It is becoming apparent to me that much of my writing whether through linguistic analysis or otherwise is anecdotal. In keeping with this trend I begin with a situation, which occurred last year in my classroom. One of my students who was habitually late to class would often argue that he saw no reason why it was such a big deal to be on time. In hindsight, I would attribute our differences of opinion to age and possibly class. Although I am unsure if there are any studies which explain class and its relationship to time orientation, there are studies that would attempt to explain the language exchanged in our debates. For the sake of comfort I will focus mostly on the sociolinguistic elements of our conversation, how they affected my perception of my student, and how other elements, which occurred after the conversation, produced a different affect. My hope also is for the reader to see how the use of the “N” word, which continues to be controversial among African Americans young and old, has played a significant role in my evolution as an educator and student of the English language.
Consider the following statement: “Mr. Knight ‘yous a diffr’int type a nigga”. One noticeable linguistic element here is the use of the term “yous” which in some non-standard dialects is used as the 2nd person form of the word “I”. In this example however, it is used as the first person since he was only addressing me. Another feature of this sentence is the use of the letter “a”(pronounced uh) which replaces the word “are” and acts as a contraction for the phrase “you are a” as in the more standardized form of “Mr. Knight you are a different type of Nigger”. Other acceptable statements which would convey the same meaning are: You a’ diffrint’ kinda’ Nigga, You a diffrint’ type nigga’, You a diffrint’ kind nigga” and “You a diffrint’ konna nigga”. In my experience through personal usage and as a witness in other urban settings these different variations of the phrase are interchangeable. These examples are consistent with Peter Trudgill’s findings which report that in most localized English dialects there is a great degree of variation as opposed to standardized forms where there is little (40).
The last obvious element is of course the use of the “N” word, which possesses a sordid etymology that would be unnecessary to explain. This is what my student said to me after several classes where I pleaded my case why he should be on time. Initially his statement, which seemed to be an indication of dismissal or disbelief of the very notion of promptness, was an insult for two reasons. The first was because our difference in age. Although the use of this term between African Americans is long standing, those in my age group especially those who are college educated use it sparingly at best and only in select company. I can recall old episodes of television shows such as “Sanford and Son” and “The Jeffersons” where “nigga” was used only for dramatic or comedic effect. Enter the 21st century. It is now used frequently especially among urban youth. The effect however, has been diminished. The second reason I was offended was that his statement at the time seemed to be an extreme form of disrespect. It was in my opinion a glaring violation of a social relationship between teacher and student that I refused to acknowledge as dissolving or nonexistent.
This episode gives credence to Fernando Penalosa’s statement that “language varieties survive because of their functional differentiation, and their status derives largely from the functions they serve”(83). In this case, although I was fully aware of the function of the “N” word as a term to indicate companionship (as in my nigga) or as a gender identifier much like guy or dude, my age and preoccupation with class and status only allowed me to hear its negative connotation.
It seems that in our linguistic frames of reference my student and I were on familiar ground. However, because we differed fundamentally on the usage of this one word, a breakdown in communication occurred. In this instance, we both felt disrespected. Because of one simple phrase and others similar in style I dismissed the very notion that he may have never been exposed to the value of promptness at least in the classroom setting. It is possible that I was desensitized because of the homogeneous language styles and over usage of the “N” word throughout the school to receive any viable messages. The fact that he was a new student could have also been a contributing factor to his slowness to adjust to the lateness policy.
Whatever the case, our failure to see eye to eye on the issue of lateness was essentially due to the problems presented by standardization of the language and its rejection of the “N” word as profane. Each time my student was late I reminded him of the lateness policy conveniently placed on my bulletin board. Although this act was supposed to follow the “unifying function” of language referenced by Penalosa ,which addresses an adherence to the standardized form (87), my student in turn, responded to the formalized lateness policy with more lateness and colorful language, which is referred to as the “separatist function which preserved his integrity as a separate class” (87). It is only when I decided to have a series of “real” discussions with him in which I tried to give real life examples of the consequences of tardiness that he began to respond. For example, I asked him how he would feel if he lost a job or if someone he loved was hurt as a result. After these conversations his lateness was not as frequent but he still referred to me as “a different type a nigga”.
After this series of events I only had a chance to speak to this individual one final time. He seemed more at peace with his surroundings. Although he had not quite beaten the lateness problem, he was getting better. His lateness had decreased from 20 minutes after the bell to 5. When we spoke he said that he had a better understanding of what I meant and we had reached the “frame of reference” (87) function within our communication, which equally served us both even though he was no longer in my class. Later that night, he was killed in a gang related incident and I learned something new about language.
I realized that beneath all of the rules and theories of language, communication is always waiting to be utilized. Using the frame of reference style that Penalosa spoke of allowed me to see my student (whose name was Jalal by the way) as a person and not a dialect or a language variety.
The word he frequently used, started out as black (negro). It was transformed into an utterance that was used to enslave. Eventually, it developed a beat and became music to urban youth everywhere. To them, the definition of nigga was always black. They were never made to watch Alex Haley’s “Roots” on T.V. or be exposed to any of the historical resources that would cause violent responses to its usage. In fact, it would be safe to say that their exposure to the word has been more in a hip-hop context then any other. Because of my historical relationship to the word, I still cannot embrace it even with its new spelling. But despite the protests of older generations against it, it is as resilient as the spirits it was created to break. I find it interesting that throughout the last 3 decades nigger has become a different kind of word, creating a different kind of standard in a different kind of world. I have even considered the possibility that my student Jalal was paying me a compliment when he referred to me as such. It would be a shame if I let it be buried with him and by my own pompous.
