What were your first thoughts when you read the article? Personally, I couldn’t help but feel sympathy towards both the mother and the daughter.
Reading Amy Tans article, most people would be shocked of the ridiculous American-view towards non-native English speakers. The discrimination towards people with different backgrounds is very real in the “land of the free”. For example, in the text Tan states “When I was growing up, my mother’s ‘limited’ English limited my perception of her.” This is a common and standard reaction, as the americanized daughter thought her mother was the equivalent of an uneducated person based solely on how she spoke English. People assume that the way people speak reflects their intelligence, thus giving the people the right to undermine her thoughts and identity in the world. Most do not understand that this is not a true reflection of these individuals and no matter their limited English, everyone should be treated equally and with respect.
In the western world there is a very real problem with stereotyping Asians and labeling them as being smarter in the sciences than the common person. As immigrants coming from China do not speak what is called ‘proper’ English, most are forced into other subjects such as math and science. This is a problem because instead of teachers teaching children English for them to be able to pursue a career in the arts, they just guide them in a different direction. This does not help the Asian minority and only confirms the stereotype. Amy Tan however discusses her rebellious nature and her wanting to prove everyone wrong is what drove her into pursuing language. With much backlash from her teachers she was still able to become a writer, through doing this she had to change the way she speaks English. She uses code-switching in order to bring her ideas across effectively with her family and in her professional life. She starts to question the different Englishes she uses and how with her parents she uses a ‘broken english’ instead of ‘proper’. But the end of the text she comes to a realization that the ‘broken’ english used is not a sign of ignorance, rather a language of intimacy and love. Language does not always show a persons identity, if someone speaks ‘broken’ english it should not give others the impression as well as the self-appointed right to call them unintelligent.
Overall, the opinion column is well written. However, the strong opinion voiced throughout the text would benefit from the use of external sources. As well, some of the facts should be followed with a source in order to gain the readers 'trust', and further engage the author-reader connection. The value of the post would be promoted by re-reading the text, in order to avoid to grammatical issues.
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with the opinion in the post, as it is one I related my column to as well. The issue surrounding negative stereotypes made around a broken language is one not gaining enough attention, and this post works to surface this issue. Many people are classed into categories they might not want to be in due to their language abilities, which is one of the many points I agree with in the column.
It meets the conventions of a blog post clearly as it shows a clear opinion, and reasoning behind it. Using personal thoughts/beliefs to justify opinions promotes the personal-relation to the topic, which engages the reader. A strong opinion about the message in the text is well explained in this column, by often referring back to the text.