Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I associate ebonics with stupidity because it "sounds" illiterate.

It shouldn't need to be taught at schools. Most people that speak it (african americans and, unfortunately, white kids) also understand the English language. They shouldn't need to be "taught" in rap speak to get an education.

A black man understands the phrase "what are you looking at?" They don't need the teacher to say to them "whatchoo lookin at?" when they understand the first one just as well as the second.

This is getting off track so I think we can discontinue the conversation about "rap speak" (which I'm always going to refer to it as because I think rappers have the biggest influence on people NOT wanting to learn the proper dialect).

Are Cajuns considered "gak eaters" for the way they speak? It seems silly that people are considered illiterate for speaking in a regional tongue.

Frazzled wrote:Thats not quite accurate. It depends on region. French was repressed by English speakers in Louisiana. In contrast Germans and Czechs coming into Texas tended to congregate in wilderness areas, and spoke native langauges but converted to English quickly on the whole. They needed it as English was the language for trade.
in other areas Spanish remained common.

It was completely accurate, as I never made any mention of everyone keeping to their mother tongue as your rebuttal seems to assume. As you point out people in different areas adopted English at different rates, which makes the original claim quite funny.

This man should run for President in 2012.

Border defense FTW

The Federal government is officially not obeying the law of the land

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/21/official-says-feds-process-illegals-referred-arizona/

dogma wrote:I am highly amused by Fateweaver's invocation of English propriety.

Only 3-4 posters on this board speak 'proper' English.

Oh, Hai!

Also, Is Dora the Explorer and Illegal Immigrant??????????!??!!?!?!?

Frazzled wrote:The Federal government is officially not obeying the law of the land

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/21/official-says-feds-process-illegals-referred-arizona/

I like how they repeated the last four paragraphs twice to reinforce the fact that he's a bad American. Great journalism! Does arizona law enforcement fall under the DHS' sphere of direct control?

if they don't enforce the actual processing of the illegals, yea.

Frazzled wrote:The Federal government is officially not obeying the law of the land

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/21/official-says-feds-process-illegals-referred-arizona/

I don't see a quote indicating that Morton does not intend to enforce the law. I see a quote, from Napolitano, which indicates that ICE has the final say in deportation and processing, which is absolutely true. I also see a lot of paraphrasing to convey a desired message. If a smoking gun statement existed, it would be in the article.

Saying that a certain set of laws are not the solution, or that they are not indicative of good governance does not indicate that one will not enforce them anyway; which itself a moot point in this case as Morton has nothing to do with the enforcement of Arizona law.

WarOne wrote:

For those who will rally, I hope you believe in what you will be defending, as there are equally spirited people on the other side of the picket fence waiting for you.

Too bad they didn't show up.... Rally was a great success, thanks to all who could make it.

There is no empirically 'stupid' quality to it.

It could be argued that any dialect which loses verb tenses, or otherwise is stripped of meaning has a more "stupid" quality to it.

I'm not exactly an expert on Ebonics, but my impression is that it's lost some of the nuance of "standard" English.

The other issue is that there's no formal standard for Ebonics, so it's "stupid" insofar as it has minimal established scholarship, uniformity of use, etc.

It'd be one thing if every Ebonics speaker used the same patterns and variations from "standard" English, but, in reality it's more a catchall term applied to anything that black folks say that isn't standard. It's just more of an "excuse" than an actual dialect.

Fateweaver wrote:

This man should run for President in 2012.

Nice, I'd liketo shake his hand.

Arizona can kiss my ass.

LA is saying the same thing to AZ.

Will be funny when AZ cuts power to LA, it blacks out and LA gets looted and rioted.

I'll be applauding AZ if they do.

LA can burn too. If I'm down in Arizona, and the local Gestapo asks for my ID whilst I'm walking, they're getting told to OBEY THE FORUM POSTING RULES !

How is asking for ID Violating your rights?

If you get asked to show ID when NOT being stopped for doing something illegal than it's a problem.

The law does NOT give police permission to ask ID just to ask for ID. If you are breaking the law they can ask for papers.

Sure there will be an asshat or 3 who will do just that but most will only ask you for papers if they stop you for doing something stupid like speeding or running a sign.

But I applaud you joining in the millions who think this immigration law is unconstitutional and racist. I'm glad AZ is giving Obama the finger and doing what Obama SHOULD be doing. Of course he won't because he is more worried about making himself look good than protecting the citizens of this country.

So I applaud you for being brave enough to be against something that the majority of the country is for.

Fateweaver wrote:If you get asked to show ID when NOT being stopped for doing something illegal than it's a problem.

The law does NOT give police permission to ask ID just to ask for ID. If you are breaking the law they can ask for papers.

Sure there will be an asshat or 3 who will do just that but most will only ask you for papers if they stop you for doing something stupid like speeding or running a sign.

But I applaud you joining in the millions who think this immigration law is unconstitutional and racist. I'm glad AZ is giving Obama the finger and doing what Obama SHOULD be doing. Of course he won't because he is more worried about making himself look good than protecting the citizens of this country.

So I applaud you for being brave enough to be against something that the majority of the country is for.

I live in PA, and we have a huge immigration problem here. I wish we could come up with something this nifty.

And I applaud you for being one of those millions willinng to sell more of our constitution so we can keep the mexicans out.

I am all for immigration laws. I think illegal immigration is a very large issue. So why are we not fining all the corporations and businesses that utilize illegal labor? You don't care about that. You're totally ok with this country morphing into a police state, aren't you?

So, yes, I'm against a law that a bunch of uneducated drones support because they buy into the fear mongering of the Right.

Phryxis wrote:

There is no empirically 'stupid' quality to it.

It could be argued that any dialect which loses verb tenses, or otherwise is stripped of meaning has a more "stupid" quality to it.

I'm not exactly an expert on Ebonics, but my impression is that it's lost some of the nuance of "standard" English.

The other issue is that there's no formal standard for Ebonics, so it's "stupid" insofar as it has minimal established scholarship, uniformity of use, etc.

It'd be one thing if every Ebonics speaker used the same patterns and variations from "standard" English, but, in reality it's more a catchall term applied to anything that black folks say that isn't standard. It's just more of an "excuse" than an actual dialect.

It's the left that is wanting to sell the constitution (actually, they want to rewrite it to make it more "minority friendly").

They do get fined when found to be hiring illegals. You think Target is worried by a $3M fine for hiring some illegals (if they were ever caught doing so)? Target Corp makes that in probably 1 hour time frame world wide.

I love the leftist "uneducated right". I got a better education in HS using "right leaning history books" than the mindless drones these days who use "left leaning" history books, ie the PC version of history and not the 'what actually happened' version of history.

Most of the liberals I've encountered lack common sense and street smarts. So you have a PhD but when you lack common sense that PhD does you no good because you still look the fool.

Ok, lemme get a few things straight. I agree there should be immigration reform. I agree illegal immigration is a very troubling trend.

I disagree with the image that most of the country agrees with this law. It IS unconstitutional. It is also a ploy by the right to desperately gain ground on the left.

Take John McCain for example. All of the sudden he's all for the strictest possible laws for illegals. Where was this sentiment years ago? Where was the right when they had control of this country? John McCain certainly didn't say these things back then, not with the gusto he is now.

Oh wait, his senate seat is in trouble? What a coincidence.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I consider myself a democrat. I voted for Obama. Am I pleased with how he's done so far? No, not entirely. However, I'm willing to cut him some slack. He's our president, after all. I hope he does the best he can and gets us back to, at least, pre-bush status.

But these little gimmicks the Right is throwing out are really childish. Vowing not to work with the left in the senate. Passing these vogue immigration laws. People gotta open up their eyes a little bit and realize just how nuts these guys really are.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry for the double there.

SB1070 iS NOT unconstitutional. It enforces the immigration laws set forth decades ago that the fed. government stopped enforcing post 1920's.

The constitution gives states the right to make their own laws or to help enforce the laws of the federal government. SB1070 breaks no Constitutional amendments. The closest thing it does to that is violating illegal search and siezure (the 4th amendment). But it doesn't promote it nor does it skirt the 4th amendment. If police are going to violate the 4th amendment they were doing it before SB1070.

Liberals should be all for SB1070 if they feel it's unconstitutional. After all, no liberal I've met or ever known thinks the Constitution should remain as it is so if it's unconstitutional it SHOULD get the liberal seal of approval.

Really don't want to get into another Shuma/Fate type of thread. Check out any poll on the web and the majority opinion is in favor of SB1070.

Again, enforcing a Federal law is NOT unconstituional, creating laws that don't violate the constitution is a power given to states BY the constitution. SB1070 is not that law. See my sig for what the Costitution is meant to do. PresBO wanting to punish AZ for SB1070 IS unconstitutional, FYI.

Fateweaver wrote:SB1070 iS NOT unconstitutional. It enforces the immigration laws set forth decades ago that the fed. government stopped enforcing post 1920's.

This is exactly why it's unconstitutional, Fate. Only the federal government has the authority to enact immigration law.

Fateweaver wrote:Liberals should be all for SB1070 if they feel it's unconstitutional. After all, no liberal I've met or ever known thinks the Constitution should remain as it is so if it's unconstitutional it SHOULD get the liberal seal of approval.

This is inane.

Fateweaver wrote:Again, enforcing a Federal law is NOT unconstituional, creating laws that don't violate the constitution is a power given to states BY the constitution. SB1070 is not that law.

You're right, it's not a law that doesn't violate the constitution. And the parts of it that don't violate the constitution are, alternatively, ill thought out and redundant.

@Warboss: Don't know how they do things down under, but here the states have the power to make any laws they want as long as its A) constitutionally acceptable, and B) doesn't tread on any federal laws already in place. SB1070 meets both requirements, and therefore is perfectly legal

Well, no. It's not constitutionally acceptable, because the states don't have the authority to enact immigration laws.

If you don't like it, take it up with the Supremacy Clause and how the Supreme Court has interpreted it over the years. Beyond that, there's not really anything to discuss.

Fateweaver, I am sure you aware that the constitution contains provisions for it to be modified.

It has been modified a number of times. These modifications are called the Amendments.

Do you believe all these amendments were made at the insistence of liberals?

Phryxis wrote:
It could be argued that any dialect which loses verb tenses, or otherwise is stripped of meaning has a more "stupid" quality to it.

I'm not sure that 'ebonics' has stripped English of meaning. I've seen words re-appropriated, but I've not seen them entirely dissolved. At least not to any greater extent than occurs in any other impoverished, poorly educated population. Granted, its difficult to note an absence, but I feel that the sum of the matter is nothing more than generative evolution.

Phryxis wrote:
I'm not exactly an expert on Ebonics, but my impression is that it's lost some of the nuance of "standard" English.

My impression of 'standard' English is one that presumes it lacks any form of nuance. I've had more than enough arguments to presume that either I speak a 'higher' form of the language, or other do not speak it at all.

Phryxis wrote:
It'd be one thing if every Ebonics speaker used the same patterns and variations from "standard" English, but, in reality it's more a catchall term applied to anything that black folks say that isn't standard. It's just more of an "excuse" than an actual dialect.

How, then, do we categorize regional peculiarities like 'bubbler' (referring to a drinking fountain) or 'Coke' (in the sense that it refers to any soft drink)? There are many informal elements to all languages.

What denotes proper English? American English, or British English?

languages, especially english, aren't necessarily good or bad, they're tools that adapt to the needs of the culture, so if ebonics is truly useful, it's fine.


What worries me is that it's a voluntary, outward sign of embracing "other" status by speakers. I'm sympathetic to the idea that marginalized minority would seek to take pride and embrace that marginalized status, but I have a hard time encouraging that behavior. It's only going to make things more difficult for individuals who only speak in that dialect to move outside of the community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:Fateweaver, I am sure you aware that the constitution contains provisions for it to be modified.

It has been modified a number of times. These modifications are called the Amendments.

Do you believe all these amendments were made at the insistence of liberals?

I'm guessing he's referring more to the idea of a living constitution, in which the same text is interpreted more in the "spirit of the times", compared to originalism which seeks to interpret the constitution according to the original intent of the framers (as seen in letters, diaries, debates etc. of the time.)

It is a current weakness in some branches of liberal thought, because while constitutional interpretation does change over time (Plessy v. Fergesun and Brown v. Board were both decided on the same relevant constitutional passages), the less permament the constitution is, the less stable our entire legal system is. This is one reason stare decisis, is so important. It means, essentially, "it's been decided", and so the following of precedent is key to justice.

Of course, this is just another Fateweaver strawman that he takes out when gets bored, but at least this one has some point behind it.