(Introduction) (Hook) While many people are confused as to what Ebonics is exactly, James Arthur Baldwin, an American novelist, claims, “It goes without saying, then, that language is also a political instrument, means, and proof of power” (4).  (Bridge) Baldwin’s message is that the ownership of intelligent language is indicative of one’s social status and power.  (Divided Stasis) (Opponent’s Claim) Although opponents will claim that Ebonics is simply a bastardization of English and not an official language, (Rhetor’s Main Claim) Ebonics must be recognized as a language of its own, as (Reason/Support 1) it has different properties than slang, (Reason/Support 2) it has its own set of rules and regulations, and (Reason/Support 3) it has a specific demographic.

           (Narration)  In December 1996, the Oakland Ebonics controversy sparked a debate that raised new questions as to the nature of language, and what qualifies as language.  In a society where interaction relies most heavily upon verbal and written communication, it’s blatantly obvious that language use will play a large part in how one is perceived and judged by others.  On one side of the debate, supporters claim that Ebonics is a legitimate language on its own, while opponents claim that Ebonics is simply a bastardization of English.  Some people believe that “White Americans would not sound the way they sound if there had been no blacks” (Baldwin 5).  This issue has relevance, because if Ebonics is considered a legitimate language, then speakers could gain benefits as multi-lingual students.  In addition, official programs to teach English from an Ebonics standpoint could be funded.  However, critics of Ebonics being recognized as an official language claim that this slang will only encourage laziness in students.  What critics don’t seem to understand, however, is that Ebonics would be used as a teaching device to lead to proper Standardized English, not taught on its own.

           (Confirmation) The Oakland School Board Resolution radically changed the learning opportunities for certain students, from being dictated that what they had previously known was distinctly wrong and despicable, to being encouraged to learn what was considered proper utilizing what they had already known.  John R. Rickford, a representative at the annual Linguistic Society of America meeting, describes “Ebonics as systematic and rule-governed like all natural speech varieties” (1).  Ebonics is just like any other language, not to be seen as a fractured or lazy version of the English language.  It is necessary to use Ebonics to facilitate the learning of Standardized English for those who are already comfortable with the Ebonics language, else face the inescapable result of alienating people.  As David Dante Troutt, an associate professor of law at Rutgers University explained, “we must deal frankly with the exclusion itself” (5).

           (Concession) It is, indeed, true that opponents will claim that Ebonics is simply a bastardization of English and not an official language.  (1) They claim that Ebonics is “lazy English, bastardized English, poor grammar, and fractured slang” (Rickford 1).  Opponents believe that Ebonics did not develop a unique structure, but rather simply borrowed from English, then moved on to be as lazy as possible, omitting actual rules and regulations.  (2) “Others say it should not be considered an English dialect” (Berman 4).  (3) Clyde Haberman, a New York Times journalist, satirizes this debate, by saying,

“Here’s an idea sure to go nowhere fast: recognize that vast numbers of New Yorkers speak a distinct language that may be called ivonics. It is not named after the former Mrs. Trump. The word combines ivory and phonics, and applies to speech patterns of European origin that virtually define what many Americans think of as a New York accent. … No? Then how about ochonics, for ocher and phonics. It refers to the English spoken by many Asian-American immigrants, whose language structure in their countries of origin has them substituting R's for L's and stumbling over the V sound” (1).

Opponents note how if one identifies Ebonics as a language of its own, then there are dozens of other “dialects” that must also be identified and recognized.

           (Refutation: Rhetor’s Main Claim + Support 1)  But, Ebonics is a language of its own, because it is different than slang.  (Toumlin Warrant) A unique language cannot share the same properties as slang, or a shortened language.  (1) John R. Rickford, a linguist, makes the claim that Ebonic’s “linguistic identity is described by patterns of pronunciation and grammar” (2).  By this, he means that although Ebonics does contain certain slang words, the language as a whole has a definite pattern to it, rather than random shortenings of words.   (2) Charisse Jones, a writer for the New York Times, gives an example of an opponent to Ebonics due to its impression as slang, “’He believes that it is misleading to tell children that it's all right to speak in slang,’ said Ms. Colletti. ‘And that it's really taking our eyes off the ball to start to make this a focus of professional development for teachers or to lead children to believe it is a language of success.’” (12). The reason that Ebonics opponents believe that it should not be taught is because they fear that teaching Ebonics will encourage the mindset that speaking slang is okay.  However, one, Ebonics will only be used as a teaching utility, not as a lesson, and two, Ebonics is not in fact slang.  (3) Jones also notes how “supporters of the fledgling ebonics movement contend that the language spoken by many urban blacks is not merely a slang version of English but a distinct language with roots in West African languages” (16).  Since Ebonics has roots in other languages, it is not in fact English slang.  (Conclusion)  From the above information, we can conclude that Ebonics has different properties than slang.

            (Refutation: Support 2)  Ebonics can be considered a legitimate language since it has its own methodology.  (Toumlin Warrant) A unique language must have its own rules and regulations that dictate its use.  (1) For example, John R. Rickford, a linguist, demonstrates how “Ebonics is one of the most distinctive varieties of American English, differing from Standard English… in several ways… for instance, its verb tenses and aspects” (2).  Rickford goes on to clearly explain how Ebonics does indeed have its own structure, and how that structure is uniquely different than Standardize English.   (2) Mark Berman, a writer for Opposing Views, references John R. Rickford’s work, quoting ““Ebonics pronunciation includes features like the omission of the final consonant in words like ‘past’ (pas’ ) and ‘hand’ (han’), the pronunciation of the th in ‘bath’ as t (bat) or f (baf), and the pronunciation of the vowel in words like ‘my’ and ‘ride’ as a long ah (mah, rahd).”  Berman makes note of the fact that there are certain rules to Ebonics, that can be seen consistently throughout the language (3).  (3)  An article in the New York Times claims that “Although Oakland's resolutions are poorly worded, it is wrong to misrepresent the unique and profound linguistic consequences of American slavery” (Times 2). To ignore Ebonics is to ignore African American culture, as it is a direct linguistic result of their heritage.  (Conclusion)  From the above information, we can conclude that Ebonics has its own rules and regulations.

            (Refutation: Support 3)  Language is one of the most common ways for people to identify themselves as part of a larger community or demographic.  (Toumlin Warrant) A unique language must have its own demographic, even if that demographic is shared in part with another language.  (1) John R. Rickford, a linguist, notes how “features of Ebonics… are more common among working-class than among middle-class speakers, among adolescents than among the middle-aged, and in informal contexts… rather than formal ones... or writing” (3).  As Rickford shows, there is a demographic for Ebonics, and very often those of this demographic are able to identify with each other through this language.  (2) Mark Berman, a writer for Opposing Views, says that “Ebonics is a variant of English spoken largely by blacks” (3). Since the language does have a general populace who speaks it as their primary form of communication, it should be considered a language of its own.  (3) New York Times journalist makes note of the fact that “many experts say a narrowly focused debate over language hinged on a much broader questions of language and culture -- the way an emotionally weighted issue was framed and the language that transformed an educational issue into a political one” (50).  There are many factors that contribute to this debate, culture being one of them.  Since Ebonics help cultures represent themselves and form a sense of unity, this conversation must be taken seriously, as it will influence how people see themselves.  (Conclusion)  From the above information, we can conclude that Ebonics has its own demographic.

            (Summation)  The decision made by the 1996 Oakland School Board Resolution of using Ebonics to facilitate African American students in their learning of Standard English has led to many positive results.  Students taught by this method show drastic increase in the use of Standard English as opposed to Ebonics, from 8.5% to 59%  (Rickford 7).  Is it better to continue to berate children on their use of language, or to come alongside them, encouraging them to learn by utilizing familiar examples and experiences?  It is clear to see that Ebonics is a language of its own, and that it can be readily used to assist the learning of Standard English as well as helping retain a sense of cultural background and history.  This assistance and help can only result in a more informed, educated population, which will reciprocate and lead to more student success.  To focus on the bettering of students is to prepare future decision makers for a developing world, and to invest in a more positive world for everyone.