As he put it, “The blended form is our dues” (351). They dont have to learnto the rules to write rite first; the blended form or code meshing is writin rite.
QUOTE – Strong line about how blended, code-meshed writing is already legit and earned, especially for writers of color. Good for a conclusion or identity section.
What we need to dois enlarge our perspective about what good writin is and how good writin can lookat work, at home, and at school.
QUOTE – Useful for explaining that “good writing” can look different in different contexts, not just one Standard English model.
Code meshing is the new code switching; it’s mulitdialectalism and pluralingual-ism in one speech act, in one paper.
QUOTE – Clear definition of code meshing I can use in my key terms paragraph.
The narrow, prescriptive lens be messin writersand readers all the way up, cuz we all been taught to respect the dominant way towrite, even if we dont, cant, or wont ever write that one way ourselves. That behegemony. Internalized oppression. Linguistic self-hate.
Impact – When “good writing” is defined only as dominant Standard English, writers can start to believe their own voices are wrong. Young names this as hegemony, internalized oppression, and “linguistic self-hate.” This connects directly to my focus on belonging and disengagement.
The contraction “nothing’s,” the colloquial phrase “common guy,” and the ver-nacular expression “punked,” are neither unusual nor sensational. Yet, when theseexamples get compared to the advice giving about code switching, you get a glar-ing contradiction.
Young points out the contradiction: professionals are allowed to use everyday / vernacular language, but students are told they must use “standard English only.” Good evidence for a language + power section.
(3) ChrisAnn Cleland, a real estate agent from Virginia, express disappointment aboutPresident Obama’s economic plan in an interview with the Washington Post (Rich):“Nothing’s changed for the common guy,” she said. “I feel likeI’ve been punked.”(4) Referencing Cleland’s remark, the title of New York Times columnist FrankRich’s Op-ed article asks: “Is Obama Punking Us?” Rich writes in the last para-graph of his article:“The larger fear is that Obama might be just another corporatist,punking voters much as the Republicans do when they claim tobe all for the common guy.”
Example – Word “punked,” which comes from Black language, being used by white professionals in mainstream media. Shows how Black English moves into “respectable” spaces while students are still told it’s not appropriate for school writing.
Middle class aspirations and an academic career have rubbed offon me, fo sho, but all hell or Texas gotta freeze over befo yousee me copping out on a genuine respect and love for my nativetongue. [...] That’s from the heart, you know. But I don’t expecta lot of folks to feel me. (3)
Example – College writing scholar Kermit Campbell using blended dialect (“fo sho,” “befo”) inside an academic book. This is code meshing in published scholarship and proves that serious academic writing can include home language and still be legitimate.
(1) Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley sent two tweets to President Obamain June 2009 (Werner). His messages blend together common txtng abbrvs., standardEnglish grammar and a African American rhetorical technique:First Tweet: “Pres Obama you got nerve while u sightseeing inParis to tell us ‘time to deliver’ on health care. We still on skedul/even workinWKEND.”Second Tweet: “Pres Obama while u sightseeing in Paris u said‘time to delivr on healthcare’ When you are a ‘hammer’ u thinkevrything is NAIL I’m no NAIL.”
Example – Senator Grassley mixes texting abbreviations, caps, punctuation, and a Black rhetorical move (loud-talking). Shows that “code meshing” happens in professional/political contexts, not just with students’ home language.
I call it CODE MESHING!Code meshing is the new code switching; it’s mulitdialectalism and pluralingual-ism in one speech act, in one paper.
DEFINITION – code meshing = mixing multiple dialects/languages in the same text. Key term for my project.
Instead of prescribing how folks should write or speak, I say we teach languagedescriptively. This mean we should, for instance, teach how language functionswithin and from various cultural perspectives. And we should teach what it taketo understand, listen, and write in multiple dialects simultaneously. We shouldteach how to let dialects comingle, sho nuff blend together, like blending the dia-lect Fish speak and the black vernacular that, say, a lot—certainly not all—blackpeople speak.
Young’s solution: don’t force one ‘proper’ English. Teach how different dialects work and how they can mix. This is his code-meshing pedagogy.
Standard language ideologyis the belief that there is one set of dominant language rules that stem from a singledominant discourse (like standard English) that all writers and speakers of Englishmust conform to in order to communicate effectively.
DEFINITION – ‘standard language ideology.’ Use this as background concept in my paper.
But dont nobody’s language, dialect, or style make them “vulnerable to preju-dice.” It’s ATTITUDES. It be the way folks with some power perceive other people’slanguage.
Young: It’s not the language itself that’s the problem — it’s the attitudes of people in power. Good for explaining how students’ home dialects get treated as defective.
And that’s my exact argument, that we all should know everybody’s dialect,at least as many as we can, and be open to the mix of them in oral and writtencommunication (Young).
THESIS – Young says everyone should learn and be open to multiple dialects and allow them to mix in writing/speaking. This supports students using home language in academic writing.
Cultural critic Stanley Fish come talkin bout—in his three-piece New York Times“What Should Colleges Teach?” suit—there only one way to speak and write toget ahead in the world, that writin teachers should “clear [they] mind of the ortho-doxies that have taken hold in the composition world” (“Part 3”).
Intro – Young uses code-meshed English on purpose. Sets up Fish as the person arguing for only one ‘correct’ English as the path to success.
Vershawn Ashanti Young: Should Writer’s Use They Own English?What would a composition course based on the method I urge looklike? [...] First, you must clear your mind of [the following...]:“We affirm the students’ right to their own patterns and varietiesof language—the dialects of their nurture or whatever dialectsin which they find their own identity and style.”--Stanley Fish, “What Should Colleges Teach? Part 3.”
Young is responding to Fish + ‘Students’ Right to Their Own Language.’ Sets up a debate about whose English belongs in college writing. Connects to my research question about home language in academic spaces.
There is an urgent need to have confianzabetween schools and community programs. Commu-nity programs such as MANOS deserve institutionalsupport, while at the same time maintaining opera-tional distance from those institutions providingsupport.
Implication / So what: Alvarez argues that schools should build trusting relationships with community programs like MANOS so they can better support emergent bilingual families. This connects to my project because it suggests that writing classrooms should see students’ home language practices as resources and partner with community spaces that already value those practices.
Flor’s composition illustrates her translanguag-ing as she inventively captures in writing how shemakes sense of what she hears.
Example – Flor: Flor writes English words the way they sound to her, mixing Spanish and English. Instead of correcting her immediately, Amy lets her keep translanguaging and later helps her and her mom practice spelling together. This shows how bilingual homework spaces can validate kids’ language practices instead of framing them as “wrong.”
“My mom wants to talk to you,” saideight-year- old Nico as soon as hesaw me. I was one of Nico’s regu-lar tutors at the Mexican American Network of Stu-dents (MANOS) after-school homework assistanceprogram (names of the program and participants arepseudonyms). I greeted his mother Evelyn and him,and then she said something to Nico in Spanish; heset down his backpack, opened it, and pulled outa piece of paper. He handed me his language artsspelling test from the previous week. The first thingI saw was the large 55% written across the top inred ink.
Example – Nico: Alvarez uses Nico’s spelling test and his mom’s concern to show how kids act as language brokers during homework. Nico translates between Spanish and English and helps plan a strategy to improve his spelling. This example supports the idea that bilingual kids’ home-language skills are central to their schooling experiences.
This article draws from a larger research projectinto how emergent bilingualism transformed fam-ily relations and structured educational ambitionsamong MANOS families and mentors. Ten first-generation, Mexican-origin immigrant families (10mothers, 22 children) living in New York City werethe focus of my study, all members of MANOS—asmall, underfunded, self-sustained educationalmentoring program whose core of 11 dedicatedvolunteers were also study participants.
Method / Evidence: Alvarez uses qualitative research and long-term fieldwork at the MANOS after-school program with 10 Mexican-origin families. He collected field notes, interviews, recordings, photos, and copies of homework. This matters because it shows his claims come from observing real homework interactions, not just theory.
Language brokering isone such practice—a fun-damental one to under-standing the engagementof social relations inbilingual and biculturalexperiences of familiesin immigrant, language-minoritized communi-ties.
Key term – language brokering: Alvarez defines language brokering as when children/teens translate or mediate for adults. It’s “fundamental” for understanding bilingual families’ social relationships. For my research, this shows how kids’ home language skills create real responsibility and authority, which can affect how they see themselves as learners and writers.
Translanguaging treats the hybridsense-making practices of emergent bilinguals asadditive for language development, and stronglycounters subtractive English- only pedagogies (Gar-cía, 2011a; García & Kleifgen, 2010).
Key term – translanguaging: Here, Alvarez defines translanguaging as the hybrid, flexible ways emergent bilinguals use all their languages together. He frames it as additive (a strength) and says it challenges English-only teaching. This helps my project because it shows how home-language practices aren’t “wrong,” but actually support learning.
In this article, I portray two trans-languaging events that demonstrate how MANOSmentees, their mothers, and adult mentors collabor-atively enacted dynamic forms of bilingualism whenresponding to English language homework assign-ments. The translanguaging events offer insight intoparental involvement in an intimate setting with anattitude that embraces bilingualism amid classroomStandard English language learning constraints(Hernandez-Zamora, 2010; Murillo, 2012).
Thesis / Main Idea: Alvarez argues that by looking closely at “translanguaging events” in the MANOS after-school homework program, we can see how emergent bilingual youth act as language brokers for their parents. These bilingual homework interactions show that students’ home language practices are powerful resources that schools often ignore or undervalue, especially around English-only expectations.
Steven Alvarez
RQ: How does using home languages/dialects in writing/homework affect students’ engagement and sense of belonging as writers?
My experience as a college writing instructor for 32 years, and as a writer, editor, and consultant for nearly 20 years
Method/evidence: Essayistic argument using experiential and anecdotal evidence (teaching tenure, professional roles, stories).
What this lets the author prove (and what it can’t): It shows practitioner perspective and patterns he’s observed, but not generalized causal proof from empirical studies.
My experience as a college writing instructor for 32 years, and as a writer, editor, and consultant for nearly 20 years, suggests that one of the best things we can do for students is to help them master standard English.
Jenkins argues that students should master Standard American English (SAE) because it is essential for professional communication and success.
Keywords the author leans on: standard American English, workplace, norms, professionalism.
Author(s): Jenkins, Rob.
“Title of Source”: “We Must Help Students Master Standard English.”
Title: The Chronicle of Higher Education (Advice).
Date: 10 Apr. 2018.
URL: https://www.chronicle.com/article/we-must-help-students-master-standard-english/?sra=true
In short, standard American English is not inherently racist. It is not merely a “tool of the patriarchy.” It is a tool for anyone who wishes to use it
Why this quote matters to my theme: It directly rebuts claims that SAE is inherently discriminatory and frames it as an open tool.
Signal phrase I might use: Jenkins concludes, “In short, standard American English is not inherently racist…”
Later that day I received a reply from a young bank employee offering further details. Actually, I have no idea if she was young — I just assumed she was because her long e-mail was full of emoticons and text-messaging abbreviations — including, I kid you not, “LOL.”
Gatekeeping vs. pragmatics: Jenkins frames SAE as practical for credibility with unknown audiences, while Young critiques “Standard English” as gatekeeping that marginalizes nonstandard varieties. (Used for concept-map edge between Jenkins / Young.)
Later that day I received a reply from a young bank employee offering further details. Actually, I have no idea if she was young — I just assumed she was because her long e-mail was full of emoticons and text-messaging abbreviations — including, I kid you not, “LOL.”
What the example demonstrates: Informal dialect/features can undermine perceived professionalism and lead to lost business.
How I will connect it later: workplace expectations for tone/register (Jenkins) / critique of gatekeeping (Young).
A good friend of mine grew up in a very small town in the Deep South.
Limitation: The argument relies heavily on anecdotes (friend’s accent, mortgage email, class vignettes) rather than empirical workplace studies; this invites counter-evidence in synthesis.
Why this matters for my synthesis: I’ll weigh experiential authority against research-based claims from other sources.
In the workplace, we’re communicating with people we don’t know personally or even have never met. All they know about us is what they can infer from reading an email or a report we wrote. And on that basis, they will make inferences — about our competence, our intelligence, our level of education.
Paraphrase: In professional settings, unfamiliar audiences judge competence and education from language alone, so using SAE affects perceived credibility.
Which part of the theme this supports: Audience diversity and stakes of impression management justify SAE.
In one class, my 24 students spoke 17 languages. I can tell you from experience that those students were eager to master standard American English — once I explained to them what it is (and isn’t) and how it could benefit them. They saw it as a key that could unlock the world of higher-paying employment.
What the example demonstrates: Multilingual students treat SAE as economic access and actively pursue it.
How I will connect it later: access via SAE (Jenkins) to/from identity/voice via code-meshing (Lysicott).
. In one class, my 24 students spoke 17 languages. I can tell you from experience that those students were eager to master standard American English — once I explained to them what it is (and isn’t) and how it could benefit them. They saw it as a key that could unlock the world of higher-paying employment.
Access vs. identity: Jenkins emphasizes SAE as a key to employment, while Lysicott foregrounds code-meshing to honor identity and agency within academic/professional spaces. (Used for concept-map edge between Jenkins/Lysicott.)
The only purpose of language is to communicate, and if the language or dialect you use in a particular situation allows you to do so, then it is effective.
Why this quote matters to my theme: It centers communication effectiveness as the standard, supporting SAE as situationally pragmatic.
Signal phrase I might use: According to Jenkins, “The only purpose of language is to communicate…”
That’s why we have a standardized language in the first place.
Term + my working definition:
Standardized language = shared norms that enable mutual understanding across diverse dialect users.
Why this matters for my theme: It grounds the claim that SAE reduces cross-audience miscommunication.
The word “standard” here is not prescriptive. It does not refer to a flag we must all salute. Rather, it simply describes accepted norms — in this case, accepted in the workplace by college-educated professionals.
Term + my working definition:
Standard American English = the accepted workplace dialect among college-educated professionals.
Why this matters for my theme: It frames SAE as pragmatic convention, not moral superiority.
My experience as a college writing instructor for 32 years, and as a writer, editor, and consultant for nearly 20 years, suggests that one of the best things we can do for students is to help them master standard English.
Jenkins argues that mastering Standard American English is essential for professional success and is not inherently discriminatory.
Angle most relevant to my theme: SAE as pragmatic, workplace-driven convention for cross-audience communication.
Advice We Must Help Students Master Standard English
This functions as an advice/op-ed piece in a higher-ed venue presenting a prescriptive argument.
I understand the reasoning and sympathize to a degree — but ultimately reject those arguments.
The author aims to rebut anti-SAE arguments and advocate for requiring SAE mastery.
Experiences like that are why it’s folly for colleges and universities not to require students to master SAE as a minimum requirement for earning a degree.
Primary audience seems to be higher-ed faculty/administrators concerned with graduate readiness.
Lyiscott's 3 Ways to Speak English
“Let there be no confusion… This is not a promotion of ignorance / This is a linguistic celebration.”
Lyiscott argues that shifting across “home/school/friends” Englishes is deliberate, rule-governed, and worthy of celebration, not deficit.
“’Cause I speak three tongues / One for each: Home, school and friends / I’m a tri-lingual orator”
Purposeful repertoire across Englishes (home, academic, peer) used situationally.
“Sometimes I’m consistent with my language now / Then switch it up so I don’t bore later”
Blending/moving among Englishes inside the same performance to fit audience and purpose.
“Today, a baffled lady… announced that I’m ‘articulate’… / So when my professor… / So when my father… / when I’m on the block…”
Method/evidence: Autobiographical vignettes + performance rhetoric; demonstrates rules-in-use through scenarios (classroom, family, peers).
“the English language is a multifaceted oration / Subject to indefinite transformation”
English is not monolithic; aligns with translingualism.
“I know that I had to borrow your language because mines was stolen… you can’t expect me to speak your history wholly while mines is broken”
Historical/racial context for language practice; ties to linguistic justice.
“Now you may think that it is ignorant to speak broken English / But I’m here to tell you that even ‘articulate’ Americans sound foolish to the British”
What counts as “proper” depends on audience and power; “broken” is a perspective, not an inherent flaw.
“So when my professor asks a question… Pay attention / ‘Cause I’m ‘articulate’”
Shows academic register on demand; rule awareness in school context.
“when my father asks, ‘Wha’ kinda ting is dis?’… / when my boy says, ‘What’s good with you son?’”
Contrasts family and peer codes; demonstrates purposeful switching for belonging and clarity.
Audience: Spoken-word audience + general public; educative and celebratory tone.
Purpose: Reclaim/validate plural Englishes; challenge “articulate” gatekeeping; advocate linguistic justice.
Genre: Spoken-word poem/performance.
To Young: Performs the code-meshing Young defends; rejects “one correct English,” favors plural, audience-aware practice.
To Baldwin: Echoes Baldwin’s language-as-power/identity; centers stolen/broken histories as reason for linguistic plurality.
To Alvarez/Wan/Lee: Embodies “language architect” stance; strategic repertoire across contexts.
“do not judge me by my language and assume / That I’m too ignorant to teach”
Implication: Assessment should not equate register with intelligence; invites reform of academic gatekeeping.
Lyiscott argues—through performance—that moving among home/academic/peer Englishes is intentional, rule-governed, and just, pushing back on “articulate” as a gatekeeping label. Reframes “broken English” as history and power, not deficit.
Lyiscott, Jamila. “3 Ways to Speak English.” TEDx / YouTube, 19 Jun 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9fmJ5xQ_mc&t=1s
Author: Baldwin, James.
“Title of Source”: “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?”
Container: The New York Times, 29 July 1979, Section E, p. 19.
A people at the center of the Western world, and in the midst of so hostile a population, has not endured and transcended by means of what is patronizingly called a “dialect.”
Implication: Challenges “dialect” framing; positions recognition as a matter of justice and historical truth. Synthesis will weigh recognition vs. gatekeeping.
This is a digitized version of an article from The Times’s print archive
Genre: Newspaper essay/op-ed (archival NYT piece).
Now, no one can eat his cake, and have it, too, and it is late in the day to attempt to penalize black people for having created a language
Purpose: Public defense of Black English’s status and a critique of penalizing its speakers.
See the article in its original context from July 29, 1979, Section E, Page 19
Primary audience: general NYT readership (public, policy, education, culture).
There was a moment, in time, and in this place, when my brother, or my mother, or my father, or my sister, had to convey to me, for example, the danger in which I was standing from the white man standing just behind me, and to convey this with a speed, and in a language, that the white man could not possibly understand
What this shows: Communicative function of Black English for safety/solidarity; opacity to dominant listeners.
How I’ll connect it later: purpose-driven language (Baldwin) / Young’s claim that “It’s ATTITUDES,” not dialect deficits.
Subsequently, the slave was given, under the eye, and the gun, of his master, Congo Square, and the Bible — or, in other words, and under these conditions,.the slave began the formation of the black church, and it is within this unprecedented tabernacle that black English began to be formed.
Baldwin’s historical account of Black English’s formation complements Heller’s analysis of AAVE as identity/agency in Bambara—both center vernaculars as purposeful, not deficient.
Subsequently, the slave was given, under the eye, and the gun, of his master, Congo Square, and the Bible — or, in other words, and under these conditions,.the slave began the formation of the black church, and it is within this unprecedented tabernacle that black English began to be formed.
What this shows: Specific historical sites (church/community) where Black English coalesced.
How I’ll connect it later: historical formation (Baldwin) / AAVE-as-agency in literature (Heller).
A language comes into existence by means of brutal necessity, and the rules of the language are dictated by what the language must convey.
Languages form under pressure to communicate urgent realities; their structures follow communicative needs.
Supports: Functional/necessity-based account of Black English.
It is not the black child's language that is in question, it is not his language that is despised: It is his experience.
Baldwin’s “it is his experience” aligns with Young’s language-justice stance and Alvarez/Wan/Lee’s translingual pedagogy—value lived experience and plural voice over monolingual “objectivity.”
It is not the black child's language that is in question, it is not his language that is despised: It is his experience.
Why this quote matters: Reframes “standards” as hostility to lived experience, not grammar.
Signal phrase I might use: Baldwin insists, “It is his experience.”
It is the most vivid and crucial key to identity: It reveals the private identity, and connects one with, or divorces one from, the larger, public, or communal identity.
Where Jenkins argues SAE mastery for workplace power, Baldwin reframes power as already embedded in Black English’s identity/politics—setting up a productive tension for synthesis.
It is the most vivid and crucial key to identity: It reveals the private identity, and connects one with, or divorces one from, the larger, public, or communal identity.
Why this quote matters: States language–identity linkage for synthesis. Signal phrase I might use: Baldwin maintains that language is “the most vivid and crucial key to identity…”
People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances, or in order not to be submerged by a reality that they cannot articulate.
Method/evidence: Historical-cultural reasoning + sociolinguistic examples (France, Basque/Welsh, U.S. slavery/church).
What this shows / can’t show: Explains functional origins and politics of language; not a quantitative study.
The argument has nothing to do with language itself but with the role of language.
Term + my working definition:
Role of language = how language functions as a tool of identity, power, inclusion/exclusion.
Why this matters: Frames the essay’s lens for analyzing Englishes.
Black English is the creation of the black diaspora.
Term + my working definition:
Black English = a language formed within the Black diaspora in the U.S., emerging from shared necessity and community, not merely a “dialect.”
Why this matters: Centers origin and legitimacy for concept map.
It goes without saying, then, that language is also a political instrument, means, and proof of power.
Baldwin contends that Black English is a legitimate language forged by historical necessity and bound to power and identity, and that contempt for it is contempt for Black experience.
Angle most relevant to my theme: Language as power/identity vs. “neutral standard.”
It goes without saying, then, that language is also a political instrument, means, and proof of power.
Baldwin argues that the debate over Black English is about power, history, and identity—not “correctness”—and that Black English is a legitimate language formed by necessity.
Keywords: power, identity, history, Black English, legitimacy.
Author(s): Alvarez, Sara P., Amy J. Wan, and Eunjeong Lee.
“Title of Source”: “Workin’ Languages: Who We Are Matters in Our Writing.”
Title: Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, vol. 4.
URL: https://wac.colostate.edu/docs/books/writingspaces4/alvarez.pdf
the idea of standard English powerfully maintainsour unequal realities, erasing and/or exoticizing our highly multilingualworld.
Implication: Adopting translingual practices is framed as part of broader work against inequality; synthesis will weigh institutional standards vs. justice-oriented pedagogy.
This chapter shares how we, as writers and scholars, and what Dr.Ofelia García, Professor Emerita of Urban and Bilingual Education, callsemergent and experienced bilinguals, work as language architects, and re-sist those critical feelings that push us to suppress our own voices.
Genre: Pedagogical chapter in a college writing anthology (Writing Spaces).
Ourgoal is to support students in recognizing the value of their own languagepractices and to provide strategies that students can use to rethink theirown relationships with writing.
Purpose: Validate students’ language practices and equip them with strategies to use them in academic writing.
This chapter’s central premise isto share with students how the work that they already do with languageshas great value.
Primary audience: student writers (with secondary audience of instructors).
To start writing this chapter, for example, one of the first things we didwas read previous contributions to Writing Spaces to get a sense of the ex-pected tone and the structure.
What the example demonstrates: Audience/design analysis as part of language-architect work.
How I will connect it later: situational design (Alvarez/Wan/Lee) / Jenkins’s emphasis on audience expectations (contrast in aims).
Once we havesome words, ideas, frustrations on paper, we give ourselves small writingtasks, like “just write whatever you can or feel about X topic for 5 minutes.”
Pedagogy in action: The authors’ translingual strategies (freewriting, revision cycles) complement Young’s call to teach descriptively and embrace code meshing in the same paper.
Once we havesome words, ideas, frustrations on paper, we give ourselves small writingtasks, like “just write whatever you can or feel about X topic for 5 minutes.”
What the example demonstrates: A concrete technique that surfaces authentic voice before later shaping.
How I will connect it later: practice-level support for translingual composing / Young’s classroom stance on descriptive teaching.
Dr. Flores (mentioned earlier) and Dr. Jonathan Rosa, Professor ofLinguistic Anthropology, have crucially pointed out how the idea of stan-dardized English (both written and spoken) as the “appropriate” languagerelies on the racialization of students, regardless of their actual languageuse (157-158)
Appropriateness standards are tied to raciolinguistic biases that judge students independent of how they actually use language.
Which part of the theme this supports: Links language standards to structural inequity.
What we mean bythis is that your voice and all the ways you use it—as part of who you are—makes all the difference, and therefore, should be amplified and cultivated.
Why this quote matters to my theme: Centers student voice as a positive resource to develop, not suppress.
Signal phrase I might use: The chapter emphasizes that “your voice… should be amplified and cultivated.”
Yes, you read this correctly: standard written English is not an objectiveset of criteria.
Standard vs. plurality: This chapter challenges the “objective” status of standard written English, contrasting with Jenkins’s claim that mastering a single standard is central to professional success.
Yes, you read this correctly: standard written English is not an objectiveset of criteria.
Why this quote matters to my theme: Directly challenges “objective standard” myths that drive gatekeeping.
Signal phrase I might use: The authors assert, “standard written English is not an objective set of criteria.”
In this section, we offer specific ways of using our rich language practicesto understand how they might contribute to our academic writing.
Method/evidence: Scholarly essay + strategy toolkit; blends research framing with concrete classroom practices.
What this lets the authors prove (and what it can’t): Shows actionable pedagogy and rationale; not a quantitative outcomes study.
as designers of meaning, language architects carefully considerhow to work with their own languages and voice for the most successfulcommunication in a specific situation (25).
Term + my working definition:
Language architects = writers who intentionally design with multiple language resources for a given audience/situation.
Why this matters for my theme: Positions students as intentional designers, not error-correctors.
An approach that resists monolingual ideology,translingualism views our different and varied language practices as crit-ical in inquiring, supporting, and sustaining the full range of richness inour voices (Horner and Alvarez).
Term + my working definition:
Translingualism = resisting one-language norms by leveraging the full range of a writer’s language practices.
Why this matters for my theme: It names the orientation that re-frames “academic writing” around plurality.
Orienting practices around translingual-ism and envisioning students’ language work as that of “language archi-tects” creates opportunities to uplift, value, and sustain students’ richlanguage practices, as well as ways to critically understand their academicwriting experiences.
Alvarez, Wan, and Lee advocate a translingual orientation that treats students as “language architects,” offering concrete strategies to bring full language resources into academic writing.
Angle most relevant to my theme: Pedagogy that legitimizes multilingual voice and challenges monolingual standards.
Orienting practices around translingual-ism and envisioning students’ language work as that of “language archi-tects” creates opportunities to uplift, value, and sustain students’ richlanguage practices, as well as ways to critically understand their academicwriting experiences.
The authors argue that centering translingual practices and treating students as “language architects” strengthens academic writing and builds critical understanding.
Keywords the authors lean on: translingualism, language architects, value, sustain, academic writing.
Author(s): Young, Vershawn Ashanti.
“Title of Source”: “Should Writer’s Use They Own English?”
Container: IJCS / Writing at the University
Year: 2010
Pages: 110-117
But some would say, “You cant mix no dialects at work; how would peeps whoaint from yo hood understand you?”
Implication: Raises audience-design and clarity concerns that the synthesis will address (how to mesh codes while ensuring mutual intelligibility).
Why this matters for my synthesis: I’ll weigh inclusivity/justice against practical comprehension and gatekeeping.
IJCS
Genre: Scholarly/position essay within an academic venue.
Code meshing be everywhere. It be used by all types of people.
Purpose: Advocate for recognizing and teaching code meshing as legitimate, widespread practice.
Writing at the University
Primary audience: composition/rhetoric scholars, writing instructors, and academic readers.
Teachers frequently encounter him on panels with titles like“The Expanding Canon: Teaching Multicultural Literature InHigh School.” But the dude is also hella down to earth.
Vernacular as agency: Young’s code meshing aligns with Heller’s claim that AAVE conveys identity, confidence, and critique; both position vernacular forms as tools of voice and resistance.
Teachers frequently encounter him on panels with titles like“The Expanding Canon: Teaching Multicultural Literature InHigh School.” But the dude is also hella down to earth.
What the example demonstrates: Journalistic prose mixing formal description with vernacular insertions—live code meshing in print.
How I will connect it later: identity/voice via vernacular (Young) / AAVE-as-agency (Heller).
(1) Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley sent two tweets to President Obamain June 2009 (Werner).
Pragmatics vs. plurality: Young promotes blending codes in public/professional writing (e.g., Grassley tweets), while Jenkins urges mastery of a single standard for workplace credibility.
(1) Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley sent two tweets to President Obamain June 2009 (Werner).
What the example demonstrates: Public, professional communication already blends registers/abbreviations—evidence of code meshing beyond classrooms.
How I will connect it later: real-world register mixing (Young) / workplace register expectations (Jenkins).
We shouldteach how to let dialects comingle, sho nuff blend together, like blending the dia-lect Fish speak and the black vernacular that, say, a lot—certainly not all—blackpeople speak.
Paraphrase: Instruction should train students to blend mainstream and vernacular dialects within the same piece of writing.
Which part of the theme this supports: Pedagogy that operationalizes code meshing.
Instead of prescribing how folks should write or speak, I say we teach languagedescriptively.
Why this quote matters to my theme: Sets the teaching stance that supports code meshing.
Signal phrase I might use: Young proposes, “we teach language descriptively.”
But dont nobody’s language, dialect, or style make them “vulnerable to preju-dice.” It’s ATTITUDES.
Why this quote matters to my theme: Reframes “deficits” as listener prejudice, not speaker dialect.
Signal phrase I might use: Young contends, “It’s ATTITUDES.”
Code meshing be everywhere. It be used by all types of people.
Method/evidence: Essayistic argument using concrete contemporary examples (tweets, journalism, scholarship) to demonstrate widespread practice.
What this lets the author prove (and what it can’t): Shows real-world usage across domains; not a controlled empirical study.
Code meshing is the new code switching; it’s mulitdialectalism and pluralingual-ism in one speech act, in one paper.
Term + my working definition:
Code meshing = blending dialects/languages/rhetorical styles together in the same utterance or paper.
Why this matters for my theme: It’s the central practice Young advances.
Standard language ideologyis the belief that there is one set of dominant language rules that stem from a singledominant discourse (like standard English) that all writers and speakers of Englishmust conform to in order to communicate effectively.
Term + my working definition:
Standard language ideology = the belief in one dominant, mandatory set of English rules everyone must follow.
Why this matters for my theme: Names the system Young critiques.
Code meshing is the new code switching; it’s mulitdialectalism and pluralingual-ism in one speech act, in one paper.
Young argues that teachers should teach and value code meshing—blending dialects and languages within the same text—and reject a single “standard” as the only acceptable academic or professional English.
Angle most relevant to my theme: Language plurality as both pedagogy and justice.
Code meshing is the new code switching; it’s mulitdialectalism and pluralingual-ism in one speech act, in one paper.
Young argues for code meshing—using multiple dialects/languages together in the same text—as the preferred approach, rejecting a single “standard” as the only acceptable academic/workplace code.
Keywords the author leans on: code meshing, multidialectalism, pluralingualism.
Author(s): Heller, Janet Ruth.
“Title of Source”: “Toni Cade Bambara’s Use of African American Vernacular English in ‘The Lesson’.”
Title: Style, vol. 37, no. 3, Fall 2003, Penn State University Press.
Pages: (article length 7,021 words).
URL:
link.gale.com/apps/doc/A115567406/ITOF?u=nm_a_albtechvi&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=78586197
In "The Lesson," the have-not children speak AAVE. This vernacular dialect emphasizes the children's distance from mainstream white bourgeois culture and economic power.
Tension: Linking AAVE with “have-not” status can risk reinforcing deficit associations even as the article celebrates AAVE’s power; this tension is key for synthesis.
Why this matters for my synthesis: I will address how valorizing AAVE avoids deficit framing while critiquing structural inequality.
From: Style(Vol. 37, Issue 3) Publisher: Penn State University Press
Genre: Scholarly literary analysis in a humanities journal.
AAVE adds realism and humor to the story. The dialect also reflects Bambara's pride in her ethnic heritage.
Purpose: Analyze how AAVE functions aesthetically and politically in “The Lesson.”
Document Type: Article
Primary audience: academic readers in literary/linguistic studies engaging peer-reviewed analysis.
"Who are these people that spend that much for performing clowns and $1,000 for toy sailboats? What kinda work they do and how they live and how come we ain't in on it?" (94).
What the example demonstrates: AAVE voice frames incisive social/economic questioning at the story’s climax.
How I will connect it later: AAVE questioning/critique (Heller) / Jenkins’s workplace-norms argument (contrast).
In the opening sentence of "The Lesson," Bambara clearly indicates that Sylvia is narrating in AAVE. Here, Sylvia describes Miss Moore as an adult with "nappy hair" (87).
Identity/agency: Heller’s framing of AAVE as pride and resistance aligns with Lysicott’s argument that vernacular resources carry identity and should be leveraged within academic spaces.
In the opening sentence of "The Lesson," Bambara clearly indicates that Sylvia is narrating in AAVE. Here, Sylvia describes Miss Moore as an adult with "nappy hair" (87).
What the example demonstrates: Early lexical cue grounds narrator’s voice in AAVE and signals cultural stance.
How I will connect it later: AAVE as identity marker (Heller) / code-meshing/voice (Lysicott).
AAVE fits the story's main theme: wealth is unequally and unfairly distributed in American society.
Paraphrase: Heller links AAVE to the story’s critique of economic inequality, showing how the dialect highlights distance from mainstream wealth and power.
Which part of the theme this supports: Language choice as social critique.
Such writing implies resistance to the dominant culture, destabilizes the privileged dialect/discourse, and portrays "subversive voices" that present "alternative versions of reality" (11, 13, 46).
Why this quote matters to my theme: Captures the resistance function of dialect literature and aligns with Bambara’s use of AAVE.
Signal phrase I might use: Heller, citing Jones, notes that dialect writing “destabilizes the privileged dialect/discourse…”
However, Bambara also celebrates AAVE as a vehicle for conveying black experience: Sylvia uses AAVE to express her self-confidence, assertiveness, and creativity as a young black woman.
Why this quote matters to my theme: Names AAVE’s expressive and identity-affirming functions directly.
Signal phrase I might use: According to Heller, “Bambara also celebrates AAVE as a vehicle for conveying black experience…”
The young narrator's language makes her ethnicity quite clear in its phonology, morphology, lexicon, and syntax.
Literary linguistic analysis: close reading of phonology, morphology, lexicon, and syntax, supported by scholarship.
What this lets the author prove (and what it can’t): Demonstrates how form (AAVE features) builds theme/identity; not an empirical workplace or survey study.
Dialect literature questions "sociolinguistic wholeness" (51).
Term + my working definition:
Dialect literature = writing that uses non-standard varieties to challenge the idea of a single, unified “proper” language.
Why this matters for my theme: Supports the claim that Bambara’s AAVE disrupts linguistic hierarchy.
In Toni Cade Bambara's short story, "The Lesson" (1972), the narrator, Sylvia, speaks in African American Vernacular English (AAVE).
Term + my working definition:
AAVE = a vernacular dialect associated with African American communities that carries cultural identity and rhetorical power in the story.
Why this matters for my theme: Establishes AAVE as the story’s linguistic frame and vehicle for meaning.
AAVE also embodies Sylvia's and Bambara's ability to question their society and to resist pressure to conform to the dominant culture.
Heller argues that Bambara’s use of AAVE in “The Lesson” constructs realism, affirms Black identity, and equips the narrator to critique inequality and resist dominant norms.
Angle most relevant to my theme: Vernacular as a tool of critique and agency.
AAVE also embodies Sylvia's and Bambara's ability to question their society and to resist pressure to conform to the dominant culture.
Term + my working definition:
AAVE = a vernacular dialect associated with African American communities that carries cultural identity and rhetorical power in the story.
Why this matters for my theme: Establishes AAVE as the story’s linguistic frame and vehicle for meaning.
t was conducted in a school in Paschim Medinipur District, WestBengal, India. Therefore, the sample was collected from a small geographical location.
Limitations: Single-site, small geographic scope (p. 11). Why it matters: CRAAP to balance strengths with scope limits.
Hence, in a translanguaging classroom, one language is used to reinforce the performance in otherlanguages and students learn many new words from each other which enrich their vocabulary.
Finding: Reinforcement across languages enriches vocabulary and performance (p. 9). Why it matters: Ties CUP to observed learning gains: useful for my analysis.
They used new words like Judiye Sisha (Magic Mirror), Daini(Witch), and Pokkhiraj (Pegasus). Pokkhiraj is a popular term in Bengali literature and culture, and theyhave borrowed this term from Bengali literature while writing in English. The students combined both theEnglish and Bengali languages during the presentation, which enriched the quality of their presentationthe classroom. Therefore, they were able to enrich their classroom discourse by borrowing resources fromnative as well as from other languages. They blended their creativity and imagination while writing story.
Evidence: Group work mixing Bengali/English/Hindi leads to vocabulary growth and creative output (p. 8). Why it matters: Supports the research question about creativity/imagination.
Teacher: Yes Raghu, You can use Santali word of paddy and repeat the whole sentence in the class.Raghu: [silent for a minute]Teacher: Raghu! You can do it. Try once.Raghu: Kuri gidro horo irre sanno kana [The woman is going to the field to cut paddy]Teacher: Tell it in English.Raghu: The woman is going to the field ... [mumbling] to cut paddy.Teacher: Excellent Raghu!
Evidence: Teacher prompts L1 (Santali) first; student produces a complete sentence, then moves into English (p. 8). Why it matters: Concrete example of confidence + transfer (CUP) enabled by translanguaging.
The participants were the English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers and students of Class VIII from astate-run school of Paschim Medinipur district, West Bengal, India. The school was chosen randomly bythe researchers. The data was collected from December 2019 to March 2020. The researchers visited theinstitution thrice in a week during the abovementioned period. Three teachers and sixty students fromSection A and B participated in this study.
Methods (qualitative case study): One state-run school in Paschim Medinipur, India; 3 EFL teachers + 60 Class VIII students; interviews + classroom observations (pp. 6–7). Why it matters: Establishes credibility/CRAAP (scope, site, instruments).
García (2009b) described translanguaging as “an important educationalpractice – to construct understandings, to make sense of the world and of the academic material, tomediate with others, and to acquire other ways of languaging” (p. 135).
Quoted definition: García explains that translanguaging is “an important educational practice…to acquire other ways of languaging” (qtd. in Bisai and Singh 4). Why it matters: Authoritative definition I’ll use for my “Key quote”.
Scaffolding can be described as cognitive support to learners given by the teachers to help them solvevarious tasks which they might not be able to solve on their own (Bruner, 1978).
Key idea: Teacher prompts function as scaffolds that let learners do more than they could alone (p. 3). Why it matters: Pairs naturally with CUP to justify teacher-led translanguaging prompts.
This model states that theknowledge in one language helps in acquiring other languages.
Key idea: CUP = knowledge gained in one language supports acquisition in another (p. 3). Why it matters: Explains why starting in L1 can strengthen academic English performance.
1. How can translanguaging enhance the quality of learning by making the classroom a learner-centricplace and by engaging the students from all sections of society in the classroom?2. How can translanguaging bring creativity and imagination in a multilingual classroom?
Paraphrase: The study investigates whether translanguaging can make classrooms learner-centered for all social groups and whether it fosters creativity and imagination (p. 3). Why it matters: This defines the study’s purpose I’ll cite when I explain its relevance to inclusive pedagogy.
Findings show the active involvement of students in the translanguaging classroom and suggest that translanguagingencourages students’ creativity and imagination in a multilingual classroom.
Summary: The study shows that when students can use their full linguistic repertoires, participation rises and learners demonstrate more creativity and imagination in multilingual classrooms (p. 1). Why it matters: This frames translanguaging as both inclusive and academically productive.