Asao B. Inoue's Infrequent Words

Entry 35 In posts 30 , 32 , 33 , and 34 , I discussed the CCSS L.11-12.1 anchor standard and the first of the standards underneath it (L.11-12.1.A). Now, consider the second standard, L.11-12.1.B. It is equally problematic as the first. And it works to maintain the white language supremacy, or a single standard that is dominant in all schools and colleges. It also exemplifies a problem that such standards tend to have when used in classrooms. It’s a problem of circularity, of being one’s own judge.  L.11-12.1.B states, “Resolve issues of complex or contested usage, consulting references (e.g., Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage , Garner's Modern American Usage ) as needed.” This standard reinforces white habits of English language in classrooms by using as a yardstick the very standard being contested. So according to this standard, the way you resolve a contested usage is to consult references that point back to the standard. Do you see the problem? This is overdet...

Entry 34 My examples of Faulkner, Walker, and MF DOOM ( post 33 ) show change in language over time as well as variation -- that is, language contesting -- even if such changes are unacknowledged. And, it should be pointed out that Strunk and White agree on this point (see post 25 ). They explain, “language is perpetually in flux: it is a living stream, shifting, changing, receiving new strength from a thousand tributaries, losing old forms in the backwaters of time” ( note 236 ). What do you think those “thousand tributaries” are? They are various English languagings that are not at that time considered by those in power to be standardized. They are Black Englishes, and multilingual Englishes, Southern Englishes, and Midwestern Englishes, not to mention other languages, Spanishes, Frenches, etc. (picture from USGS Twitter account ) Language ain’t never been static nor still. The Russian linguist Valentin Nikolaevich Voloshinov explains this dynamic of language as the “ceaseless ge...

Entry 33 A big part of using any set of literacy standards or learning outcomes in a classroom are the models used to demonstrate such things to students. Sometimes the models are dictated by required curricula and sometimes they’re chosen by teachers. An antiracist orientation would help a teacher to consider the nature and histories of their models of “good writing” in ways that implicate the models and teachers in white supremacist and racist systems, even as many of us are required to use those models in our classrooms as teaching devices. The kind of antiracist orientation I’m speaking of in effect asks: Who does the model represent in society and our classroom? How is that representation, and the habits of language it assumes, connected to the history of racism and WLS in society? Who is that ideal embodied languageling that the model invokes or conjures and what are its effects when circulated in our classroom? How do we (teachers and students) make sure that we do not reproduce...