| trudawg wrote:|
| melikey wrote:|
i have grown up around plenty of poor children, none of them have language issues. and saying that poor women don't speak to their kids is just plain insulting. the kids i know spoke the non-standard english the same way they were spoken to. so basically all this article is saying is that children who grow up in households with with poor standard english language skills will themselves have poor standard english language skills and will therefore will be at a disadvantage when competing in a society that refuses to acknowledge the way they speak at home as a legitimate dialect and therefore requiring a specialized way of teaching standard english in schools vs. native "standard" english speakers.
and i'm not sure how nationality came up in this thread, it has no place IMO.
Melikey, I think you're misunderstanding the point. It's nothing to do with language skills and dialect. It amounts to lack of exposure to a vast array of words in the vocabulary. For instance, if you're not talking about computer processors in your home, then chances are, you're children won't know WTF a computer processor is at a younger age.
The article says they are not speaking, not that they are not being exposed to a variety of subject matter. poor children are exposed to language, food, art and culture that is relevant to them at a young age. Because the name of specific dance moves or certain cuisine isn't relevant to the majority culture, it has been dismissed. I can't tell you the number of times i have visited young children from where i grew up and I have to ask THEM what certain words they are using mean. When i ask their parents if they know, the parents know the word too. Because I am not immersed in the culture like I used to be, I missed out. I just think this article missed the mark completely.
Edited by melikey - Jan 01 2014 at 11:14am