Language Diversity in the Classroom - ymerleksi - home

110 Language Diversity in the Classroomprinciple holds regardless of the languages under comparison. AsLenneberg (1967) observed, there are no ‘primitive’ languages, novarieties that are inherently more complete or more logical than others;‘logic’ in languages is simply a synonym for ‘grammar’. Lenneberg’sobservation is only one example of a broadly held linguistic conviction;the fact that it was made when the ‘deficit’ perspective on disadvantagewas at its peak is an indication of how linguistically ill-informed were thetheorists of ‘verbal deprivation’. (When I equate logic with grammar,incidentally, I obviously prescind from arguments for an underlyingdeep ‘logic’ common to all languages.) Similar insights apply to dialects ‘just as there is no linguistic reason for arguing that Gaelic is superiorto Chinese, so no English dialect can be claimed to be linguisticallysuperior or inferior to any other’ (Trudgill, 1975: 26), and this chapter willprovide supporting evidence.(There is, of course, ample evidence that beyond the enlightened anddata-driven assessments of scholars languages and dialects are not allof equal, or potentially equal, value. Fishman has made the point,directly and indirectly, throughout his work (e.g. Fishman, 1980, 1987;García, 1991). And Mackey (1978: 7) pointed out, some time ago, that‘only before God and the linguist are all languages equal. Everyoneknows that you can go further with some languages than you can withothers’. We shall certainly see supporting evidence for this, here and inother chapters.)By an early age, and certainly by the time they go to school, allchildren within the normal range of intelligence have acquired a fluentgrasp of their maternal variety. Since, as we shall see, all dialects are fullyfledged, rule-governed systems across which comparisons of ‘better’ or‘worse’ cannot legitimately be made, then it follows that all childrenlearn ‘proper’ or ‘correct’ language. While ‘a fluent grasp’ is not the sameas a perfect one, some linguists maintain that children are on the road tothis perfection, that they are learning a proper language properly. Inconsidering this proposition, Trudgill (1975) notes that we all make slipsof the tongue, or say things that we don’t mean to; fatigue is often a factorhere, of course. He also realizes that we sometimes use words withoutknowing their proper or accepted meaning. He adds that, if we intend tospeak in a particular dialect but then use a word or phrase from another,this could be construed as a mistake; terms like ‘style’, ‘register’ and‘jargon’ could be substituted for ‘dialect’ here. And finally, Trudgillaccepts that we often make mistakes in speaking a language that is notour first. But he is adamant that: