CARS 07 · Social science: linguistics and education
Whose Grammar?
A social-science passage on standard languages, prestige and what schools should teach.
Passage
Most speakers believe that the standard form of their language is the correct one and that other varieties are corruptions of it: ungrammatical, careless, or lazy. Linguists generally reject this belief. Every variety they have studied, including those that are looked down upon, turns out to have a systematic grammar with rules that its speakers follow without being taught. What distinguishes the “standard” is not that it has rules and the others do not, but that it is the variety associated with a particular group.
The history of standard languages supports this reading. Standard forms typically begin as the speech of a region or class that gains political and economic power: the capital, the court, the merchants, the printers. They spread through schools, dictionaries and publishing, and in time they come to seem natural. But the spread is explained by the power of those who spoke the variety and their ability to make others learn it, and not by any intrinsic superiority of its sounds or constructions. Had another region prevailed, its speech would now be the standard and its rivals the corruptions.
The logic of a stigmatized variety is often easy to demonstrate. Consider the double negative, long condemned in schoolrooms on the ground that two negatives make a positive. The objection imports a rule from logic into a domain where it does not apply. Several standard languages require a negative to be repeated within the same clause, and no one accuses their speakers of confusion. A speaker of a variety that does the same thing is following a consistent rule, and the only difference is that the rule is not the one in the prestige variety.
None of this shows that the standard does not matter. A common variety has real advantages: it provides a shared medium across regions, allows people who grew up far apart to understand one another, and carries the written record. It also has social consequences that cannot be wished away. Teachers and employers often treat speakers of a stigmatized variety as less intelligent or less reliable, though nothing in their speech warrants the judgment. The prejudice is real even though its justification is false. Teaching children the standard is therefore a practical matter, much like teaching them the customs of a country they will have to live in, and does not confirm that the standard is superior.
Two claims are therefore often confused. The first is that the standard is the best or the only correct form of the language, which is false. The second is that command of the standard is useful, which is true. Schools that teach the second as though it were the first tell children that the speech of their homes is defective, with predictable costs to their confidence and willingness to take part. A better approach, plausibly, teaches the standard as an additional variety, to be used where it is appropriate, and leaves the child’s home speech intact as another.
Questions
Question 1 of 6
Which statement best expresses the main idea of the passage?
The first paragraph says that all varieties have systematic grammars, so this is the view that the author rejects.
The author says that teaching the standard is a practical matter and recommends teaching it as an additional variety.
Double negatives are an example used to show that a stigmatized variety has its own rules. The author makes no claim about formal writing.
Why the answer is what it is
The author argues that the standard owes its status to power (paragraphs 1–3), grants that it is useful (4), and recommends teaching it without devaluing other varieties (5).
Question 2 of 6
The author discusses the double negative in order to:
The author says only that one rule from logic does not apply to this feature of language.
The author does not say this. The standard has rules, but so do other varieties.
The author says that several standard languages do so, not all languages.
Why the answer is what it is
The example shows that the condemnation of the double negative comes from an external rule, while the variety’s own rule is consistent, as it is in several standard languages.
Question 3 of 6
According to the passage, why do standard forms typically spread?
The author says the spread is not explained by any intrinsic superiority.
The passage does not offer beauty as a reason.
The passage does not say that standards are the oldest forms. It says they begin as the speech of groups that gain power.
Why the answer is what it is
The second paragraph says that the spread is explained by the power of those who spoke the variety and their ability to make others learn it.
Question 4 of 6
The author’s attitude toward teaching the standard language in schools is best described as:
The author says that teaching the standard is a practical matter and does not confirm that it is superior.
The last two paragraphs discuss teaching and recommend an approach.
The author denies that the standard is the best or only correct form.
Why the answer is what it is
The author endorses teaching the standard for practical reasons and criticizes teaching it as though it made home speech defective.
Question 5 of 6
Which finding would most weaken the author’s claim that standard forms spread because of the power of their speakers rather than intrinsic qualities?
This is consistent with the author’s claim that power spreads the standard, so it would not weaken it.
Change over time does not bear on why the standard spread.
This concerns the abilities of the speakers and not the reasons that a standard spread.
Why the answer is what it is
If the standard forms in independent cases were systematically easier to learn, intrinsic qualities would be part of the explanation, which would weaken the author’s claim.
Question 6 of 6
Which of the following teaching approaches would be most consistent with the author’s recommendation?
This treats the home variety as defective, which the author warns against.
The author supports teaching the standard because it has real practical value.
The author sees practical command of the standard as useful and a reason to teach it.
Why the answer is what it is
The author recommends teaching the standard as an additional variety used where appropriate, leaving home speech intact. The first option does exactly this.