The argument has nothing to do with language itself but with the role of language
Here he could argue that it is not the fact that Black English causes controversy and conflict but its role in the language or it is not only within Black English but also all other languages in general. He does not judge its right or wrong or its superiority but its role in life
it may very well be that both the child, and his elder, have concluded that they have nothing whatever to learn from the people of a country that has managed to learn so little.
It can be said that America is a multiracial country and it does not have a specific identity, culture has a country. What they have, can be borrowed, transferred, combined from other racial cultures and transformed into their own. And easier and more immediate is the culture of the black people, it can be traced back to the music, slang,.. You can say he was right about what the country has.
a country that makes heroes of so many criminal mediocrities,
Does this mean that people who participate in politics, have a high positions in the state apparatus?
Black people have lost too many black children that way.
He's a reflection of a time when white people synchronized other races with them. They change the way they dress, provide schools, etc. But those things will inject into the heads of children of other races their point of view, which most of us know. It's like a way to eradicate race and culture at the root.
THE BRUTAL TRUTH is that the bulk of white people in America never had any interest in educating black people, except as this could serve white purposes.
This can be evidenced by the fact that from the earliest times when white people used black people as slaves, they taught only what was necessary for black people to serve them and increasingly their work became more important and the amount of knowledge they are forced to learn is also more
if this absolutely unprecedented.journey does not indicate that black English is a language, I am curious to know what definition of language is to be trusted.
The example of himself above supports his statement, and it almost makes sense
If two black people, at that bitter hour of the world's history, had been able to speak to each other, the institution of chattel slavery could never have lasted as long as it did.
This is a confusing example because is there any connection between Chattel slavery and two Black people?
Blacks came to the United States chained to each other, but from different tribes: Neither could speak the other's language.
It is not simply a chain but a bond as each Black tribe has its own language but when they come to America, they all speak the common language they founded, Black English. The bondage makes us almost forget that there are many other tribes and ethnicity, it is not only confined to the phrase "Black people".
white people purified it into the Jazz Age
This could be an example of the "domesticated" part of the previous sentence, that although Jazz was invented by Black people, it is "domesticated" suitable for White people, not only in calling but also in how to enjoy. It is restricted to a race-specific framework.
I do not know what white Americans would sound like if there had never been any black people in the United States, but they would not sound the way they sound.
This statement is a bit confusing for me but he is probably mentioning that Black English is an important part of shaping the way white people pronounce. His implication may be that Black English is the premise of White English. When racism is still acute, every language will be "domesticated" to become suitable for White people, even if it is Black words. What they want is to make the language "more sublime" and Black's language serves as the foundation on which it is built.
black English
why does he mention Black English in this part of the sentence?
There have been, and are, times, and places, when to speak a certain language could be dangerous, even fatal.
This is indeed true about language given its degree of danger and its certain constraints. That danger could include hated speech, or discrimination (seems to be an appropriate example of having to speak and being asked to speak the language of that racial country)
one's ternporal identity.
Language has the role of symbols and other factors to recognize a person's identity, it does not include educational status, class, ethnicity but also language.
although the "common" language of all these areas is French
A good example and this is the case almost everywhere when we have to choose which language is in "higher" position, like choosing a standard language for the country even though it is mostly the same.
But each has paid, and is paying a different price for this "common" language, in which, as it turns out, they are not saying, and cannot be saying, the same things:
Great sentence to tell the reality of language, this is like we create language but let language control us, making them the standard by which we are judged.
People evolve a language in order to describe and this control their circumstances, or in order not to be submerged by a reality that they cannot articulate
This is probably an interesting quote because we use language so much that we forget what it is for, myself included. Its effect when it was invented and I think just like Baldwin said, it's just a tool and if not used properly, it will obscure the meaning that the speaker wants to convey.
Language, incontestably, reveals the speaker.
He may mean that through language it is possible to infer other things of the speaker such as class, status, education, etc. And it's important here to talk about Black English so you can guess the speaker's race and ethnicity.