than those of the students, which gives the message that how they, their family, and people of their community talk and behave are inappropriate by contrast" (83). If there is just one correct technique to teach writing, students will never feel valued for who they are or what they bring to the table. It's improper and immoral to underestimate someone's intellect or character.

The second article, “African American Language Is Not Good English", by Jennifer M. Cunningham, challenges the common belief that African American languages are just variations of English in her collection Bad Ideas about Writing. Many other names have been used to refer to what is now known as the "African American Language," including Ebonics, African American English, Black English, and many more. Many people mistake it for a lower standard of English, but it's a distinct variety of languages (Cunningham. 2020). Linguists contend that it is not English but a different language due to its distinctive vocabulary and pronunciation. Many people mistakenly believe this to be incorrect English; however, it is only a variant of English with its unique grammatical conventions and phonetics. The origin of African American language is the subject of two competing hypotheses. One of them claims that it's an English dialect. The second hypothesis postulates that it evolved via a linguistic fusion between distinct communities that heavily used English. The author thinks the second explanation is more plausible than the first. The grammatical rules of a language, not its vocabulary, are what linguists use to trace its history. Even though most English vocabulary originates from French and Latin, the language is nevertheless classified as Germanic since it follows Germanic norms. Africa and the Niger-Congo region are the origins of African American language. According to this criterion, African American Language may be considered a distinct language. Many negative concords are used to emphasize a point in the African American language. The English word "don't" is roughly equivalent to their term "ain't."

The author contends that African American Language is a distinct language, and its use in speech or writing does not constitute an instance of improper grammar. The author uses several rhetorical strategies, one of which is the extensive use of cases to demonstrate how the African American vernacular alters the original English phrase. When they want to make the sound th, they write it with a d or a t. By providing real-life linguistic examples, the author helps the reader distinguish between standard English and African American speech. Jennifer's various instances are all shown by the author's use of analogies, which she employs both within the same phrase and between English and African American Language. That's why I didn't accept the money, as "I ain't take the money" may also be translated. This is also a successful rhetorical move.

The third article, by John McWhorter, “Blackness and Standard English Can Coexist,” illustrates how Blackness and Standard English can be used together. The author uses examples to make the point. According to the author, Black Americans are doing what people everywhere do: juggling two different languages. The Swiss German they use casually and in official settings is nearly entirely different (Mcwhorter. 2022). The Arabic speaker often speaks official Modern Standard Arabic, derived from the Qur'anic language, and a regional dialect used in everyday situations, such as Egyptian or Moroccan.

The author has illustrated how the English language's pronunciation includes several subgroups. It is a distinct language, and nowadays, individuals frequently create new terminology for it that becomes the buzz in the school. Black English has a long history and is essentially a more straightforward way of speaking that conveys the same meaning (Mcwhorter. 2022). A Black English translation of the passage is also provided. Because it is so straightforward and effective, I see no reason to criticize it. The language is still English and can be used in everyday speech. The only problem is that it is improper. It's concise and straightforward, but it communicates the intended meaning effectively. It's not bad, and it's encouraged to spend time learning about and appreciating your heritage but only up to a point. Honor your roots but don't let them define who you are today.

 The author makes extensive use of ethos in this piece. Ethos refers to the speaker's ability to establish their credibility, expertise, and moral standing as part of their argument and persuasion. To establish credibility as an expert in a certain field and win over readers, all authors use ethos to varying degrees in their work. John H McWhorter is an associate professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University. he uses his vast experience with the english language to drive his point home. He states, “I ask because, of my attempts to encourage students to use their home dialects in writing, Black students in particular often resist those practices as setting them up for failure”(pg 1). This illustrates that the author has worked in this field long enough to understand it. The strongest appeal of this essay is pathos, where the author effectively incorporates emotional language into his writing to connect with his audience and make his argument more relatable.

In summation, the essays successfully employ a healthy mix of ethos, pathos, and logos. The authors establish their authority through ethos by detailing their experience with the subject. By sharing their inner turmoil with the reader, they use pathos to make the reader feel empathy for their plight. Then, the authors add more substance to their texts through logos by quoting other reputable sources.

References

Cunningham. J, M. (2020) "Bad Ideas about Writing," “African-American Language is Not Good English” 

Mcwhorter. J. (2022). Blackness and Standard English Can Coexist. Professors, Take Note.

Pattanayak, A. (2017). There is One Correct Way of Writing and Speaking.  BAD IDEAS, 82.