The Tutoring Book - California State University, Sacramento

The acquisition of SAE for speakers of AAVE is much like bilingualism, and as such, both
dialects serve as assets; furthermore, being able to switch between the two dialects could only broaden the social
breadth of the community. Cooks urges that students “must master how to switch back and forth between the
different genres to be successful” (2004, p.76). Labov (1965) likens this bi-dialect acquisition to bilingualism of
foreign language because speakers of nonstandard dialects share three fundamental things in common: many are
isolated from SAE, learning SAE does not necessitate neglect for the home dialect, and structural features of
AAVE can most certainly cause interference with SAE. Although “the shift to another language in bilingual
situations seems to be a radically different step… there is a functional relation between different languages
[bilingual] and different styles [monolingual] which cannot be overlooked” (Labov, 1969, p. 21). It is, in fact,
favorable for speakers of AAVE to maintain their cultural heritage through their home dialect while acquiring
SAE. This idea is similar to code switching in bilingual speakers. However, bi-dialectically, this becomes a
complicatedly different phenomenon all together, and for the sake of simplicity, I’ll refer to the bi-dialect
phenomenon as code switching as well. Anyone interested in reading further on the subject might consider Labov
(1965), Donlan (1974), or McCrary (2005). However, resources on the subject most certainly do not end there.
Donlan defines this dialect switching as “the mutual acceptance of both dialects and the ability of the speaker to
switch back and forth as the situation demands” (1974, p. 263). We can see the need for this shifting in view of
the conflicts that many African Americans face when speaking in different contexts. They may face ridicule from
their peers for speaking SAE or may not be taken seriously or treated respectfully at work or in school for
speaking AAVE. This makes it a social necessity for speakers of AAVE to have the ability to switch back and
forth between SAE and AAVE.
This bi-dialectic shift should be embraced or, at least, encouraged as a positive tool for rhetoric and
voice. McCrary advocates it as giving students “the freedom to make a contribution to academic discourse by
using their own language or voices and the values embedded within them…because that is what is denied to many
other-literate students in the academy” (2005, p. 75). Their are common rhetorical issues in the writing of
speakers of AAVE, such as the tendency to use a tone much like the preacher Martin Luther King or other African
American orators, and some awareness of audience will often show in a shifting in and out of this “high-context”
and “low-context” rhetoric (Blackburn & Stern, 2000; Chapman, 1994; Linn, 1995). Often you will find a rhythm,
pacing, and preachy tone similar to what you might hear from a speech from Martin Luther King, Malcom X, or
Barack Obama, especially when they are addressing an African American audience. The dry nature of academic
writing, which rejects the performing style of AAVE writing, creates a formidable reaction to SAE writing for
these students because it is so far detached from the style of their home dialect and overall culture. As Linn states,
“Thus the incoming African American students, who have grown up being passionately involved with their
arguments, must learn the rhetoric and stylistics of presenting ideas as though they were completely objective and
impartial and that the ideas had an objective life of their own” (1995, p. 39). Balester shows how African
American students’ perception of prestige is why they use the passionate tone of a preacher, explaining, “They are
attempting to be identified with educated or sometimes literary language by using features stereotypically
associated with it. Their stereotypes quite naturally will come from discourse they perceive as elevated or
prestigious” (1993, p. 78). I find it most important to draw these writers’ attention to the difference in tones
between the two varieties in English. Sometimes this can be a delicate task. We certainly do not want to give the
impression that we judge or mock, as this dialect variation has strong racial implications which I would argue
miss the mark grossly when we ignore the role of socioeconomics. Nonetheless, I will refrain from the urge to
rant on about it in this article. So how can we bring light to this rhetorical variation between SAE and AAVE?
One way might be to search the internet for a two speeches, letters, etc. by the same orator (MLK, Malcom X,
etc.) and have one written intended for a white, college educated audience and compare that to one written for
members of that speaker’s community. The idea is to show our AAVE writers 1) what code switching is and 2)
how to do it. Most of the time, they do not even see the AAVE features which makes it necessary for tutors to find
a way to bring them to a writers attention when they are present in the writing. I have never experienced an
AAVE writer refuse to write SAE (although I might be inclined to view this as refreshing and powerful). Like all
other writers on campus, they want to get good grades, pass classes, and graduate. Just because a writer has a
difficult time with taking an appropriate and consistent rhetorical approach when they write, does not mean that
114