a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 #

lewis lister - chapter 2: literature review lyrics

2. literature review

2.1. overview of aave
when speaking of african american vernacular english (henceforth aave) it is first necessary to dispel some linguistic myths concerning language and race, brought into being by the literature of the 18th and 19th centuries (eg: campbell 1851). firstly, production of aave is not determined by the genetic make-up of the speaker. rather, it is a dialect the same as any other and as such, its make-up is determined by a mult-tude of socio-historical factors, and its variants conditioned by a range of factors both linguistic and extra-linguistic. for this reason, what follows will be consistent with wolfram & schilling-estes (1998: 170): “we consider anglo american and african american to be labels for culturally constructed ethnicities rather than genetically determined racial groups”. secondly, much of the aforementioned literature was motivated by racism and linguistic ignorance, and therefore characterised aave as an inferior, incorrect usage of english by speakers of lesser intelligence. campbell (1851: 172), for example, dismisses speakers of aave thus: “the typical wooly-haired races have never invented a reasoned theological system, discovered an alphabet, framed a grammatical language, nor made the least step in science or art”. thankfully, these ideas have been proved wrong. it has been established that aave is subject to its own system of rules and conventions, and is no less ‘correct’ than any other variety of english. a hotly contested debate exists today as to whether aave should be taught alongside standard english in schools containing a large proportion of aave speakers (baugh 1998). this review will take no part in such a debate, but its very existence shows how far aave has come since the days of racially-motivated prescriptivism

2.2. the historical roots and development of aave
the origin of aave is a major debate in the extant literature, and there are two hypotheses that come to the fore: the creolist hypothesis and the anglicist hypothesis. broadly speaking, the former maintains that aave originated as a creole that emerged across the african diaspora as a result of the slave trade (bailey, 1965; stewart, 1967; dillard, 1972), while the latter holds that the original aave was identical to european american speech, but has since diverged (labov, 1998; poplack, 2000). both hypotheses (and their various implications) must be considered in order to appreciate exactly what it is we mean when referring to aave in this study
wolfram & schilling-estes (1998: 175) succinctly define a creole as: “a special language developed in language contact situations in which the vocabulary from one primary language is imposed on a specially adapted, restricted grammatical structure”. in the case of the creolist approach to aave, vocabulary from american english was imposed on a restricted grammatical structure as a result of the need for african slaves to communicate with their overseers, and with one another. over time, this creole is said to have come into contact with surrounding dialects, the influence of which caused aave to become more like american english, in a process known as decreolization. as a result, today’s aave is considered a full dialect rather than a creole
the anglicist hypothesis “maintains that the roots of aave can be traced to the same source as anglo american dialects – the dialects of english spoken in the british isles” (wolfram & schilling-estes 1998: 176). this position holds that aave is a result of african immigrants having learned english as a second language, in particular the regional dialects of the surrounding white speakers. data in the form of written records of ex-slaves supports the anglicist hypothesis (schneider 1989), as this written speech “was not nearly as distinct from postcolonial anglo american english varieties as would have been predicted under the creolist hypothesis” (wolfram & schilling-estes 1998: 176). data from black expatriate insular varieties of english also support the anglicist hypothesis, for example poplack & sankoff’s study of samana in the dominican republic (1987). these kinds of communities are able to retain a relic variety of english despite centuries of relative isolation
the anglicist hypothesis contends that “the language contact situation of those of african descent in the united states was roughly comparable to that of other groups of immigrants” (wolfram & schilling-estes 1998: 176). however, reflection on the historical context of the language contact situation specific to aave reveals that the two are not directly comparable. other groups of immigrants were free to practise their native languages in social groups. surrounding dialects inevitably impact on this language, but there is no impetus for a pidgin/creole to develop. by contrast, “black slaves coming to this new world were systematically isolated from other speakers of their native language. slave traders engaged in this practice, thereby deliberately planning the death of african languages to restrict possible uprisings” (baugh 1983: 13). clearly then, the language contact situation of african slaves was one which necessitated the evolution of a pidgin (and subsequently a creole) in a way that the situation of other immigrants simply did not. it is this unique language contact situation that gives particular weight to the creolist hypothesis. it has been suggested by mufwene (1996) that these conditions were not actually conducive to the formation of a widespread plantation creole, as suggests by creolists. while it may be not the case that a single creole ranged over the whole of the antebellum south, the language contact situation is sufficiently different to that of other american immigrants that evidence from the latter cannot directly inform study of the former
rickford (1998) provides some compelling evidence that aave is a creole-based dialect, citing “the very fact that copula absence is widespread both in aave and in mesolectal creoles, but not in white englishes outside of the american south” as proof that “at least some of the predecessors of modern aave arose from a restructuring process similar to that which produced the english-based creoles” (rickford, 1998: 189). he does, however, acknowledge that a clear-cut distinction between the two hypotheses as to which one is ‘correct’, is likely unachievable. to this end, baugh (1983: 16) contends that: “the best historical evidence shows that a combined hypothesis is the most accurate, at least at this time”. his basis for this is that –is ¬deletion varies over time, seemingly as part of a creole at times and as part of a full anglo-american based language at others. this ‘combined hypothesis’ holds that the anglicist and creolist positions are not mutually exclusive. a focus on using the two hypotheses to critique the extent to which aave is based on a creole or an anglo american dialect is likely to be the most fruitful approach. this dissertation, then, will be consistent with baugh’s approach: aave will be considered as reflective of a “dual heritage” (smitherman 1998: 207)

2.3. aave and ident-ty
as a minority dialect, one might expect aave, once established, to converge with its surrounding anglo american dialects. however, there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that this has not been the case, leading some to posit the ‘divergence hypothesis’. labov’s (1985) study in philadelphia, research on habitual be in the south (bailey & maynor 1987), as well as research on inflectional –s absence (rickford 1991) all suggest that aave is diverging from anglo american varieties: these features become more common in aave speech and are dying out in sae speech. wolfram & schilling-estes (1998: 179) suggest that this divergence has a sociological basis, specifically: “the social and economic plight of lower-cl-ss african americans – racial isolation brought about by increasing de facto segregation and a widening socio-economic gap between mainstream american society and lower-cl-ss minority groups”. although it is debatable that this socio-economic gap is widening today (fifteen years on), the point remains that as a result of their history, african americans have a “heightened awareness of african american cultural ident-ty and the function of a distinctive dialect in maintaining this cohesive ident-ty” (wolfram & schilling-estes 1998: 179)
giles & smith’s ‘accommodation theory’ (1979) may help to explain this divergence. the theory aims to account for certain language changes in terms of the desire of the speaker to accommodate speech to their interlocutors. in the case of aave, accommodation theory applies in reverse: speakers often wish to distance themselves from their interlocutors in order to exclude them, or to -ssert their own ident-ty (giles & smith 1979). smitherman (2000: 272) is in agreement, referring to aave as “a communication system that functioned both as a resistance language and a linguistic bond of cultural and racial solidarity for those born under the lash”. although the validity of smitherman’s creolist standpoint (2000) remains to be seen, her conclusion certainly seems true: “as we move toward the twenty-first century, it is clear that african america continues to const-tute itself as a distinct speech community, with its own linguistic rules and sociolinguistic norms of interaction” (smitherman 2000: 272)
evidence from a study of patois usage in the uk (edwards 1986) is also consistent with giles’ accommodation theory. edwards found that black speakers who wished to reject “the low status ascribed to black language and culture by white mainstream society” (edwards 1986: 122) used a subset of patois features, or ‘markers’, to do so. she concluded that “patois is -ssociated with a group ident-ty: it can be used to signal solidarity and exclude outsiders” (edwards 1986: 123)
however, smitherman’s survey of african-american speakers in atlanta, chicago, cincinatti, detroit and philadelphia (1989) exposes a clear tension. it revealed that a majority of speakers actually felt disconnected with their african heritage: an average of 40% of speakers favoured use of the term ‘african-american’ over the term ‘black’. one key reason for disapproval of the former term is a lack of identification with africa, as one speaker put it: “what do they mean about african american? by now we have no african in us” (smitherman 1998: 206). according to the results, speakers feel disconnected with africa, and yet according to the literature, their african heritage is inherent in their speech. a study of ordinary speakers of aave may seek to resolve this tension, but this study is concerned with rappers. hip hop is afro-centric by its very nature, drawing huge influence from the black power movement. therefore, jay-z and nas are expected to use a high frequency of aave features as a result of the strong connection to the african culture they expressed through hip hop music. as jay-z himself says: “i’m representing for the seat where rosa parks sat / where malcolm x was shot / where martin luther was popped” (jay-z the blueprint)

2.4. aave and hip hop
aave, then, is an important part of african american culture: it is a way of preserving ident-ty. this is where the art form that is hip hop enters the picture: “the communicative practices of the hip hop nation are firmly rooted in the african american speech community. hip hop’s rappers are both in and of this community […] representing the case of america’s still dispossessed slave descendants” (smitherman 2000: 282). hip hop artists, being part of the african american speech community, use aave in the same way as regular aave speakers might: to mark their african american ident-ty and represent their cultural heritage through language. cramer & hallett (2010: 259) contend that: “a key feature of ident-ties is that they emerge in interaction, and, in the case of hip hop artists, ident-ties emerge through the medium of their music”. therefore, we expect the ident-ty of hip hop artists to be constructed in the use of aave in their lyrics. in terms of their speech in hip hop music, rappers’ use of aave variants provide “ill-strative examples of implied racial resistance – that is, in the continued use of these kinds of verbal forms despite white america’s linguistic disapproval – other forms of aal [african american language] suggest a more explicit rhetoric of resistance” (smitherman 2000: 272)
the language of hip hop, therefore, can be seen as being linguistically representative of african american culture in two ways. firstly, as discussed in section 1 (introduction), through his use of language, the rapper represents the west african storytelling tradition: rappers are the modern-day equivalent of the west african griots. secondly, the rapper’s use of aave marks the desire of the hip hop community to isolate itself from mainstream white culture. as smitherman puts it: “the hip hop nation employs african american communicative traditions and discursive practices to convey the black struggle for survival in the face of america’s abandonment of the descendants of enslaved africans. the rap music of the hip hop nation simultaneously reflects the cultural evolution of the black oral tradition and the construction of a contemporary resistance rhetoric” (smitherman 2000: 283). this dissertation therefore, will serve to evaluate the above claim: if the artists in question (nas & jay-z) really do ‘keep it real’, representing both “the cultural evolution of the black oral tradition” and an art form that seeks to preserve and venerate black culture, then they will most likely use a high frequency of aave forms in their lyrical content, as linguistic markers of ident-ty

- lewis lister lyrics

Random Lyrics

HOT LYRICS