"gangsta" fad

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
Ok, when rap declares it's-self a different language, or a different culture...then yeah, I'll accept it as part of the English language. But, for now, it's just mindless dribble.

I don't get your point.....

Music is and always has been a part of culture...there are lots of different cultures, thus lots of different music, no??

Just as an example...The word for drum sounds in jazz may be "sticks" and the word for drums in rap may be "boom"....does that not interefer with language and the need for applying the appropriate image to the appropriate word?

It's "dribble" to you b/c you don't like the music - I don't love it myself all the time....but to consider someone's english as less than adequete b/c they grew up a certain way, b/c they were afforded less opportunities than you, b/c they worked for a living while you were in grade school, b/c they listen to the music that they can culturally identify with and repeat words used in the songs to show they identify with other similar people.....you think that lessens their credibility for using a different spin on english?....that they care what you think?

Maybe some would say I'm taking this too far...that b/c I don't speak ebonics myself and don't listen to rap that much, that why should I care if you consider another culture's language a joke....and I realize you're not racist, and maybe just tired of hearing these words you don't use and don't see the purpose of having in our language....but you probablly have no place to say these things and would be more easily put in your place by someone who does use it - In general, I think anyone that makes a comment on a cultural group's practices from an outside position has no place to make negative comments to those on the inside b/c you have no real basis for your judgement....

Blah blah blah....long story short....not a personal attack on you - I just wanted to make the point that I think you're wrong and I'm right....lol - what can I say....




posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Well,

Why didn't they incorporate radical and narly into the english language/dialect for the surfer dudes??

Or kookie for the flower children back in 70s??


Your professor was an ass, alot of prof's are.......
And so are some of the employee's working in high paying positions..



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueLies
Well,

Why didn't they incorporate radical and narly into the english language/dialect for the surfer dudes??

Or kookie for the flower children back in 70s??


Your professor was an ass, alot of prof's are.......
And so are some of the employee's working in high paying positions..

Well....lol....I don't want to beat this to death with a bloody hammer and make more an issue out of it than it is.....but...

It would be one thing if it were just one professor I had who went along with this - but try almost all of them....this is a hot topic in linguistic anthropology....and given the four-field approach all professors must have in order to teach, it is a frequent debate in any class...be it european archaeology or medical anthropology....and the general consesus is that for which I've argued....of course, as I've said, I've also incorporated my own beliefs, so it's not just regurgitate lectures I'm using here....

Oh well - that's my piece.....I respect others opinions tho, but I just think ya'll are wrong on this - if I'm wrong in everyone elses eyes, than so be it....but I suggest trying a search on yahoo or google on "ebonics" and I bet the first 10 or more website you'll find will be pro-ebonics websites from distinguished universites....



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun

Originally posted by Herman
Ok, when rap declares it's-self a different language, or a different culture...then yeah, I'll accept it as part of the English language. But, for now, it's just mindless dribble.

I don't get your point.....

Music is and always has been a part of culture...there are lots of different cultures, thus lots of different music, no??


Music is a part of our culture, it is not a culture in it's own.


Just as an example...The word for drum sounds in jazz may be "sticks" and the word for drums in rap may be "boom"....does that not interefer with language and the need for applying the appropriate image to the appropriate word?


It's fine by me if they use it in the music. But when they start using their stupid slang/bad grammar in real life, outside of the music world, it becomes annoying. I'm not saying that they can't, I'm just saying it's annoying. That's why this is a rant..


It's "dribble" to you b/c you don't like the music - I don't love it myself all the time....but to consider someone's english as less than adequete b/c they grew up a certain way, b/c they were afforded less opportunities than you, b/c they worked for a living while you were in grade school, b/c they listen to the music that they can culturally identify with and repeat words used in the songs to show they identify with other similar people.....you think that lessens their credibility for using a different spin on english?....that they care what you think?


No, it's not dribble because I don't like the music. I just think it's annoying, especially because they use it OUTSIDE the music. And yes, not being able to speak english properly does lessen their credibility. It's sad, but it does. It's not like that have no control over it, they could easily speak properly. I don't have a problem with all slang. I don't care if they slip it in every once in a while. I, myself, use "cool". I don't care if someone says "That car's tight". It's when I can't even understand them, that it gets annoying. Like I've repeatedly said, what annoys me is when they know better, but speak with bad grammar anyway. If, for some reason, they were never able to attend school...I wouldn't blame them. When someone is from another country, hey, that's their accent...no big deal. When people do it willingly, then it gets annoying. "I'd pop-a-cap in dat biotch ova der". That's annoying.


Maybe some would say I'm taking this too far...that b/c I don't speak ebonics myself and don't listen to rap that much, that why should I care if you consider another culture's language a joke....and I realize you're not racist, and maybe just tired of hearing these words you don't use and don't see the purpose of having in our language....but you probablly have no place to say these things and would be more easily put in your place by someone who does use it - In general, I think anyone that makes a comment on a cultural group's practices from an outside position has no place to make negative comments to those on the inside b/c you have no real basis for your judgement....


IT'S NOT A CULTURE!!!!! Sure, people from Jamaica speak differently because THAT'S-AN-ACCENT. Again, using bad grammar on purpose is annoying.


Blah blah blah....long story short....not a personal attack on you - I just wanted to make the point that I think you're wrong and I'm right....lol - what can I say....


Well, enron, we all have our opinions
.



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Well - like I said...I don't want to beat this with a bat anymore....but I'm also more than willing to continue so long as I know someone else is listening and I'm not just talking to a wall, which I don't think I was before - but like I said, these are just differences in opinion - Whatever I say is not going to change the way you see something, espically something that just plain annoys you....but nonetheless....I'll make another stand - lol

Let me start out a quote...those interested in this arguement should read thoroughly and, not to sound rude, but also look up any words that are unfamiliar to you as some of the vocab that linguists use are not in our own dictionaries (haha...funny funny):


I've been reading the San Francisco newspapers these last two weeks, and I see continuing chaos in the ways commentators choose to describe and classify the manner of speaking that is the target of the Ebonics resolution. The resolution and the public discussion about it have used so many different terms, each of them politically loaded ("Ebonics," "Black English," "Black Dialect," "African Language Systems," "Pan-African Communication Behaviors") that I will use what I think is the most neutral term, "African American Vernacular English," abbreviated as AAVE.

(1) Some participants in this debate think that AAVE is merely an imperfectly learned approximation to real English, differing from it because the speakers are careless and lazy and don't follow "the rules." It is "dialect," in the deprecating use of that word, or "slang."

(2) To most linguists AAVE is one of the dialects of American English, historically most closely related to forms of Southern speech but with differences attributable both to the linguistic history of slaves and to generations of social isolation. (For a linguist, to describe something as a dialect is not to say that it is inferior; everybody speaks a dialect.)

(3) And some people say that while AAVE has the superficial trappings of English, at its structural core it is a continuation or amalgam of one or more west African languages. The views summarized in (1) are simply wrong. The difference between the views identified in (2) and (3) is irrelevant to the issue the board is trying to face.

The Oakland resolution asks that the schools acknowledge that AAVE is the "primary language" of many of the children who enter Oakland schools. What this means is that it is their home language, the form of speech the children operated in during the first four or five years of their lives, the language they use with their family and friends. An early explanation of the purpose of the new program (San Francisco Chronicle 12/20) is that it "is intended to help teachers show children how to translate their words from 'home language' to the 'language of wider communication'."
Source

I really have to agree here with #1 and #2 - these are really strong points....and like I mentioned before....that anooying phrase you mentioned earlier (subtract the "pop-a-cap" part, are really just leftovers from slavery - always remember that we forced African Americans to learn English and not in an academic fashionat first...this bleeds into culture....which then bleeds into music...which is itself a sub-culture....to say music alone is not a culture is absurd IMHO)

Another point you made was "...what annoys me is when they know better, but speak with bad grammar anyway..." - I could apply the phrase "they know better, but..." to a lot of things that people find annoying but that doesn't mean it's biologically wrong for that person/thing to do.....And honestly....do you think that even if they do "know better" that they're going to care? If you don't like it they'll find someone who does....that doesn't solve your problem tho...if anything, it amplifies it....

To go against everything I've said so far on the subject tho - I don't think it should be taught in schools...which it has been and continues to be today - I only think it should be studied, accepted and used by those who choose to use it....

One last quote and I'll call it a night on this discussion...that is unless I get my fire sparked again - I know this is a little long, but just read it....


"The "demeaning" thing must have to do with the whimsical structure of the
word: "Ebony" (like the magazine) but like a color and a piece of wood,
used to describe a human being. Ebony + Phonics = Ebonics. It's not as
clever to many readers as it was intended to be. .... And. finally, maybe
some linguists feel the -onics/phonics element is demeaning to the notion
of "language" since it is a relatively simple-minded approach to the
teaching of reading by sounding out spelled words"

That's not why I "dislike" the word. I dislike it for other reasons. I'll
get to that, although it isn't particular relevant to why I think the word
has become worse than useless, except as a reference to a specific
political controversy at a specific point in the history of American
society.

Next, considering the above quote, was "Ebonics" intended to be "clever"?
Not really. I'm sure that it was intended to sound "scientific" in defence
of legitimising what it was intended to refer to. Science, linguistics
included, continually coins new words along similar lines, though usually
more accurately preserving the integrity of the Greek and Latin formatives
used.

If the linguists among you are going to get reflective over that, at least
appreciate that "Ebonics" is a BLEND, so that the -on- element pays
literate (not phonetic) homage to both parents, "eb/on/(y)" and
"ph/on/ics". In fact, the method of combination that led to "Ebonics" is
most in tune with the various ways that commercial brand names are coined,
e.g., "Sominex", "Peptobismol", "Lysol", etc. (my favorite is the late
great "Serutan"; that's "Natures" backwards, as the commercials proudly
pointed out). But SO WHAT?

Do you disdain the word "aspirin" for its equally ignominious origin? And
don't you appreciate "infomercials"? (hmm, probably not) What about
"docudramas"? Aren't you worried when the economy goes into a state called
"stagflation"? Does your rug have "fleafestation"? ...

(OK, The worst you can say for "Ebonics" as a linguistic formation is that
it's "slogan-y". And that might not appeal to your sense of what is
traditionally appropriate to "rational scientific discourse" or "polite
society".)

Next -- and this is most serious. Even more than the continuously
increasing array of pharmaceutical brand-names (and the more *sedate*
generic pharmaceutical names marketed under the brand-names), "Ebonics"
has turned into POISON.

You cannot use that word in a serious linguistic discussion about language
varieties, and you most definitely cannot use that word with non-linguists
and have them listen to you without *prejudice and blinding emotion*. And
if you don't know that, what have you been talking about during the last
two months?

The phenomenon is familiar. There are lots of other words and expressions
that that has happened to. We talked about this on list once in the case
of the expression "political correctness". That's why I found it odd that
Rob Hagiwara would write the following:

"Political Correctness is not about replacing 'familiar and simpler' terms
with 'odd and inappropriate' ones. The 'tenets' of PC are about courtesy
and accuracy."

That's wrong. The attitude of acknowledgment and respect that is intended
by certain forms of linguistic and other behaviors is PUT DOWN/DEMEANED
with the term PC. Rob had acknowledged that earlier, but here he fell into
the trap, either in order to condense what he wanted to say, or by
misplacing the scare quotes. As an expert in communicative disorders, I
was surprised that he let this communicative disorder get past. The word
"Ebonics" has become a communicative disorder.

You are not free to use words any way you feel like ( if you want to be
understood). You cannot say "I think everybody should be politically
correct and those who sneer at political correctness are cycloptic
troglodytes -- or worse!". It simply doesn't say what you want to say.

(take note, ye linguists using words like "language", "dialect" and
"grammar" in public. Gauge your audience, and the audience of your
audience. Your audience can understand you -- maybe -- and they can let
THEIR audience MISunderstand you.

Maybe you should say, "everybody USED TO think that
"language/grammar/blabla" was ... but then linguists made the AMAZING
discovery that blablabla!" So if the audience still thinks what everybody
"used to" think, they're still living in caves, get it? OK, I tried.)

And you cannot say "Ebonics is a legitimate language in its own right." In
fact, if you read the list and most other current discussion you'll see
that "Ebonics" is used to refer to the political movement and/or topic of
discussion originating in the flap over the Oakland School Board's first
resolution. That's how it's used. Other uses have been marginalised,
and cannot be understood by most people. The word has been poisoned, and
it POISONS conversations that have to do with language.

(N.B. The Oakland school board understood that very well when they
expurgated the word "Ebonics" from their revised resolution -- but only
altered the intent of the original resolution minimally. And it worked.
They were ignored as the fire set by their initial use of the word
"Ebonics" raged on and ravaged the countryside -- and the cityside.)

Finally, why do I dislike the term "Ebonics"? For linguistic reasons. For
social and political analysis I think it is going to be fine, even useful,
to refer to "the Ebonics movement", "the Ebonics controversy", etc.
Doesn't even need scare quotes.

But, again, as a linguistic term applied to the first language of most
African Americans
- long before the controversy, it was already associated with perhaps
well-intentioned but inaccurate, superficial, premature and immature
characterisations of that language. Its linguistic sponsors never went
beyond finding any similarity they could between AAVE (I'll call it that
without saying what the "E" stands for) and a number of Africal languages,
primarily West African Niger-Congo languages, and asserting that these
features were historically continuous with those languages.

(I'm not saying *all* their identifications were *totally* wrong, but that
they had no method to recognise whether they were right or wrong -- unless
you consider wishful thinking to be a methodology, rather than a
distracting factor to be constantly guarded against in developing and using
a methodology.)

They dismissed any contradictory or confounding data, and dismissed any
arguments questioning that theory, as irrelevant. And they ignored such
data and arguments in propagating their theories.

(In mitigating my condemnation of them, I'll note that they chose to focus
on some equally methodologically ignorant and lousy theories which denied
the possibility of continuity between (almost) any feature of any African
language and AAVE. So their attention might have been somewhat distracted
by the racism and anti-Africanism of theories which had previously found
their way into print. But that doesn't excuse them for ignoring legitimate
issues that had arisen before them and have continued to arise. )

Even worse (according to my standards of scholarship), they ripped all
their pet features off of AAVE and reified them as a separate language.
The result is at best a bunch of language fragments, incoherent and
unusable alone, and it leaves what it ignores in AAVE similarly incoherent
and unusable as a language. This does as much damage to the concept of
AAVE as a language as does the false and intentionally vicious concept that
AAVE is not a language. Ebonics is not a language, but a parody of AAVE,
and the methodology used to assert that it is a language is not
linguistics, but a parody of it.

Hopefully that wasn't to long of a quote for the mods...


[Edited on 8/24/2004 by EnronOutrunHomerun]



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman

IT'S NOT A CULTURE!!!!! Sure, people from Jamaica speak differently because THAT'S-AN-ACCENT. Again, using bad grammar on purpose is annoying.




Uhm... Ever heard of the reggae culture??? People in Jamaica speak like that because it's their culture. It's not just an accent. Then I can also say that Americans speak English with an accent. And that it's not a culture there. Same with Ebonics and the people who grow up speaking it at home. I'm not talking about the people who adopt it because it's in style or whatever. I'm talking about the people who genuinely grew up with Ebonics. Nothing more. There is no difference between a person in the U.S. who was rared with Ebonics than a person in The Netherlands who was rared with Frisian. Nothing!!!



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
....Then I can also say that Americans speak English with an accent....

- Good point that I missed Bandit....This isn't even our friggin language - who are we to say what's right and what's wrong from a social standpoint?

This arguement goes both ways....I made the claim earlier that this is a small part of linguistic history for the English language that is being monitored and recorded for the sake of origin....but look at how some people treat Shakespeare today!!!

"Is this guy speaking English?!! I can't understand a word he's saying here..." Sounds familiar, but only in reverse right? Well...ya know what? That's what the language we are speaking right now looked and sounded like 350 years ago - look where it is today....language evolves just like people do - I'm not saying ebonics is the future, but it may play a part of it - But by the time things have changed that dramatically, we'll all be dead and our curses of this will be forgotten and ignored.



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
Then I can also say that Americans speak English with an accent. And that it's not a culture there. b]



Everybody but southerners has a weird accent yall need to learn to talk right......LOL



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun

Originally posted by TheBandit795
....Then I can also say that Americans speak English with an accent....

- Good point that I missed Bandit....This isn't even our friggin language - who are we to say what's right and what's wrong from a social standpoint?


A.) :bnghd: I ALREADY SAID THIS. ENGLAND IS ANOTHER COUNTRY. We speak english, in America, with AN ACCENT!!!! I'm seriously not trying to be rude here, but you're not getting the point. I'm talking about people who purposefully speak english in a certain way, in order to sound un-educated, in order to sound cool. The stupid "Gangsta" fad where the people dress differently, and try to act all tough and intimidating. The slang is part of that. I'm not talking about a southern accent, I'm not talking about accidentally mis-pronouncing words, I'm talking about the rappers who spread this stupid slang among us. Like I said, I say "Cool", and "Awesome". If someone said that was annoying, I wouldn't tell them "It's just a different culture, you don't understand!!!"

B.)


I can also say that Americans speak English with an accent. And that it's not a culture there.

um, no. England is a different culture than the U.S. You can't say it's not a culture. Well, I guess you could; but you'd be wrong.

[Edited on 24-8-2004 by Herman]

[Edited on 24-8-2004 by Herman]



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Yes Herman, I understand what you're talking about and I agree partly. People for whom hip hop is not native and who imitate it will not get far like that. But I was just looking at an interview with JayZ on tv and how he used Hip Hop and the culture to make it big and become a succesful business man.

But anyway, of course I don't mean that American English is not a culture, but I was saying that to prove my point. Jamaican English is a culture, African American English is a culture, Arubian English is a culture, British English is a culture.



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Yeah, I agree that African American English is part of a culture. But I don't believe that the way modern rappers speak, and the people who immitate them speak, is part of the African American culture. Not the accent, the stupid words (Fo shizzle ma nizzle) and (purposefully) bad grammar. That doesn't have to be part of the culture.



posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Opinions are like assholes everybody's got one" remember that saying??? Still valid till this day....

Don't hate dawg, i'm just tryin to get my thang on wit my bitches down the street yo, ya'll down wif it my niggas?! Now I got sta get my bitch back so she can ged er nails "did" and I got sta touch up my corn rolls word?

Still sounds like street talk to me....

I hear people in detroit say all the time " Asx" as in ask....... They aren't using ebonics, they don't know how to pronounce because the school system there is bad, and something like 80% of black people in detroit (adults) don't know how to read or write...

Asx, and instead of saying "done" they say "did" as in a past tense, but they really mean to use present tense...

This isn't purposefully trying to speak your own language, it's mispronounciation...

And dawg, is slang... A cap, is slang.....

Do these ebonics have a dictionary?? I know gaelic does, and i'm sure korean's do as well....Do black people have their own dictionary or something that we don't now about??

Why can't they incorporate this so called language into the school systems? And why can't these people get normal jobs if it's really a different kind of language??
These people will surely get jobs in the inner cities, but when they move out and elsewhere in the world, i'm not so sure they will be so lucky..



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Yeah Urban Dictionary


www.urbandictionary.com...



[Edited on 25-8-2004 by TheBandit795]



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 11:11 AM
link   
I have a feeling that no one has read my qouted material....TrueLies - it not only has it's own dictionary...it has it's own textbooks!
Cambridge
Amzon has tons, but here's one....
Damn yo...even wal-mart got da shiat
Here's a course listing...
And another...
I realize what you all are trying to say with people using it purposefully as an annoyance....but we have enough subtlties in the way we are able to speak the english language that we can come off as being equally annoying without the use of slang.....besides - most people who do it either don't know you're around, don't care if you're around, are making money off of it, are trying to get you pissed on purpose, joking with you, or just speaking the only way they know how

It's comfortable and natural for a person from the UK to have an accent and speak with it - many movie stars undergo training to loose their accents so they can blend in.....is that what we want? Everyone to sound the same and speak the same monochrome english? That would just reverse itself and then we would end up having even more diglossia...it could even end up like the Indian language where the rich people speak one language, the poor another, when you're poor and in public another, when you're casually chatting with ohter poor people another.....

But like I said earlier - don't we already reflect all of this in our forms of eye contact? speech patterns? etc... - At a job interview, I'll be more careful with my english....someone who regularay speaks ebonics will either let it be known that they speak it, will use "high" english, or will mix both.....it's part of their personality, which, of course, is something that the person doing the interview can discriminate against....

Of course, we all know about the Oakland resolution, right? When it was discovered that more students spoke ebonics in classrooms in Oakland than regular English, the educational system flopped and that's where this whole debate on ebonics began.....as a short term solution they began teaching ebonics.....then the official ruling came back that students should be equally taught both forms of english b/c it is an important part of their culture to keep their distinct speech patterns and words...that goes for every "fo-shizzle", "dawg" and "g-unit" out there....



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
Yeah Urban Dictionary


www.urbandictionary.com...



I just looked at that site, and I gotta tell ya, if I was black or an african american, I would be totally insulted by the bs they put up there.. A total bastardization of the true african american language...

People, mostly kids who try talking "ebonics" I will agree, that they do bastardize the language... It's almost like they do it as a joke, if not, then thats what it appears to look like... "chunk it", "crunk" why this site talks nothing about true words, just low rent sayings, and a bunch of slang...
Oh wait, it even says it at the top of the page "Urban Dictionary is a slang dictionary with your definitions"
What a slap in the face... A true discracing of the african american language... I would be royally pissed if I was black..



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I don't see it as a question of linguistics or ebonics. Rap and hip-hop aren't ebonics. I'm not considering an accent or slang or anything of that sort. The words, whether real or made-up or just downright silly, are not the problem. The adoption of the words as a regular mode of speech is the problem. The adoption of the lifestyle represented by this form of entertainment as an actual reality is the problem.

A hundred professors can chime in on the validity of any dialect/language/whatever and it won't change the fact that these kids won't get a decent job talking like ghetto trash. I sat in the same class as they did. Listened to the same teacher they did. Was assigned the same books as they were. I can speak the language pretty well and many of my black classmates can't. Even now as adults. It's not all rap's fault. I speak the way my parents do. They speak the way their parents do. The problem goes back several generations, obviously. As has already been stated, it's not a seperate language, it's an existing language being spoken improperly. Rather than validate this, I'd rather see more effort going toward correcting the mispronunciation. It's like saying if a large group of people think 2+2=5, then give them a seperate mathematics formula so they'll be right. Easy for them because they don't have to relearn anything. Easy for the system because it doesn't have to fund new or better teaching. But in the mainstream real world, believing that 2+2=5 will not enable your professional success. It's not fair and it's not right to allow them to be left out of society in this manner. The gangsta rap community knows what they are doing. They know they are making piles of money off of these kids. They know they are making piles of money off of their clothing lines and other products. They know that maybe one in a million of these kids will actually make it in the music/entertainment industry and the rest will be trying to keep up a lifestyle that is non-productive at best and harmful to their future at worst.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by torque
The adoption of the words as a regular mode of speech is the problem. The adoption of the lifestyle represented by this form of entertainment as an actual reality is the problem.
They know that maybe one in a million of these kids will actually make it in the music/entertainment industry and the rest will be trying to keep up a lifestyle that is non-productive at best and harmful to their future at worst.


I like the way you talk mmhmm" Slingblade'

This is so very true and I agree with this 100%......

I'm stereotyping kids and teenager's who dress the part, try and act the part, and speak the part, i'm stereotyping them because I know that they are following a non-productive lifestyle, these rappers can only be so lucky these kids are buying up their music, if they weren't they would be living in the pj's doing whatever criminal activity they could think of.
Sure it's fun to use slang as a kid, who doesn't think fo-shizzle and dawg isn't fun to say.. I understand in a teenager's mind it's catchy, look at that thread about chappelle and the kids in class who repeating "i'm rick james bitch" and lil'john's "yeeaaah" They are catchy... There is no harm in this, it's when kids start taking this lifestyle seriously, we have kids today who think if you don't have parasuco jeans or ralph lauren labels your a nobody, your not cool, and a loser...

These things have been around for ages, however what torque said about
trying to keep up a lifestyle that is non-productive at best and harmful to their future at worst. is so very true and I hope that these kids don't jeapordize their futures because they adapted the lifestyle and took it too seriously.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by torque
The words, whether real or made-up or just downright silly, are not the problem. The adoption of the words as a regular mode of speech is the problem. The adoption of the lifestyle represented by this form of entertainment as an actual reality is the problem.

A hundred professors can chime in on the validity of any dialect/language/whatever and it won't change the fact that these kids won't get a decent job talking like ghetto trash. I sat in the same class as they did. Listened to the same teacher they did. Was assigned the same books as they were. I can speak the language pretty well and many of my black classmates can't.

I agree with you there 100%...well said...



As has already been stated, it's not a seperate language, it's an existing language being spoken improperly.

That's arguable....my point earlier was to suggest it's a diglossia, not an entirely different language....

Regardless of the rest of your comments....cultural trends cannot be selected and approved by the majority - often they cannot be corrected....cannablism is a cultural trend that some anthropologists doing field word either choose to ignore or try to stop, but who's to say either action is correct? This can be applied, in a less dramatic sense, to this very same situation....maybe it's a linguisitc process of selection and evolution....maybe it's the future...maybe it's a speck on the horizon....

My point is that one group of people can't tell another group of people what's right and what's wrong without inflicting emotional damage which can then lead to negative physical reactions, like someone fighting over something as silly as how two people say hello to each other....

The American education system is not strong enough to provide shelter for a shift in the winds of english grammar



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Regardless of the rest of your comments....cultural trends cannot be selected and approved by the majority - often they cannot be corrected....cannablism is a cultural trend that some anthropologists doing field word either choose to ignore or try to stop, but who's to say either action is correct? This can be applied, in a less dramatic sense, to this very same situation....maybe it's a linguisitc process of selection and evolution....maybe it's the future...maybe it's a speck on the horizon....

My point is that one group of people can't tell another group of people what's right and what's wrong without inflicting emotional damage which can then lead to negative physical reactions, like someone fighting over something as silly as how two people say hello to each other....

The American education system is not strong enough to provide shelter for a shift in the winds of english grammar


First time trying the quote thing, so hope it's right.

One group of people can tell another group of people what's right and what's wrong if the right and wrong has already been determined. The word is "ask", not "ax". The word is "desk", not "dex". The nuts and bolts of language are already established. They must pronounce it and spell it correctly, just as I must, in order to be found competent and pass. At least in theory. In reality, the schools just try to churn them out before anybody else gets shot.

As far as cannibalism, I don't see any connection except that if cannibals were going to be responsible for running the world when I'm too old to do it, they'd better put down that fried ankle and straighten up! There are omnivores and vegetarians, vegans and ovo-lacto vegetarians, etc. One group can't tell the other that it's wrong or right to eat something. But one group can tell another group that behaving in an anti-social way which is not only contributory to their own low standard of living but also harmful to the society that they affect in general is wrong. The 17 year old that thinks he has to do a drive by shooting to get his juice is the convicted felon my tax money is supporting for 15 to life. The crack dealer who thinks he has to do that in order to get by, and besides, 50 Cent did it and look where HE ended up, is a problem to society. The society I pay to support. The 20 year old girl driving along with Snoop Dogg in the tape deck singing along in front of her 4 and 5 year olds is a problem. Especially if they're singing along too. Especially if the baby daddy is either gone because she was just a ho to him, or in jail because he's a badass. If these problems are allowed to continue and are encouraged to continue, the cycle never breaks.

Again, I'm not talking about theory or linguistics or studies. I don't need studies to drive through even my small town and see the affects of this stuff. I don't need studies to see that we are in trouble here. All I have to do is go outside or turn on the D.C. news. Or probably news in any big city, for that matter.



posted on Aug, 25 2004 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Well, the whole cannablism bit was just for the sake of comparing cultural trends....allbeit a bit off topid and unrelated - lol

IMO This just brings up the whole stale "video games cause voilence" arguement...except in the form on music...

In my opinion that holds no water....And those that so happen to be influenced and take action are fringe lunatics that are going to find destructive elements in their music no matter whether they listen to Frank Sinatra or D12....

Many responsible people listen to some of the most raunchy and "negative" music thereis out there....many people who commit crime listen to the same music....some may listen to classical music - does that mean Bach should be banned b/c a gang of kids goes around shooting people who listen to his music? I'm not saying that's ever going to happen....lol....but what someone labels as music suited for the garbage can be labeled just the opposite by the next group of people who you may think represent many of the same qualities you hold...

Screw how people talk...if you can understand them, which I think we all truly can, no matter how much the griping and complaining continues, and as long as they aren't trying to write a masterpiece triology in ebonics....then what really needs to be taught is self-control and discipline - Censoring and destroying music, video games, books, etc...is the way of the Nazis...

But before you say - I didn't mean destroy it all....I'm only talking about the people who use it in a negative way....think about what I said earlier...these people are naturally mentally unstable and are going to commit crime even if they get their ideas from the wizard of oz....there's more to their problems than the music they listen to....if you can settle those problems first, you don't have to touch the music....taking rap away from those that enjoy it and relate to it is a quick fix to a bigger problem that would no doubt only become worse....





top topics
 
0
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join