Why is the definition of “Standard English” a matter of such controversy?
The use of language is often surrounded by controversy, from the Catholic leanings of the young Donne, to the obscenity of Rochester’s poetry to the mere inarticulacy of bad writers. All are unorthodox and so threatening or antagonistic to the correct use of language for their time. If this is the case how can “Standard English” be controversial if it constitutes orthodoxy? As Carter rightly asserts, “’standard is a protean term’” and the problem begins here, as it makes the notion of what constitutes “Standard English” a point to be debated. The word “standard” has two major implications; the first is that of normality, perhaps of a base level; and the second connotation is of an extraordinary quality, of being an exemplar of its kind. These implications lend themselves to two different understandings of the term “Standard English”, making the term mean ‘that which is used commonly, though not of the highest quality’, or ‘that, which is the perfect use of language’. Clearly then there
Related Questions
- Charter schools by definition are autonomous institutions. Why then do charter schools have to submit the Language Census and why do they have to submit it in conjunction with a particular LEA?
- What is the Advanced Credit Repair definition of "clearing up" a consumers credit report or improving their credit profile?
- Why is the definition of "Standard English" a matter of such controversy?
